Tell me about Texas Tech

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

[Satchel 6,949]

On July 8, 2018 at 5:17 AM, pigmeat markham said:

May have played a role, but I think Tuberville left mostly because it was pretty apparent the way things had been going, he was going to get fired after the upcoming season and with his pal at Cincy, he had an opportunity to get a shiny., brand new contract.

Understand standing Lubbock and having a history there is awfully shortsighted while narrowing the talent pool considerably. It's more than bit ironic that the winningest coach in Tech's history had neither of those credentials.

 

 

 

 

[GhostofDanJones 336]

[GhostofDanJones 336]

Wouldn't be surprised if Kliff has banged every cheerleader and sorority whore on campus

[pigmeat markham 135]

6 hours ago, Surlybastard said:

I agree in the sense that I think there are 4 things Leach is really known for as a coach in this order:

1. offenses which put up tons of pass yards/points

2. playing shit ooc schedules

3. having shit defenses most years

4. that one magical 11 win season

At the end of the day he's a good coach. Not a great one or some kind of miracle worker. He's entertaining though so it gives him bonus points in how he is generally perceived by fans.

That may very well be what he is known for, but not all perception is accurate.  The stereotype is that they weren't, but most of his  defenses were actually pretty good by a season's end national ranking standard.  A UT fan on Shaggy once upon a time posted those rankings for each year and it was very surprising.  Wish I would have saved it.  Those really awful Tech defenses came later.

He may be known for an 11 win season, but he also had three 9 win seasons and 3 eight win seasons.  Certainly not national championship numbers, but more than respectable.   First two years at TT he won 7 and surpassed that every year afterward.  The cream puff ooc schedule certainly seemed far more the norm for major schools everywhere then it is now.

[pigmeat markham 135]

7 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

 

no it is 100% the truth he coached 10 seasons in a 12 team conference and never won the conference a single time and his best achievement was being in a 3 way tie for the conference division one time

lets look at the amazing teams that he beat for those 9 and 11 win seasons (and remember no fan base talks more shit about the Baylor OOC than Texas Tech fans)

2005 he played FIU 5-6, Sam Houston State D1-AA, and Indiana....STATE D1-AA in the OOC so he played two D1-AA teams and a team with a losing record in the Sun Belt

in 2007 he played SMU (1-11), UTEP (4-8), Rice (3-9), and Northwestern State D1-AA in the OOC and he also mixed in that amazing loss to a 6-6 Colorado team so he could do a classic "mike coached team" and fall out of the rankings the next week after managing to get in the rankings with the most shittastic OOC schedules in history

in 2008 it was Eastern Washington D1-AA, Nevada (7-6), SMU (1-11), and fucking UMASS D1-AA

so out of those 29 "amazing wins" in those three "amazing" seasons mike got 5 of those wins against D1-AA teams and 5 of them against some of the shittiest D1-A programs out there and one of them against the only team with a winning record from three seasons of OOC games Nevada that was 7-6

so 11 out of those 29 wins in those three seasons were against total shit with two of those seasons having two D1-AA games

you compare that to what Art Briles or Mike Gundy have done at Baylor or OkState or what Patterson did BEFORE EVEN BEING IN THE BIG 12 and mike looks like an even bigger piece of shit for a coach

the guy has coached 16 seasons (and will be 17 if he manages to not fuck something up before this season at WSU) in two conferences of 12 teams and he has never even outright won the division in those 16 seasons and he won't this year for sure much less managed to win the conference

he made his way at Tech scheduling total dogshit and running up the score on them and yet Tech fans talk the most shit about Baylor and their scheduling while ignoring that it did not come close to being as shitty as how mike demanded that Tech schedule

and oh yea there was 2009 when he had North Dakota D1-AA, Rice (2-10), New Mexico (1-11), and UH <----- you remember that UH game right another classic mike moment (that WSU got to experience in a bowl game) when mike "sung his sword" and drunken kevin sumlin took that sword and butt fucked mike with it and stole the victory from him and then mike threw the team under the bus and tried to blame it on them.....and then another classic mike Tech finally manages to get ranked and an A&M team that was  3-3 with wins over New Mexico (1-11), Utah State (4-8), and UAB (5-7) and then three straight losses to Arkansas, OkState and KSU came to Lubbock and butt fucked Tech to a 52-30 win 

yea that is a hell of am amazing coach there....much less he is still doing the same stupid shit all these years later and costing his team wins and rankings and possible chances to have actual meaningful accomplishments in a season Vs just numbers of wins with a large % coming over total shit

 

I notice you're anxious to mention weak sisters he might have beaten, but mention nothing about wins over teams like Clemson, Michigan State, Ole Miss,  #4 ranked Cal, Virginia, and Minnesota.  Besides, your easy ooc schedule is the sole reason argument holds no water when you look at his overall conference record,  47-33.  And that was back when the Big 12 was some pretty strong medicine.

