Realignment talk not going away

['stache 21,520]

Just now, gatormarc said:

My understanding was that the GoR gave the conference the right to negotiate on behalf of the members, and the exact contract with ESPN was never shared.

I have no idea if that's the norm or an outlier.

If true, FSU and Clemson should have thrown a fit the second they announced the deal that locked them in through 2036.

[gatormarc 897]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

If true, FSU and Clemson should have thrown a fit the second they announced the deal that locked them in through 2036.

That's the GoR, that they could see and sign.

[CustersDoctor 582]

6 hours ago, 'stache said:

If true, FSU and Clemson should have thrown a fit the second they announced the deal that locked them in through 2036.

I remember when that contract was announced, nobody cared about the far off terminus. It was the biggest contract EVER. The other four conferences were agast. Wondering how they could compete with that ACC money. Then by the fall of 2022 FSU & CLEMSON are like, "WTF UCF is making more than us."

[msucolt45 3,978]

WTH is going on?

TX and OU to the SEC
Washington, Oregon, SC, and UCLA to BIG
FSU and Clemson to B12
aggy to BIG?

Hook’em!!!

[msucolt45 3,978]

I really think that in about 6 years (2030) that there’s going to be a different league/conference of about 48-64 teams (football) that will be totally on their own, separate from the NCAA. They will dictate their own terms and $$$.

Hook’em!!!

[msucolt45 3,978]

The “bottom feeders” of each conference need not apply. No longer $$$ by association over the decades. Sucks for them, but it is what it is!

Hook’em!!!

[markstanco 12,425]

Who are you replying to

[Hurtlocker 2,208]

On 7/10/2024 at 6:44 PM, CustersDoctor said:

I look as these rankings obsessively. UT is usually in the Top 5. But what continually surprises me is just how far down UNC & UV always are. They are always 40th or worse. Some people act like the B1G is drooling to pick them up if the ACC collapses. I call BS, UV is actually less valuable than Maryland and Rutgers.

UVA is continuously good in everything that doesn't matter.    Stanford must feel weird to find its long lost twin in a new conference.

[Hurtlocker 2,208]

On 7/10/2024 at 9:45 PM, statsman said:

I can see why the B12 would be interested in FSU and Clemson (although I’m not so sure it’s a great idea; are they just recreating the UT/OU dynamic- Gulliver and the Lilliputians?). Why would FSU and Clemson be interested in the B12? Sure, it’s better than the ACC,…if the ACC doesn’t have FSU and Clemson. 
 
Are they talking to the B12, hoping to elicit interest from the SEC and B1G? Because, if they had interest from the SEC or B1G, they sure wouldn't be talking to the B12. 
 
I had my doubts already that FSU and Clemson had a landing spot all worked out should they break out of the ACC…

FSU nor Clemson are worth $80m.   If they were wars would already have been bled over their corpses.   They're worth $50-65, tops, on a good day, when the humidity doesn't make their hair frizzy and they didn't drink themselves puffy the night prior.

And, actually, that isn't really fair.  FSU is that.   Well, FSU is likely $55-60.   Clemson is already B12 with nail polish.   It has natties and couldn't outdraw ISU/Memphis in a bowl game with Kentucky.   No one is paying top dollar for that fan base.

 

 

[notre dame joe 171]

13 hours ago, gatormarc said:

That's the GoR, that they could see and sign.

and was their idea.

[gatormarc 897]

3 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

and was their idea.

Oh yeah... they were bragging about how it would lock everyone in.

[John80 121]

Any list that has Iowa as more valuable than USC shouldn't be taken too seriously.

[Al_4_ISU 12,229]

38 minutes ago, John80 said:

Any list that has Iowa as more valuable than USC shouldn't be taken too seriously.

Don’t tell Iowa fans.

They think they’re a crucial component of the Big 10’s value, and have no awareness that if we had hooked up with Ohio State and Michigan, and they had hooked up with Nebraska and Oklahoma, they would have spent the last 15 years in existential dread while we suckled at the teat of content benefactors.

[TrashMaster G 17,271]

22 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Don’t tell Iowa fans.

