Jump to content
Required Reading for any Longhorn ×

Left Behind: A Quick Dose Of Post Big 12 Reality

LTtxfan

By LTtxfan
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

lemonandaturd

lemonandaturd 4285

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Okie State said:
17 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:
Do you not expect college football fans to be offended by dubious claims to titles?

No, actually I don't. It happens all the time. It doesn't affect anything.

If you choose to fake one, at least choose some obscure year in the early teens or twenties like aggy did.  Then paste that bs title in small letters somewhere near the stadium entrance.   Don't paste the bullshit claim in gigantic black letters behind your goal posts.  To knowledgeable fans of football history, it looks like a huge reach and is funny.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Sbbruin
Sbbruin

Yeah, undefeated every year no doubt.  

The Hot Dog Buffet
The Hot Dog Buffet

Colorado BuffaLowes Kansas State Wild Wings Kansas JayKochs (at least until Koch gets tired of hearing Jaycocks) Oklahoma State Stetson Cowboys Iowa State Pioneer Seed Clones

closetojumping
closetojumping

It's a large Texas forum. Every thread will largely be dominated by Texas posters. This is news? Not only that, it's funny in some form? My view is that the Big 12 will be fine as the 4th of 4 la

Posted Images

TrashMaster G

TrashMaster G 17620

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Okie State said:
39 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:
Do you not expect college football fans to be offended by dubious claims to titles?

No, actually I don't. It happens all the time. It doesn't affect anything.

It affects the perception that college football fans have of your program when you claim bullshit titles. Maybe there is no practical impact, but there is some impact.

And saying you don't expect college football fans to be offended makes me question if you understand fans of the game.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deej

Deej 76944

Posted
Posted

It doesn't matter that they are diminishing the rightful claim of Army? You say it doesn't matter, but long-term, it damages their history. At some point in the future, it will just be taken as truth, if that claim stands. 

Media have already tried to legitimize it.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/why-oklahoma-state-has-been-named-college-footballs-1945-national-champion/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5486

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Okie State said:
1 hour ago, lemonandaturd said:
Army was the 1945 national champion in football.  The Boone Pickens OSU fake claim to 1945 is bullshit.  It is embarrassing to see that shit on their stadium wall.  

Is it embarrassing? To you? Why? Who gives a fuck? It's all made up bullshit.

It’s embarrassing for OSU. You want to claim a MNC? You should at least look into it a little first. It doesn’t take a lot of critical reasoning to see the 1945 MNC claim by OSU is bogus. They make the claim, because they like being able to claim a MNC more than they like to be intellectually honest. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Okie State

Okie State 3848

Posted
Posted
It’s embarrassing for OSU. You want to claim a MNC? You should at least look into it a little first. It doesn’t take a lot of critical reasoning to see the 1945 MNC claim by OSU is bogus. They make the claim, because they like being able to claim a MNC more than they like to be intellectually honest. 
I literally don't give a single fuck about whether it's claimed or not. I didn't claim it and have no influence on whether or not it's claimed. There are all kinds of bullshit claims all over college football, but yeah let's jump on this one as if it's somehow unique. Fuck you with that hypocritical horseshit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Okie State

Okie State 3848

Posted
Posted
It affects the perception that college football fans have of your program when you claim bullshit titles. Maybe there is no practical impact, but there is some impact.
And saying you don't expect college football fans to be offended makes me question if you understand fans of the game.
Perception of our program? Literally all this thread does is shit on programs like ours. But yeah, a claim to a fake title really makes a difference. Sure. If only we didn't claim this fake title maybe we'd finally be taken seriously.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5486

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Okie State said:

I literally don't give a single fuck about whether it's claimed or not. I didn't claim it and have no influence on whether or not it's claimed. There are all kinds of bullshit claims all over college football, but yeah let's jump on this one as if it's somehow unique. Fuck you with that hypocritical horseshit.

How is it hypocritical? My alma mater only claims titles awarded and recognized at the time. 
 
Is OSU’s claim the most bogus? Well, it’s in the conversation for most bogus. I’d put it up there with SMU’s claim of MNCs in 1981 and 1982. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BachelorTrek

BachelorTrek 3062

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, statsman said:

How is it hypocritical? My alma mater only claims titles awarded and recognized at the time. 
 
