Magus Ossis

Recent regimes have seemed to have too many comfort hires and “buddies” that turned my stomach to see on our payroll, e.g., CH from the Briles Baylor staff under Herman. I know not everyone is sold on PK as DC, but I don’t put him in the same basket. Bringing in hired guns like GP to tune up the D is something else that strikes me as veering away from the comfort zone. I see a staff that looks to be assembled based largely on competence and a roster based largely on ability/potential. It sounds like a no-brainer way to do it, but it hasn’t been this way in a while, from my perspective. Am I crazy? Do we have a big mass of dead weight I’m not seeing?

If the GA AG is an alumnus of UGA, maybe he’ll be just as diligent as (impeached) Texas AG and Baylor alum Paxton has been.

Bingo. And they can both word and promote the contract with the optimistic numbers, putting "corrections and adjustments" in the fine print. Headline: "PAC 10 signs deal that pays $58M per annum! More than B12 by wide margin!" But at some point the school administrators have to decide based on actual revenues, not unicorn farts. Color me surprised if there is not some ship-jumping on/before 7/31/23.

Using a good survival stroke or drown-proofing, most fit people could last quite a while. An out-of-shape person should not be swimming in the ocean.

Where to draw the line could prove very tricky for NCAA with enforcing a ban on donor perks related to collective donations. RGBIII could obviously give a more informed answer, but I'm fairly certain that the TOF is essentially a normal 501c3 that happens to have contractual relationships with athletes among its expenses, when you get down to it. Does NCAA think it can ban perks for donors to charities? Good luck drawing that line. How much business transacted with athletes, under which conditions, at what remove? They can try to close the barn doors, but the horse is out.

Don't trust them. They'll walk all over you.

This is no doubt true in our world of widespread ignorance. But they were never going to pay Leach. To suggest otherwise is fatuous at best. Leach underestimated how petty and self destructive (and destructive of what they professed to defend) the people who ostensibly want the best for Tech were willing to be. He may have been happier in the final analysis; he received better treatment elsewhere once he got back into coaching.

I won’t dignify the cruelty by going through it, but it basically involves alcohol. Mike RIP; we miss you!

I have a couple of friends/colleagues whose families are among those who still tell themselves good riddance. They use his never disclosed officially but often speculated private life to tell themselves that “he had to go.” edit families who were in the crowd that ran him off

Both of those guys were only bosses of record. It was a donor issue.

I wouldn’t mind seeing them at a hard-earned 4-6 going into the last two weeks of the season, including a brilliant near-win over Bama. Then they dominate mighty ACU and drop a huge turd into LSU’s punch bowl for a second season in a row to improve from last year’s five wins by exactly one. Cleetus cheers the turnaround, Jimbo stays, the mercs leave, and 24 is set up to be a flaming pile of slightly-used Collie food.

I’m sorry about your foot. Most of us take for granted that our feet will let us step on them thousands of times a day and won’t nag us let alone torture us with pain. I hope someone can do something for your foot someday.

Do you see how your rebuttal falls just short?

I'll take my own advice. Sorry to forget where I was. 😀

I’m not sure whether I’m missing some subtle (or otherwise) feigned ignorance of English idiom and usage here.

This. References to conflict between news channels and presidents, current or former, are in the wrong place if they’re on this board. Don’t double down on mistakes. Own them and fix them and move on.

I think restarting the series by beating them with another game-ending FG might be too much for my blood pressure, but it might be the most poetic way to do it. For the historic lulz, restarting in Austin and winning the first few would forever give aggy more fuel for its conspiratorial alternative history. If only we hadn't bribed the man to move the game in the pivotal year of 2024, all of history would have been different, etc.

Maybe spare us the military and political filler of the day here on the football board?

Mack Brown approves of the name of BRENT VENABLES ou football camp

Wouldn’t be the first time aggy made its mark there.

So, let me get this straight. Eli was and is happy to get paid an order of magnitude more (for coaching a game) than his pediatrician BIL is for "saving lives." But young men's being allowed to receive market value for putting their health at risk in a manner necessary for his own enrichment is shocking.

No divisions, 3 permanent rivals, play every one else H/H over any given 4 year span in a 9 conference game schedule was the best idea to me. Pending that, pods could be a reasonable intermediate step or a catastrophe depending on the implementation. If we were in a "far west" pod with OU, pig, and aggy, our scheduling in an 8-game pod arrangement would be very similar to the 9-game rival format. The biggest problem is cases in which there are teams whose rivals don't allow easy division into pods. Aggy, e.g., is the most important rival for Bama, UGA, Gator, and LSU. At least one of those teams will have to interrupt its historical and beloved rivalry, even if aggy doesn't get relegated to the "far west." I think this is the real answer. Cows, milk, free. Money ultimately talks, which means 9 games is the likely end game. We'll likely play all those teams more in a boogered-up SEC schedule than we would in any other conference alignment, and I can think of one or two other reasons to put/keep B12 in the rear-view. Patience. 2024 is a bonus year of early departure, and most of us besides @armybrat have a chance to live to see the schedule get fixed.

One can say many things about Sanders. One piece of evidence that may fall just short of convicting him of fraud, however, is failing at the outset of his first season to lead his recently 1-11 squad to victory on the road against the national championship runner-up.

We play in a conference with OU (never at DKR), some midwest mid-majors, some private pseudo-Christian schools, and WVU. Who the heck is the big draw to which Tech is being compared? The real tragedy is that in the B12 our home slate is so lame that a sellout is worth mentioning.

Iowa State is not going back to playing teams like Grinnell or Simpson as they did in their early years. Why? There is no butthurt. Iowa State does not care about those teams. They are not suitable candidates to compete against a team like ISU for a championship. They don't bring much fan interest or revenue. They are yesterday's news to ISU. ISU has everything to lose and nothing to gain by playing them. ISU would be upset if someone dumped them in a division of 'purist' CFB with those regional and historical 'rivals.' Everybody has his own definition of who matters enough to be in the club, and a great many people think they are one of those who matter. There are not 72 serious contenders for the CFB national crown. The last team outside the new P2 and not named Miami, FSU, ND, or Clemson (aka the candidates already named as potentially ripe for taking by P2) to win a championship was Washington, who shared the title over 30 years ago, before Leach ever coordinated an offense or most Americans had heard of the internet. A nationwide 'purist' CFB consortium sounds great for people who don't want to watch a lot of blue blooded, red-faced, hate-inspired, championship-implications, etc type football. Great. Make the league and good luck against Grinnell. The system, for better or worse, has evolved from what some people seem to want (loose regional divisions) to what we are witnessing. Teams don't play high schools or city teams any more, and I am glad. I would rather see more games against Bama, UGA, LSU, OU, Arkansas, Florida, Auburn, and the like. If other teams "left behind" disagree with the logic, they are welcome to structure their next conference without using the criteria Texas, USC, OU, and UCLA have employed. My suspicion, though, is that they will do the exact same thing. They will decline to fill their schedule with teams in their backyards and instead play games that, on balance, look more exciting, more challenging, more lucrative, and less strictly 'regional.' Because it makes sense.