They think they’re a crucial component of the Big 10’s value, and have no awareness that if we had hooked up with Ohio State and Michigan, and they had hooked up with Nebraska and Oklahoma, they would have spent the last 15 years in existential dread while we suckled at the teat of content benefactors.

They also think Ferentz is a great coach, so I question their intelligence. 

[Al_4_ISU 12,229]

Just now, TrashMaster G said:

They also think Ferentz is a great coach, so I question their intelligence. 

My favorite argument they make for Ferentz is “he puts so many guys in the NFL”.

All that NFL talent and he has one Big 10 co-championship in a year they didn’t play the other co-champ (Ohio State) and one NY6 bowl win to show for it.

Matt Campbell has done those exact same things at ISU and he had to beat OU and UT to do it.

I do think Ferentz is a very good coach, but he’s not great.

 

[BigHornedLurker 1,883]

11 hours ago, msucolt45 said:

WTH is going on?

TX and OU to the SEC
Washington, Oregon, SC, and UCLA to BIG
FSU and Clemson to B12
aggy to BIG?

Hook’em!!!

Im not convinced its the future that will happen, but count me in the club where i could see a short term future FSU and Clemson to the B12 

this would be a logical media play that benefits both parties and puts ESPN in a spot they are essentially consolidating media assets in the BIG12 for the next round , which is probably the super league . 

ESPN doesnt have to over pay them in the SEC, and also drops the ACCs media deal through the floor 
 

More likely if/when FSU finds its exit , I still see them in the SEC/BIG with a non Clemson partner and Clemson being relegated to the Big12 
 

Edited July 12 by BigHornedLurker

['stache 21,520]

I think it's all just chatter. If FSU and Clemson themselves put it out there, it's a negotiating tactic to continue pressing how unhappy they are with the ACC right now, not because there is any legitimate chance of them joining the XII. 

[utee94 15,709]

22 hours ago, Left Coast said:

Wait, so we’re back to “FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 talk not going away”?

Time to rename the thread? 

[thunderlounge 7,619]

35 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I think it's all just chatter. If FSU and Clemson themselves put it out there, it's a negotiating tactic to continue pressing how unhappy they are with the ACC right now, not because there is any legitimate chance of them joining the XII. 

All chatter, yes. But don’t think for a second the b12 wouldn’t bend over and welcome them without hesitation. 
 

I get it’s all clickbait for now, but to speculate on the rumor, it isn’t terrible from the Mouse’s perspective.

They keep access the properties, but now split a lower overall cost with Fox. The ACC is now less valuable, and ESPN’s outlay is thereby reduced.

They go SEC, more cost for ESPN. They go b1g, way less for ESPN, but no access. 
 

They probably won’t take a half share to get in either, so why not kick the tires on the b12?

However, that’s just speculation on a clickbait rumor.

If something like that were to happen, it would definitely place the b12 in a position to potentially be included in a breakaway division if the numbers they are looking for are 64. 

[Al_4_ISU 12,229]

35 minutes ago, thunderlounge said:

All chatter, yes. But don’t think for a second the b12 wouldn’t bend over and welcome them without hesitation. 
 

I get it’s all clickbait for now, but to speculate on the rumor, it isn’t terrible from the Mouse’s perspective.

They keep access the properties, but now split a lower overall cost with Fox. The ACC is now less valuable, and ESPN’s outlay is thereby reduced.

They go SEC, more cost for ESPN. They go b1g, way less for ESPN, but no access. 
 

They probably won’t take a half share to get in either, so why not kick the tires on the b12?

However, that’s just speculation on a clickbait rumor.

If something like that were to happen, it would definitely place the b12 in a position to potentially be included in a breakaway division if the numbers they are looking for are 64. 

This is why it could happen.

If TV wants 60-70 schools in the top division for inventory’s sake, they may push them into the Big 12.  If the SEC and Big 10 are cool on FSU and Clemson, they know the Big 12 would be ecstatic.

They can pay them (FSU/Clem) less in the Big 12 than the SEC, but if it’s better than the ACC, it will make sense for FSU and Clemson too.

It would raise the profile of the third conference which would probably generate more overall interest than shoving all the brands into too tight of a proximity (which causes current brands to lose more games and generate less interest in them).