Is OSU’s claim the most bogus? Well, it’s in the conversation for most bogus. I’d put it up there with SMU’s claim of MNCs in 1981 and 1982. 

Don't forget all the LAUGHABLE and Imaginary MNC claims that aggy made that they actually thought that making signs would somehow make people believe them.  Lulz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
66BUFF

66BUFF 2565

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Sandman said:

We got a crystal football so fuck the haters

Oklahoma State football retroactively awarded 1945 national title | Local Sports | stwnewspress.com

 The AFCA asked schools who felt they had a legitimate bid for the title to submit their reasons why so that their committee could hear the case and decide.[7] In 2016 Oklahoma A&M was awarded the 1945 national championship.[8] Oklahoma State was the only school publicly announced to apply for the honor for any of the 28 years considered,[9] and was awarded the AFCA trophy. The AFCA committee stated that Army could also be recognized as co-champion for 1945 "if the school decides to submit paperwork to the AFCA for evaluation by the committee.

th?id=OIP.2p3INoYEZ04miTA43mpVRQAAAA&pid=Api&P=0&h=180

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5486

Posted
Posted (edited)

For the record-Army was loaded. They recruited players from other schools, saying, “We’re in a war. You may have to fight. If you graduate as a football star from West Point, you will be in a great position. Plus, it’s good for the country for Army football to be good.” That’s how freshman TAMU star Bill Yeoman ended up at West Point. 

Here is what Army did on the way to an undefeated season. 
 
Oct. 13: played 3-1 #9 Michigan at Yankees Stadium. Beat them 28-7. Michigan finished #6. 
 
Oct. 27: played 3-1 #19 Duke at the Polo Ground in NYC. Beat them 48-13. Duke finished #13. 
 
Nov. 10: played 5-0-1 #2 Notre Dame at Yankees Stadium. Beat them 48-0. Notre Dame finished #9. 
 
Nov 17: played 5-1 #6 Penn at Franklin Field. Beat them 61-0. Penn finished #8. 
 
Dec 1: played 7-0-1 #2 Navy at Veterans Stadium. Beat them 32-13. Navy finished #2. 
 
Asking army to submit paperwork to justify a MNC claim for that season is ridiculous and insulting to everyone’s intelligence. 
 
Oklahoma A&M had a nice season. They played a #19 Tulsa at home and won by six points. I don’t think the Cowboys were as good as the Longhorns in 1945. 

Edited by statsman
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gernblansten

gernblansten 3197

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 66BUFF said:

 The AFCA asked schools who felt they had a legitimate bid for the title to submit their reasons why so that their committee could hear the case and decide.[7] In 2016 Oklahoma A&M was awarded the 1945 national championship.[8] Oklahoma State was the only school publicly announced to apply for the honor for any of the 28 years considered,[9] and was awarded the AFCA trophy. The AFCA committee stated that Army could also be recognized as co-champion for 1945 "if the school decides to submit paperwork to the AFCA for evaluation by the committee.

th?id=OIP.2p3INoYEZ04miTA43mpVRQAAAA&pid=Api&P=0&h=180

 

spacer.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TKthunder2

TKthunder2 4997

Posted
Posted

Conference agreements do not equal TV deal.

Conferences have bylaws that prevent people from leaving without notice and may also have exit fees.

Now they can still leave, but they will pay a penalty if they don’t abide by their conference agreements.

The TV deal was a huge $$ number. That will not be a blocker for anyone after this season, but there are others thing that could still prevent movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crockett

Crockett 494

Posted
Posted
On 7/7/2023 at 9:35 AM, Hagbard Celine said:

you DO NOT have a national following in football - quit saying that - it has been disproven repeatedly

Ahem... 

"I asked the former ESPN exec what pushed the conference to the higher end of the scale? He said it was "BYU b/c of their loyal national following. They were the money shot. ... "

I'll go with the former ESPN exec versus Hagbard.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12496

Posted
Posted (edited)

I think you can make the case though.  The benefit to Texas and Oklahoma is clear, for sure.