I likewise get a kick out of the implication of your posts that not winning a conference championship is apparently the same as going 4-8 or whatever.  This as if there are no degrees of success or failure.  Seemingly, you either go winless or win the conference title and that is it to you.

Also entertained by your criticism of Tech versus A&M.  Leach only went 7-3 against them.  It's hardly my position that Mike Leach is the greatest coach in football history.  There's valid criticisms to be made. But you simply throw all objectivity out the window and it's kind of silly.

Btw, he took over arguably the worst power 5 program in the country in Washington State and they've gone from having 2 and 4 win seasons prior to his arrival to having two 9 win seasons and an 8 win season in the last 3 years.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 10, 2018 by pigmeat markham

[TheFlyingBoat 907]

5 hours ago, GhostofDanJones said:

Wouldn't be surprised if Kliff has banged every cheerleader and sorority whore on campus

Not a chance Kliff is out of all their leagues.

[Guest]

It’s also aggy as fuck for morons like buttfumble to slight the Leach results because” we expect more.”

 

Expect all you want. No coach won more in the history of the program.  He doubled the number of bowl wins in program history in less than 10 years.  The program was receiving national recognition and was in the discussion of  contenders.

 

Oh but he had a foot out the door and did not respect us.  Every coach leverages other offers for a raise.  Even Saban does it.  Tech trumped up the charges of player mistreatment and they never got past the fact that Leach held their feet to the fire on that contract.  The butthurt and insecurity was rampant.

 

Rebuilding years were 9-4/ 8-5.  Now we’ve returned to our normal and those results are a pipedream.  Enjoy your golf and BBQ fuckers.

 

 

Edited July 10, 2018 by slorch

[Guest Lobo]

You're being insensitive and rude to Texas Tech graduates/attendees.  

[pigmeat markham 135]

16 hours ago, GhostofDanJones said:

Wouldn't be surprised if Kliff has banged every cheerleader and sorority whore on campus

If it matters, the swimming pool girlies weren't college students but grads.  They were however, a tonic for tired eyes.

[Bash Riprock 1,695]

 

[pigmeat markham 135]

I wanted to see the part about him tapping those ol' dirty leg gals.

[C-Man 27,262]

If it matters, the swimming pool girlies weren't college students but grads.  They were however, a tonic for tired eyes.

I’ve always had a thing for the chick on the left in the black bikini.

[pigmeat markham 135]

47 minutes ago, C-Man said:

 

I’ve always had a thing for the chick on the left in the black bikini.

 

Make a blind man talk about seeing again.

[Tom 2,959]

Tech hasn't won an outright conference championship since 1955, before they joined the SWC.  I have no idea why they're brought up in conference realignment discussions going to the PAC.  I can't think of a more boring program.  TCU is a much better football school.  In 5 years by co-winning the conference championship and winning the Peach Bowl, they've accomplished more than Tech has in half a century. 

Edited July 14, 2018 by Tom

['stache 21,866]

Realignment has nothing to do with being good at football or any sport. You realize Rutgers was the biggest winner in realignment, right?

[DeadArmadillo 907]

21 minutes ago, Tom said:

Tech hasn't won an outright conference championship since 1955, before they joined the SWC.  I have no idea why they're brought up in conference realignment discussions going to the PAC.  I can't think of a more boring program.  TCU is a much better football school.  In 5 years by co-winning the conference championship and winning the Peach Bowl, they've accomplished more than Tech has in half a century. 

[Tom 2,959]

 

17 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Realignment has nothing to do with being good at football or any sport. You realize Rutgers was the biggest winner in realignment, right?

 

Sure, but from a fan perspective of any other Big 10 school, Rutgers and Maryland waters down the conference.

 

7 minutes ago, DeadArmadillo said:

 

Fair enough.  TCU has struggled with Kansas a few times on their way to outshining Tech just about every season they've been in the Big 12.  While I'm being a dick towards Tech, I guess it's just weird to me that a school with that many students and resources underachieves so much.  I really miss the Leach years when Tech scared me and they were a legitimate threat.

Edited July 14, 2018 by Tom

[Dirk X West 772]

7 minutes ago, Tom said:

 While I'm being a dick towards Tech, I guess it's just weird to me that a school with that many students and resources underachieves so much.  

How has UT been doing with their resources?  In both cases, bad coaching decisions (i.e. bad hires, but also keeping Mac Brown too long in UT's case) has made for some bad football.  That's it, just like TCU has succeeded by finding a good coach and keeping him. 

[pigmeat markham 135]

1 hour ago, Tom said:

 

 

Sure, but from a fan perspective of any other Big 10 school, Rutgers and Maryland waters down the conference.