Its very possible that they view the SEC and Big 10 as “full” in terms of high end football.

Edited July 12 by Al_4_ISU

[thunderlounge 7,619]

3 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

generate more overall interest than shoving all the brands into too tight of a proximity (which causes current brands to lose more games and generate less interest in them).

 

Bingo! Gotta have some bottom feeders to take the losses. That's why the bottom of the SEC/b1g get to ride along, and aren't getting kicked out.

 

[utee94 15,709]

Just now, thunderlounge said:

 

Bingo! Gotta have some bottom feeders to take the losses. That's why the bottom of the SEC/b1g get to ride along, and aren't getting kicked out.

 

Exactly.  The SEC desperately needs cupcake teams like Vandy, Miss State, and Texas A&M, for the big guys to beat up on.

[Al_4_ISU 12,229]

4 minutes ago, thunderlounge said:

 

Bingo! Gotta have some bottom feeders to take the losses. That's why the bottom of the SEC/b1g get to ride along, and aren't getting kicked out.

 

They definitely aren’t getting kicked out.

But I bet they take a pay cut.

[thunderlounge 7,619]

1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

They definitely aren’t getting kicked out.

But I bet they take a pay cut.

 

Maybe, maybe not. That part is less clear than mud. Too many ways it could go. Could be base of whatever for all teams, and then performance bonuses to make up the diff. Could be a tiered system. Could be 100 different ways.

['stache 21,520]

13 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This is why it could happen.

If TV wants 60-70 schools in the top division for inventory’s sake, they may push them into the Big 12.  If the SEC and Big 10 are cool on FSU and Clemson, they know the Big 12 would be ecstatic.

They can pay them (FSU/Clem) less in the Big 12 than the SEC, but if it’s better than the ACC, it will make sense for FSU and Clemson too.

It would raise the profile of the third conference which would probably generate more overall interest than shoving all the brands into too tight of a proximity (which causes current brands to lose more games and generate less interest in them).

Its very possible that they view the SEC and Big 10 as “full” in terms of high end football.

If that's the direction, and if the SEC and BIG are both done (I doubt it but we're just speculating here), it'll likely be more than FSU and Clemson, and the Big 12 would ultimately become essentially two conferences under common administration. Big 12 is currently at 16, if you add 8, it breaks down into two 12 team "divisions" (essentially two conferences). With each side being 12, the name continues to make sense too (the Big 12s). 

Big XII East: WVU, Cincy, UCF, UH, FSU, Clemson, UNC, Duke, UVA, VT, GT, Miami (maybe Louisville instead of Miami). 

Big XII West:  UU, BYU, AU, ASU, CU, OSU, KU, ISU, Tech, TCU, BU.

[DFW Horn 6,028]

19 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

They definitely aren’t getting kicked out.

But I bet they take a pay cut.

Or the B1G and SEC build in performance incentives for higher bonus payouts to justify unequal revenue distribution.

[gatormarc 897]

[thunderlounge 7,619]

3 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

 

 

['stache 21,520]

57 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

[Al_4_ISU 12,229]

Or the B1G and SEC build in performance incentives for higher bonus payouts to justify unequal revenue distribution.

Which would result in a pay cut

[statsman 5,354]

5 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Don’t tell Iowa fans.

They think they’re a crucial component of the Big 10’s value, and have no awareness that if we had hooked up with Ohio State and Michigan, and they had hooked up with Nebraska and Oklahoma, they would have spent the last 15 years in existential dread while we suckled at the teat of content benefactors.

Let’s look at it another way. If Texas and OU were in the B1G for the last 110 years, and were pulling down that sweet $100 M per year in B1G revenue, and Michigan and tOSU were in the B12, taking in its $32 M per year, do you think that the Wolverines and Buckeyes would be content? That ISU wouldn’t be in peril of the big fish leaving for a bigger pond?

The revenue disparity did not occur overnight. If ISU (and the rest of the IR8) want to stay in the big leagues, they’re going to have to get more revenue. They really have never concerned themselves before, happy as they were with the old status quo (Dodds even suggested a couple of ideas, that were voted down). I suggest they start thinking about how to market their league and games better now, while they’re still reaping the ESPN payout for letting OU/T out early. 