The remaining schools are still making more money than the ACC and Pac 12, and they aren't living under the constant threat that the big brands will leave.  Making the most money hasn't exactly proven that you'll get more success.  Plus, the whole narrative around the Big 12 has changed.  With the SEC and Big 10 moving into a separate realm financially, that pressure is kind of off the Big 12.  The remaining schools know that their value is less and there isn't this pressure to do the impossible (keep up financially with those 2 leagues) as long as you're ahead of the other two (Pac 12 and ACC).  It's not like any Big 12 school can just leave for the SEC at this point.  OU's leaving creates a power vacuum that doesn't have an obvious filler.  The parity will be high enough that almost everyone is getting a bite at the apple.

Exposure's actually going to be better per school, because UT and OU's respective brand power vis a vis the others commanded a higher percentage of coverage.  There's not this inter-league disparity anymore.  It will be interesting to see how the have/have not separation in the Big 10 and SEC starts to look like, especially in the Big 10 where the shit-bag western division is going away, and those schools will be forced to play tougher schedules against the schools that are essentially sugar daddying them.

Yeah, everyone in the 8 would have preferred UT and OU stuck around we made more money, but there are a lot of advantages to this new arrangement for everyone, even if that's not what Yormark meant.  It's not conventional logic, but there's a lot of reasons to think it's better to be TCU than Purdue in the current landscape of college sports.

Edited by Al_4_ISU
  • Hook 'Em 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DFW Horn

DFW Horn 6221

Posted
Posted
Quote

Exposure's actually going to be better per school, because UT and OU's respective brand power vis a vis the others commanded a higher percentage of coverage.  There's not this inter-league disparity anymore.

Good point, but maybe not with 2+ more mouths to feed moving forward.

How will CU and AZ potentially change that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12496

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

Good point, but maybe not with 2+ more mouths to feed moving forward.

How will CU and AZ potentially change that?

I think it just becomes more of a meritocracy.  Because these schools are relatively even branding-wise, whoever's winning will get headlines.

In the previous iteration, even in the years Texas was mediocre, said mediocrity was a bigger story than whomever was having success in that vacuum (outside of OU of course) due to the size/value of Texas's brand.

The other happy accident for the Big 12 here is Fox getting all of the Big 10 rights.  Big 10 coverage on ESPN's side shows (and Gameday) is going to be reduced, and Fox will put less resources towards discussing the SEC.  The Big 12, being in bed with both, and though they'll be behind the Big 10 on Fox and the SEC on ESPN, they'll likely get the 2nd place treatment on both networks (ahead of the ACC and Pac 12).

Edited by Al_4_ISU
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deej

Deej 76944

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

The Big 12, being in bed with both, and though they'll be behind the Big 10 on Fox and the SEC on ESPN, they'll likely get the 2nd place treatment on both networks (ahead of the ACC and Pac 12).

At least the Mormons are used to the 3rd wife thing. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12496

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Walk me through again how the new Big 12 surpasses the ACC name brands of Notre Dame, Clemson, and Florida State. 

 

1) Notre Dame isn't really an ACC brand.  NBC still carries the bulk of their games, as opposed to the ACC media partners.

2) Yeah, those two are ahead of any Big 12 brand.  It's the rest of the league with their half full 30K seat stadiums that drag the total package down.

3) Take it up with the TV execs that are paying the new Big 12 more than the ACC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
billfromlaketravis

billfromlaketravis 11528

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

1) Notre Dame isn't really an ACC brand.  NBC still carries the bulk of their games, as opposed to the ACC media partners.

2) Yeah, those two are ahead of any Big 12 brand.  It's the rest of the league with their half full 30K seat stadiums that drag the total package down.

3) Take it up with the TV execs that are paying the new Big 12 more than the ACC.

OK. Miami at UNC or OK State at Texas Tech. Which game gets top billing? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5486

Posted
Posted

I thought they paid the ACC less because they aren’t required to renegotiate for a while?

Let’s stop talking about attendance in terms of full stadiums,as if that means something. UT has a 100k seat stadium. When Texas is ranked, every league game averages well over $100 per seat. When Texas is ranked and playing another ranked team, it’ll cost you $200 and up per seat to get in. (In 2005, seats against ranked TT cost $150 and up, and that was almost 20 years ago. The next year, if you didn’t have season tix, it would cost you over $500 per seat to get into the stadium against tOSU). 
 