 

 

Fair enough.  TCU has struggled with Kansas a few times on their way to outshining Tech just about every season they've been in the Big 12.  While I'm being a dick towards Tech, I guess it's just weird to me that a school with that many students and resources underachieves so much.  I really miss the Leach years when Tech scared me and they were a legitimate threat.

Pretty much is an asinine opinion.

Given  your underachievement criteria, as TTU has won more football games in the last three years than UT, TT is currently a better candidate for realignment than UT--which is of course absurd.  Regarding realignment attractiveness, let's repeat it together shall we, "big picture", "big picture".

 

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Tom said:

Tech hasn't won an outright conference championship since 1955, before they joined the SWC.  I have no idea why they're brought up in conference realignment discussions going to the PAC.  I can't think of a more boring program.  TCU is a much better football school.  In 5 years by co-winning the conference championship and winning the Peach Bowl, they've accomplished more than Tech has in half a century. 

Basketball and baseball count too, albeit considerably less.

A decade ago, Tech was on the national conscience when it came to college football.  We were threatened by that.  Now we live with the consequences.

[kopp0e 1,135]

6 hours ago, Tom said:

Tech hasn't won an outright conference championship since 1955, before they joined the SWC.  I have no idea why they're brought up in conference realignment discussions going to the PAC.  I can't think of a more boring program.  TCU is a much better football school.  In 5 years by co-winning the conference championship and winning the Peach Bowl, they've accomplished more than Tech has in half a century. 

My opinion, XII could expand a "merger" with PAC, combining the most populated states, and each state having 4 members within the league, 8 slots for other members...

Texas -  California/ Respective flagship(s) of each of 2nd & 1st largest populated states in the United States, both AAU institutions, economies larger than some nations...

Texas Tech - UCLA/ Many alumni, boosters, fans & potential recruits located in large metro areas, both are instantly relevant nationally when a 10+ win season is attained...

TCU - USC/  Private school(s) located in 4th & 2nd largest metropolitan statistical areas in United States, normally has an impact on recruiting of neighboring state recruiting...

Rice - Stanford/ The academic powerhouse(s) of each respective division as elite top 20 AAU school(s), both universities has a longstanding "rivalry" with the state flagship...

[Hank Chinaski 6,320]

7 hours ago, Tom said:

Tech hasn't won an outright conference championship since 1955, before they joined the SWC.  I have no idea why they're brought up in conference realignment discussions going to the PAC.  I can't think of a more boring program.  TCU is a much better football school.  In 5 years by co-winning the conference championship and winning the Peach Bowl, they've accomplished more than Tech has in half a century. 

PAC wants nothing to do with church schools. It also makes sense for UT to ally with a large state school. 

[ButtFumble 5,183]

a couple of things

1. the Big 12 has a 99 year contract for conference membership that calls for a penalty of the prior 2 years worth of conference distributions for leaving and this contract was signed in 2012

this is a SEPARATE contract from the GOR

8 members of the Big 12 have been a party to ENFORCING a similar contract on two different occasions against 4 teams, CU and NU then A&M and MU and those 8 Big 12 teams collected negotiated damages equal to about 10% more than a years worth of conference distributions so it is pretty impossible any of those 8 teams could argue that suddenly they should not be held to a contract like that

WVU and TCU have both PAID under a similar contract with the Big 8 and the last team that paid under a similar contract was Maryland paying $36.5 million which was WELL over 1 years worth of distributions from the ACC

so these contracts continually stand up in court and result in significant damages paid

2. this same contract calls for any member that makes contact OR IS CONTACTED about leaving the Big 12 to notify the Big 12 within 12 days AND to send a legal notification to the party they had contract with denying their desire to leave the Big 12 and failure to do so results in being unable to vote on conference business and other penalties

3. it makes ZERO economic sense that media partners would find it desirable to pay 2 to 4 teams to leave a 10 team conference and join a 12 team conference and then pay SIXTEEN teams an amount of money that would make it financially desirable for those 4 teams to leave a 12 team conference

why would the want to pay 12 teams a large  amount of new money when they could simply keep the 4 teams where they are and pay 6 other teams a large amount of money and leave the conference with 12 teams making the same or less money

it makes even less financial sense to add 4 teams to a 12 team conference when those 4 teams are currently making significantly more money than the 12 team conference makes thus you would have to offer a large financial incentive to those 4 teams AND to the 12 teams Vs just paying 4 teams to stay with 6 others thus paying a great deal less money

4. it is simply not going to be possible for the Big 12 to break apart and find suitable landing spots for enough members that the conference could break apart without financial cost to members leaving the conference

and that is all the more so when you consider the 12 day notification clause above

the Big 12 needs a super majority of members to disband the conference and that basically means 8 of 10 teams and you are not going to get 8 of 10 teams in a position to feel as though they have a landing spot and make that vote especially within 12 days

