Magus Ossis

This right here. The magnitude of their hypocrisy is almost impossible even to hint at in a single post. If being a soft, tea-sipping snob to them means not killing students or literally throwing crap at guests, then yes— we are guilty.

No true intellectual in the scotsman tradition would go goon at a game.

The 4th down stuff defending 7-0 in the shadow of our own goalposts was the moment I think set the tone. What a game!

I have no inside scoop on Maalik, but I have a couple of thoughts. (1) from a medical standpoint, it is the rare ankle injury that suddenly makes a dramatic improvement this late in the game. (2) Sark's nonverbal cues when discussing Malik were a bit different than when discussing some other guys. He did more talking while looking down and to his left with less upper facial muscle involvement and left-handed gesturing (though Sark is inconsistent with this tell)-- until he came to the topic of competition. When his answer shifted themes, he was back to candid and excited coach instead of cagy answer coach. He didn't look like a guy who expects to see a single actual game snap out of Murphy. Psych is not my field, but there's my take-- hope I'm wrong.

Sorry for the jargon. It was really more of a reply to Sawbonz (who I expected to speak mumbo jumbo well enough to get my drift). Bottom line it is unusual, especially in today's medicolegal environment, for a doc to clear someone to play receiver with a broken hand.

It is unusual to play receiver with a hand fracture. I guess it could have been something like an incomplete diaphyseal fracture of a non-border metacarpal. As long as surveillance continues to show no completion/displacement over time, I guess one could defend waiting to treat it definitively until after the season. For a hamate hook fracture in a receiver, early surgery would be expected. Scapholunate normally won’t keep either. Maybe a non-displaced sesamoid with an intact tendon. Certainly an outlier whatever it was.

If there were a plus option on the table for the Pac, (1) it would be out there as a way to use the media to build support for preserving the league, and (2) the four corner schools wouldn't still be playing this much footsie with the Big12. I don't recall much ammunition being spent to shoot down the trial balloons for reduced payout memberships in the B1G for UW and UO other than the generic "we're in the Pac" votes of confidence. It sounds a lot like oral/ handshake (sorry aggy) type deals have already set both of the above moves in place unless the Pac somehow pulls a rabbit out of its rear in broadcast negotiations. There is no FOIA trail until emails, contracts, or the like pop up. An executive session of the board is a great place to keep members apprised of the plan that officially doesn't exist just yet. The tea leaves seem to be saying that, barring an apparently unlikely late boost to the available money in the Pac, they are losing schools. Some or all of the four corners will move to the B12, and UW/UO will either leave for the B1G or insist the new contract has an out that leaves that door open in the reasonably near future. SMU is apparently just academic and snobby enough to pass muster for the Bay Area schools, so the league will continue its existence, seat at the table, postseason bonanza, etc with the help of some seriously tier 3 (from a football standpoint) membership additions. The real timer for when this happens depends on the patience of the 'corners' schools. As long as they are willing to wait for a better deal, this can drag out. My guess is that they have already started counting their B12 payouts in their minds and will not let this go unsettled past this semester, likely less than that.

Maybe this conversation as regards religion is better continued in the CR if there are those who feel more needs saying.

Wouldn't it be terrible if some of the aggy players with, how shall we say, more affordable NIL profiles, signed NIL deals with sponsors who turned out to use those likenesses in ads that some people might construe as demeaning and mocking aggy culture.

Someone should make a Texags account ArtVIIsec10to13 and see how long it takes those functionally illiterate and delusional lemmings to notice the significance of the reference. Hint: 1876.

For aggy it’s all about living in the middens with occasional visits to the poop deck.

Of course, 5-7 is a better win % than Patterson had his last year at TCU. He’s good, but we’re not losing Lombardi Saban.

*costeded 😉

If I (and apologies if I do not) understand correctly, 1. FSU has granted broadcast rights to ACC 2. FSU would like to be able to leave ACC, presumably to join SEC 3. ESPN has purchased the broadcast rights from ACC 4. ESPN has purchased the broadcast rights from SEC 5. ESPN is potentially both the damaged party and the beneficiary should FSU bolt 6. ESPN is therefore somewhat in the driver's seat for telling FSU and ACC who goes where and when

My favorite would be to adjust the record for years the NCAA determined a team to have committed major infractions. Without the Jackie/RC FedEx era, whoops.

Our home games were on the LHN because the LHN by its nature was supposed to have Texas games. They were not on LHN, as a rule, for lack of demand for them in better media. I would expect to see relatively few Texas games relegated to ESPN+.