[DFW Horn 6,028]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Which would result in a pay cut

Of course, but that's how they'll justify the pay cut and keep the bluebloods happy.

[DFW Horn 6,028]

12 minutes ago, statsman said:

The revenue disparity did not occur overnight. If ISU (and the rest of the IR8) want to stay in the big leagues, they’re going to have to get more revenue. They really have never concerned themselves before, happy as they were with the old status quo (Dodds even suggested a couple of ideas, that were voted down). I suggest they start thinking about how to market their league and games better now, while they’re still reaping the ESPN payout for letting OU/T out early. 

Do you have a link to Dodds ideas? I'm curious about what he proposed.

Yormark has already got women's hoops and baseball (???) lined up for games in Mexico. Big 12 is expanding into new markets, baby! Whatever happed to his Allstate Conference proposal, anyway?

[LTbear 4,044]

14 minutes ago, statsman said:

Let’s look at it another way. If Texas and OU were in the B1G for the last 110 years, and were pulling down that sweet $100 M per year in B1G revenue, and Michigan and tOSU were in the B12, taking in its $32 M per year, do you think that the Wolverines and Buckeyes would be content? That ISU wouldn’t be in peril of the big fish leaving for a bigger pond?

The revenue disparity did not occur overnight. If ISU (and the rest of the IR8) want to stay in the big leagues, they’re going to have to get more revenue. They really have never concerned themselves before, happy as they were with the old status quo (Dodds even suggested a couple of ideas, that were voted down). I suggest they start thinking about how to market their league and games better now, while they’re still reaping the ESPN payout for letting OU/T out early. 

 

Dude, none of that is relevant to the relatively simple point @Al_4_ISU was making. It's a knock on Iowa. You can step down from your soap box now. 

[LTbear 4,044]

2 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

Whatever happed to his Allstate Conference proposal, anyway?

He said at media days they're looking into it. If I remember right he said a naming deal had no real timeline on it, whereas he thinks they'll decide within the next couple of months on the private equity thing. 

[statsman 5,354]

4 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

Do you have a link to Dodds ideas? I'm curious about what he proposed.

Yormark has already got women's hoops and baseball (???) lined up for games in Mexico. Big 12 is expanding into new markets, baby! Whatever happed to his Allstate Conference proposal, anyway?

He famously suggested a Big XII conference for tier 3 rights. It was voted down, because it would have required every school to wire (this was the mid-00’s) their sports facilities (not just football and basketball) for broadcast, something Texas had already decided to do. Texas was going to throw its tier 3 content into the pool with everyone else’s. 
 
Dodds thought it would raise the conference’s profile as well as bring in cash. The other schools didn’t want to spend the money. 
 
Also, he shared his disdain for FCS scheduling, and showed how even a down Texas could give the conference some tentpole games by scheduling high profile opponents, OOC (with a real risk of losing). 
 
The IR8 made an art out of free riding, until there was no one left to free ride on. 

Edited July 12 by statsman

[DFW Horn 6,028]

3 minutes ago, LTbear said:

He said at media days they're looking into it. If I remember right he said a naming deal had no real timeline on it, whereas he thinks they'll decide within the next couple of months on the private equity thing. 

So....the LIV Conference brought to you by the Saudis PIF?

[LTbear 4,044]

5 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

So....the LIV Conference brought to you by the Saudis PIF?

I'm still holding out hope for a Bucees or Whataburger naming right deal, but ya who knows on the PE.

Edited July 12 by LTbear

['stache 21,520]

20 minutes ago, statsman said:

Let’s look at it another way. If Texas and OU were in the B1G for the last 110 years, and were pulling down that sweet $100 M per year in B1G revenue, and Michigan and tOSU were in the B12, taking in its $32 M per year, do you think that the Wolverines and Buckeyes would be content? That ISU wouldn’t be in peril of the big fish leaving for a bigger pond?