My question is- in the new B12, what are the games where you can’t get into the stadium without paying over $100 per ticket? TCU just played for the MNC and Baylor is on its best 15 year run ever, and they’re rivals, and I still think you get in for $75. Are there any others?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12496

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, statsman said:

I thought they paid the ACC less because they aren’t required to renegotiate for a while?

Let’s stop talking about attendance in terms of full stadiums,as if that means something. UT has a 100k seat stadium. When Texas is ranked, every league game averages well over $100 per seat. When Texas is ranked and playing another ranked team, it’ll cost you $200 and up per seat to get in. (In 2005, seats against ranked TT cost $150 and up, and that was almost 20 years ago. The next year, if you didn’t have season tix, it would cost you over $500 per seat to get into the stadium against tOSU). 
 
My question is- in the new B12, what are the games where you can’t get into the stadium without paying over $100 per ticket? TCU just played for the MNC and Baylor is on its best 15 year run ever, and they’re rivals, and I still think you get in for $75. Are there any others?

The ACC is locked into a long term deal and they have an ACC Network to put games on that no one outside of those fanbases watches.  For the next decade, the Big 12 will make more money and get better TV exposure than the ACC.  If Clemson, UNC, and FSU never get Big 10 or SEC golden slippers, the ACC will probably pull ahead in their next negotiation.

Comparing the remaining Big 12 members to Texas is silly.  They aren't competing with Texas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12496

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, nineliveslost said:

I'd watch it while drinking

The Big 10 has been playing Friday night games for a long time.  Iowa ends up there regularly and their fans whine about it taking away from HS FB, but it's kinda fun IMO.  I have zero issue with it.  It's a great tune up for the weekend.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nineliveslost

nineliveslost 2799

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

The Big 10 has been playing Friday night games for a long time.  Iowa ends up there regularly and their fans whine about it taking away from HS FB, but it's kinda fun IMO.  I have zero issue with it.  It's a great tune up for the weekend.

Big 10 is boring. I still like all the dudes from the Big 12. Well, not Tech. . . and not a fan of OSU or TCU and fuck Baylor. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trojan Man

Trojan Man 429

Posted
Posted

Thursday/Friday night games are the kind of thing people enjoy as long as their team isn't involved.  I love having weeknight games to watch but I hate when USC has to play on a weeknight, especially at home.  As a neutral viewer it's nice to watch a game from start to finish that likely involves teams I otherwise wouldn't see very often.  Getting more exposure for middle of the road teams that don't get many prime windows is the best use of weeknight games.

On the other hand, It feels very bush league to have your blueblood team playing on a weeknight in the middle of the season when other bluebloods either never play on weeknights or only do so for week 1 and Thanksgiving/Black Friday.  Going forward the lone scenario I wouldn't complain about a weeknight game for USC in the B1G is if there is only one all season, it's coming off a bye week, it's on the road and it's against a bottom half of the conference opponent.  Requiring USC and UCLA to host a weeknight game every other year or so was one of the grievances the schools had with the Pac 12.  Fighting LA rush hour traffic to get to the Coliseum or the Rose Bowl absolutely kills attendance and the atmosphere at the game.  It's less of a problem for college town schools.

33 minutes ago, nineliveslost said:

Big 10 is boring. I still like all the dudes from the Big 12. Well, not Tech. . . and not a fan of OSU or TCU and fuck Baylor. 

I think Lincoln Riley and Chip Kelly will have an impact on how the B1G plays similar to what A&M and Missouri did to the SEC.  The SEC started to copy Big 12 offenses after their Big 12 additions lit up SEC defenses in their first few years in the league.  Riley's younger brother was TCU's OC last season when they they carved apart Michigan's defense that looked incredible all year against stale B1G offenses, which makes me very confident Riley will have even better results with his offense full of 4-5* recruits and the B1G DC only having 1 week to prepare.  Kelly is also a very good offensive mind and playcaller, plus he just signed a 5* QB.  Give it a couple years of USC and UCLA lighting up the scoreboard against B1G defenses that aren't used to playing QBs who can accurately throw the ball more than 10 yards and offenses that aim to score 45 points instead of 17 points and they will finally modernize their playbooks.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...