[1] Icing. Calling a single defensive time-out before a game-changing, end-of-half, longer-than-34-yard FG attempt has been found to decrease the likelihood of making the attempt. The new rule would only limit multiple TOs, which to my knowledge have not been shown to make any greater difference. I hate waiting for the end of a game when I know there is only a snap and kick remaining. This rule would not significantly reduce number of snaps or injuries, but it has little evidence to suggest it makes trouble, and I would certainly not cry if it were implemented. [2] Untimed Downs. Removing the rare untimed down to end and odd-numbered quarter will do little to shorten the average game. It would likewise not necessarily affect the game negatively. Play could continue in the following quarter with the appropriate penalty applied. This doesn't remove any particular pet peeve of mine, but neither does it bother me. [3] 1st Down Clock. This rule would significantly change the feel of CFB, shorten games, and reduce plays. Playing less football results in fewer football-related injuries. And in less football-watching enjoyment. Keeping the old rule in place in the final 2 minutes of halves preserves the greater comeback score potential of college ball somewhat. I am not a fan of the need to move the clock along, but I could see considering this if other options weren't available. First of all, we have decided injuries are an acceptable risk: we still play the game. Secondly, there are other ways to accommodate those who need the 2:30 game over by 5:55. See below. I'm against it but think it's coming anyway. [4] Incompletions. This rule would likewise change the feel, shorten the games, and reduce plays. I like watching football and still prefer looking for alternatives that do not result in fewer snaps played. Even so, I can see a reasonableness to expecting an offense to be at the line ready to run a play when the ball is spotted or deal with the clock winding down. Teams get time-outs. In the end, I come down here as on [3]: I would go along more were this the only way to help manage routine game length in real time. [+1] Reviews. Reviews are frustrating because they ruin the rhythm of the game and because even with them, obviously or seemingly wrong calls (or non-calls) are left to stand with great frequency. The average game has 4 minutes waiting on review results. More camera angles (including always having goal-line and side-line cameras in place) with officials watching every angle from the booth would allow rapid response when a review official sees something obviously contradicting the call on the field. If no official buzzes in before the next snap, play continues. If he does, the senior booth official has 30 seconds max to agree with the call or the booth objection. [+2] Officials. If they are too out of shape to hustle running the ball back for the next snap, let them do something else on Saturdays. Proliferating cameras in the venues that host D1 games is a trivial expense compared to the revenue this sport generates and the cost of bringing in officials. Some calls such as out-of-bounds, offsides, false start, etc are easily seen by cameras and can even be automated like the dreaded tennis line alarm. [+3] Injuries. Stopping play for an injury automatically uses a time-out. A team that has failed to preserve a time-out in case of injury is charged with unsportsmanlike conduct on the bench each time (with one "grace injury stoppage" per game) the officials must stop play anyway. The penalty is not applied if the injury is associated with a foul by the opposing team. [+4] Dynamic rules. Some or all of the accelerated clock rules to be considered could be used only in the event that a game is running long. This would have the drawback of confusing people who barely keep up now, but the precedent is set in differing timing rules in the final 2 minutes already. Once, for example, 3 hours have elapsed since kick-off, rules [3] and [4] apply; 4 hours after kick-off, a running clock is initiated. While more susceptible to confusion, it would limit the effect of the new rules on games that otherwise were going to end on time anyway with the old rules. TLDR : While more football causes more injuries, I reject this as a reason to eliminate plays. Carried to its logical conclusion, this rationale leads one to cancel the season. I do see the need to have some predictability for when games will end, and the game has changed a great deal in terms of what offenses do compared to the NCAA of the 20th century. We don't need another NFL, though. In the end, the networks are going to get what they want, so there is little point to our forming or stating opinions anyway.

Well spoken, sir.

Ultimately, I think the combination of Texas to the SEC, moving to NIL, and expanding the playoff field to 12 teams is good for almost everybody errbody from the old 12: 1. Athletes may be better compensated for their talents and efforts. 2. Texas leverages the wealth of its donor base to support our recruiting, and sponsors have more avenues. 3. Texas and SEC both improve their TV revenue situations in the marriage. 4. Texas is still virtually guaranteed a playoff berth and chance at redemption in seasons marred by one frustrating loss. Finishing in the top 3 in the SEC is basically an autobid, and 4th still looks not-bad. 5. The Big 12 remnants will have a clear path to the playoffs that does not require beating a single traditional power. 6. Sadly for teams that benefitted from the limited policing of under-the-table money previously, not everyone can be a winner in this. Boo hoo.

No college competing in the same leagues is going to be purely fans of another. There is always some degree of rivalry. ISU has never been particularly hateful or small compared to some other schools (Nebraska, aggy certainly). The AD expands in that interview that he's tired of having to do two versions of everything as a conference, not knowing how many teams will be involved. He doesn't rag on UT at all. You guys calling him a nothing and cussing him are part of the reason why so many are ready to hate Texas and call us all arrogant. And in many cases people from the same crowd later complain that we are hated and called arrogant. Thanks for representing us well. Good riddance to Baylor. To ISU: I want to congratulate you on your new business and I'm sure you'll do very well and good luck to you. Especially since your interests don't conflict with mine.

Or Kliavkov is doing what increasingly desperate men do.

The 71.3% of Texas applicants who are rejected largely go to less selective colleges and have someone else for whom to cheer. The slough from the aggy applicant pool go to Blinndergarten or McDonalds.

A man who earns a living juggling lizards at birthday parties is no herpetologist. Football writer’s job is not football.

Can the Big12 schools left behind or joining now afford to pay the exit penalty with the money they'd get for going ACC? GOR aside, there is a significant payment ostensibly required to depart.

I’m not so sure we’ll see OU/aggy as rivals. They don’t have a super-rich history together, and aggy is going to cry and whine not to have to play OU. With enough time they’ll come up with 77 different excuses.