The revenue disparity did not occur overnight. If ISU (and the rest of the IR8) want to stay in the big leagues, they’re going to have to get more revenue. They really have never concerned themselves before, happy as they were with the old status quo (Dodds even suggested a couple of ideas, that were voted down). I suggest they start thinking about how to market their league and games better now, while they’re still reaping the ESPN payout for letting OU/T out early. 

I'll never understand your need to talk out of your ass like this. Every program in the "IR8" has improved football at some point over the last 20 years, most notably to their stadiums.

 

Baylor: Brand new stadium 2014

ISU: Major renovation (and expansion) 2014.

KU: Late to the game but completely new build ongoing right now.

KSU: Already a great facility, major renovation 2011.

OSU: Complete overhaul (basically a new stadium) 2009.

TCU: Major renovation 2012.

Tech: Never a bad facility, doing a big renovation right now.

WVU: Already a good facility, looks like some renovations in 2015.

 

None of these programs will ever be bluebloods. None will ever match UT in revenue or even come close. None of them need that to be relevant in college football. The conference is looking for additional ways to make money through sponsorships, games in Mexico, etc., to try and make up some of the gap. That's how the system works. Your constant allegation that the programs just sat around sucking the teet of UT and OU is such a bizarre thing for you to say over and over and over again.

[LTbear 4,044]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I'll never understand your need to talk out of your ass like this. Every program in the "IR8" has improved football at some point over the last 20 years, most notably to their stadiums.

 

Baylor: Brand new stadium 2014

ISU: Major renovation (and expansion) 2014.

KU: Late to the game but completely new build ongoing right now.

KSU: Already a great facility, major renovation 2011.

OSU: Complete overhaul (basically a new stadium) 2009.

TCU: Major renovation 2012.

Tech: Never a bad facility, doing a big renovation right now.

WVU: Already a good facility, looks like some renovations in 2015.

 

None of these programs will ever be bluebloods. None will ever match UT in revenue or even come close. None of them need that to be relevant in college football. The conference is looking for additional ways to make money through sponsorships, games in Mexico, etc., to try and make up some of the gap. That's how the system works. Your constant allegation that the programs just sat around sucking the teet of UT and OU is such a bizarre thing for you to say over and over and over again.

Is he the same dude I noted Aggy syndrome in a while back? I lose track.

[Gaffords 755]

4 hours ago, 'stache said:

I think it's all just chatter. If FSU and Clemson themselves put it out there, it's a negotiating tactic to continue pressing how unhappy they are with the ACC right now, not because there is any legitimate chance of them joining the XII. 

I'm sure there has been "talks".  Just like I'm sure there were "talks" with Washington and Oregon too before they got the Big 10 call...

Big 12:  Hey (insert name - including ND), if things fall apart, you know you will always be welcome here.

 ____:  Well, thank you for the offer. We will keep it in mind. Well gotta run, bye.

 

Aggy:  hello BIG 12, if the BIG 10 decides aggy is too good to be BIG10BIG10BIG10, when Texas destroys the sec, can aggy come home?

Big 12: We will keep you in mind.  Look at the time, gotta go...

 

FSU and Clemson doing all this to end up in the BIG 12?  The fan base meltdown and revolt would be EPIC.

[BigHornedLurker 1,883]

14 minutes ago, statsman said:

He famously suggested a Big XII conference for tier 3 rights. It was voted down, because it would have required every school to wire (this was the mid-00’s) their sports facilities (not just football and basketball) for broadcast, something Texas had already decided to do. Texas was going to throw its tier 3 content into the pool with everyone else’s. 
 
Dodds thought it would raise the conference’s profile as well as bring in cash. The other schools didn’t want to spend the money. 
 
Also, he shared his disdain for FCS scheduling, and showed how even a down Texas could give the conference some tentpole games by scheduling high profile opponents, OOC (with a real risk of losing). 
 
The IR8 made an art out of free riding, until there was no one left to free ride on. 

Yes this was a major topic at that time, and was brought up again when we announced the LHN. 

We also gave Aggy a second chance to come on board, that they rejected until we had money in hand that they wanted a piece of 

['stache 21,520]

21 minutes ago, statsman said:

He famously suggested a Big XII conference for tier 3 rights. It was voted down, because it would have required every school to wire (this was the mid-00’s) their sports facilities (not just football and basketball) for broadcast, something Texas had already decided to do. Texas was going to throw its tier 3 content into the pool with everyone else’s. 
 
Dodds thought it would raise the conference’s profile as well as bring in cash. The other schools didn’t want to spend the money. 

So no link? Here's what I remember. The offer included aggy, I don't recall anything about a conference network. I also recall that KU had a pretty sweet tier 3 deal of their own.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6918208/texas-aggies-had-chance-partner-longhorn-network-deloss-dodds-says

Edit: To add that if the offer was spending a bunch of money to set up and own a conference network, like the PAC did, then it was a damned good decision not to do it. The LHN was a partnership with ESPN using primarily their resources, made far more sense with far less risk. 

Edited July 12 by 'stache

[statsman 5,354]

1 hour ago, LTbear said:

Is he the same dude I noted Aggy syndrome in a while back? I lose track.

Ooh,…and that’s a sick burn, I guess?

[LTbear 4,044]

3 minutes ago, statsman said:

Ooh,…and that’s a sick burn, I guess?

I can't remember if it was you. I'll assume it was not. But if you want to be like Aggy, by all means, live your life. 

Edited July 12 by LTbear

[Al_4_ISU 12,229]

2 hours ago, statsman said:

Let’s look at it another way. If Texas and OU were in the B1G for the last 110 years, and were pulling down that sweet $100 M per year in B1G revenue, and Michigan and tOSU were in the B12, taking in its $32 M per year, do you think that the Wolverines and Buckeyes would be content? That ISU wouldn’t be in peril of the big fish leaving for a bigger pond?

The revenue disparity did not occur overnight. If ISU (and the rest of the IR8) want to stay in the big leagues, they’re going to have to get more revenue. They really have never concerned themselves before, happy as they were with the old status quo (Dodds even suggested a couple of ideas, that were voted down). I suggest they start thinking about how to market their league and games better now, while they’re still reaping the ESPN payout for letting OU/T out early. 

What in the actual fuck are you talking about or responding to?

My point is that Iowa is a program that has leeched from bigger programs for years, but because those programs are content to allow it, Iowa fans have let it go to their head and not recognize how lucky they are to have just fallen in with the only blue bloods content with such an arrangement 150 years ago.

It has fuck all to do with UT, OU, or any Big 12 TV deal.

[statsman 5,354]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

I'll never understand your need to talk out of your ass like this. Every program in the "IR8" has improved football at some point over the last 20 years, most notably to their stadiums.

 

Baylor: Brand new stadium 2014

ISU: Major renovation (and expansion) 2014.

KU: Late to the game but completely new build ongoing right now.

KSU: Already a great facility, major renovation 2011.

OSU: Complete overhaul (basically a new stadium) 2009.

TCU: Major renovation 2012.

Tech: Never a bad facility, doing a big renovation right now.

WVU: Already a good facility, looks like some renovations in 2015.

 

None of these programs will ever be bluebloods. None will ever match UT in revenue or even come close. None of them need that to be relevant in college football. The conference is looking for additional ways to make money through sponsorships, games in Mexico, etc., to try and make up some of the gap. That's how the system works. Your constant allegation that the programs just sat around sucking the teet of UT and OU is such a bizarre thing for you to say over and over and over again.

I was replying to Al, once again, bemoaning that the IR8 had the rotten luck of not getting to be in the B1G or SEC, as the reason they have to sweat major conference membership. I know that nobody in the IR8 wants to ever reflect that their marginal position may be due to decisions they made, and not just pure bad luck. But, this is a Texas board, so I won’t apologize for not sharing the IR8 perspective. 
 
So, in arguing for the B12 and its continued relevance, you’re going with stadiums. Uh-huh. First, OSU’s stadium, may be “updated”, but while putting in boxes, they forgot to fix its biggest flaw- the ridiculously unsafe sidelines. That’s not an endearing trait, like a beauty flaw. It’s a cleft palate that has horribly not been repaired. 
 
Oh, and Baylor. That’s a new stadium, built on the heels of the Briles run. They can’t fill the upper deck against anyone but Texas or OU, and those teams are not on the schedule anymore. (Did I mention that Baylor games were on streaming five weeks in a row last year?)

Funny thing about those stadiums- they’re not that big. They don’t need to be. The PAC refugees will be bringing in the league’s biggest stadiums. Shoot, right now UTSA plays in a stadium larger than any IR8 team. Those SEC and B1G bottom dwellers all have bigger stadiums than the biggest B12 stadiums. 
 
It’s ok. You matter. You’re a big deal. It’s just bad luck that you’re not pulling $60M or $100M per year like an SEC or B1G team. 

Edited July 12 by statsman

['stache 21,520]

2 minutes ago, statsman said:

I was replying to Al, once again, bemoaning that the IR8 had the rotten luck of not getting to be in the B1G or SEC, as the reason they have to sweat major conference membership. I know that nobody in the IR8 wants to ever reflect that their marginal position may be due to decisions they made, and not just pure bad luck. But, this is a Texas board, so I won’t apologize for not sharing the IR8 perspective. 
 
So, in arguing for the B12 and its continued relevance, you’re going with stadiums. Uh-huh. First, OSU’s stadium, may be “updated”, but while putting in boxes, they forgot to fix its biggest flaw- the ridiculously unsafe sidelines. That’s not an endearing trait, like a beauty flaw. It’s a cleft palate that has horribly not been repaired. 
 
Oh, and Baylor. That’s a new stadium, built on the heels of the Briles run. They can’t fill the upper deck against anyone but Texas or OU, and those teams are not on the schedule anymore. (Did I mention that Baylor games were on streaming five weeks in a row last year?)

Funny thing about those stadiums- they’re not that big. They don’t need to be. The PAC refugees will be bringing in the league’s biggest stadiums. Shoot, right now UTSA plays in a stadium larger than any IR8 team. Those SEC and B1G bottom dwellers all have bigger stadiums than the biggest B12 stadiums. 
 
It’s ok. You matter. You’re a big deal. It’s just bad luck that you’re not pulling $60M or $100M per year like an SEC or B1G team. 

That's not what Al was saying, and you know it. You're a fucking clown. 

[LTbear 4,044]

4 minutes ago, statsman said:

I was replying to Al, once again, bemoaning that the IR8 had the rotten luck of not getting to be in the B1G or SEC, as the reason they have to sweat major conference membership. I know that nobody in the IR8 wants to ever reflect that their marginal position may be due to decisions they made, and not just pure bad luck. But, this is a Texas board, so I won’t apologize for not sharing the IR8 perspective. 
 
So, in arguing for the B12 and its continued relevance, you’re going with stadiums. Uh-huh. First, OSU’s stadium, may be “updated”, but while putting in boxes, they forgot to fix its biggest flaw- the ridiculously unsafe sidelines. That’s not an endearing trait, like a beauty flaw. It’s a cleft palate that has horribly not been repaired. 
 
Oh, and Baylor. That’s a new stadium, built on the heels of the Briles run. They can’t fill the upper deck against anyone but Texas or OU, and those teams are not on the schedule anymore. (Did I mention that Baylor games were on streaming five weeks in a row last year?)

Funny thing about those stadiums- they’re not that big. They don’t need to be. The PAC refugees will be bringing in the league’s biggest stadiums. Shoot, right now UTSA plays in a stadium larger than any IR8 team. Those SEC and B1G bottom dwellers all have bigger stadiums than the biggest B12 stadiums. 
 
It’s ok. You matter. You’re a big deal. It’s just bad luck that you’re not pulling $60M or $100M per year like an SEC or B1G team. 

Yep, full Aggy. As stated before, always a sign that someone has nothing in their personal life to hang their self-esteem on. Shame. 

But hey, Texas is in the SEC, you matter,  you're a big deal ("you" being a collection of 18-22 year olds who don't actually know you exist, but whatever you need to get by).

[LTbear 4,044]

5 minutes ago, 'stache said:

That's not what Al was saying, and you know it. You're a fucking clown. 

Odds he works for hourly wages, actually graduated from UT-Tyler, but wears burnt orange every day? I'm saying 85%. 

Edited July 12 by LTbear