5. the ONLY way that it would be POSSIBLE in my opinion to get 4 members to leave the Big 12 and pay the cost to do so (even going to court and negotiating it down to $40 million or so each based on the Maryland settlement and past Big 12 settlements) and especially get them to the PAC 12 is if UCLA and USC tossed their weight around and demanded that the PAC 12 go back to uneven revenue sharing as they did until their last contract (just like the Big 12) and then that provides incentive enough for 4 teams to come to the PAC 12 along with a significant change in how they handle 3rd tier content and 3rd tier revenues

everyone needs to remember that USC and UCLA made demands on the PAC 12 that if they did not each get on average $20 million a year or more from the new contract that other members would kick money to UCLA and USC.....most people forget that demand because in the end the PAC 12 was able to get just to the $20 million per year average for their new contract and that demand was not needed to be met

with the way things are now who knows if USC and UCLA would make those demands again or how they would be met, but it is HIGHLY unlikely that you could take 4 teams (or even 2) in a conference with 6/8 other members making significantly more money in one conference and add them to 12 others and then boost the money high enough to cover exit fees and make it worth it to the teams coming to the PAC 12

[Guest]

a silly little thing like a contract ain't stopping Tech...

[Jack Wilson 313]

12 hours ago, slorch said:

a silly little thing like a contract ain't stopping Tech...

Ask the Pirate.

[kopp0e 1,135]

16 hours ago, Hank Chinaski said:

PAC wants nothing to do with church schools. It also makes sense for UT to ally with a large state school. 

USC is a school originally founded as part of the Methodist church, and there seems to be no issues there, now if you saying "church schools" means Baylor & BYU, I understand...                As is, I see no reason TCU could not also be included in a "merger" with the PAC, if the league is aware that adding the bellcow of the ball, (Longhorns) and Texas Tech is possible...

[kopp0e 1,135]

15 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

a couple of things

1. the Big 12 has a 99 year contract for conference membership that calls for a penalty of the prior 2 years worth of conference distributions for leaving and this contract was signed in 2012

this is a SEPARATE contract from the GOR

8 members of the Big 12 have been a party to ENFORCING a similar contract on two different occasions against 4 teams, CU and NU then A&M and MU and those 8 Big 12 teams collected negotiated damages equal to about 10% more than a years worth of conference distributions so it is pretty impossible any of those 8 teams could argue that suddenly they should not be held to a contract like that

WVU and TCU have both PAID under a similar contract with the Big 8 and the last team that paid under a similar contract was Maryland paying $36.5 million which was WELL over 1 years worth of distributions from the ACC

so these contracts continually stand up in court and result in significant damages paid

2. this same contract calls for any member that makes contact OR IS CONTACTED about leaving the Big 12 to notify the Big 12 within 12 days AND to send a legal notification to the party they had contract with denying their desire to leave the Big 12 and failure to do so results in being unable to vote on conference business and other penalties

3. it makes ZERO economic sense that media partners would find it desirable to pay 2 to 4 teams to leave a 10 team conference and join a 12 team conference and then pay SIXTEEN teams an amount of money that would make it financially desirable for those 4 teams to leave a 12 team conference

why would the want to pay 12 teams a large  amount of new money when they could simply keep the 4 teams where they are and pay 6 other teams a large amount of money and leave the conference with 12 teams making the same or less money

it makes even less financial sense to add 4 teams to a 12 team conference when those 4 teams are currently making significantly more money than the 12 team conference makes thus you would have to offer a large financial incentive to those 4 teams AND to the 12 teams Vs just paying 4 teams to stay with 6 others thus paying a great deal less money

4. it is simply not going to be possible for the Big 12 to break apart and find suitable landing spots for enough members that the conference could break apart without financial cost to members leaving the conference

and that is all the more so when you consider the 12 day notification clause above

the Big 12 needs a super majority of members to disband the conference and that basically means 8 of 10 teams and you are not going to get 8 of 10 teams in a position to feel as though they have a landing spot and make that vote especially within 12 days

5. the ONLY way that it would be POSSIBLE in my opinion to get 4 members to leave the Big 12 and pay the cost to do so (even going to court and negotiating it down to $40 million or so each based on the Maryland settlement and past Big 12 settlements) and especially get them to the PAC 12 is if UCLA and USC tossed their weight around and demanded that the PAC 12 go back to uneven revenue sharing as they did until their last contract (just like the Big 12) and then that provides incentive enough for 4 teams to come to the PAC 12 along with a significant change in how they handle 3rd tier content and 3rd tier revenues

everyone needs to remember that USC and UCLA made demands on the PAC 12 that if they did not each get on average $20 million a year or more from the new contract that other members would kick money to UCLA and USC.....most people forget that demand because in the end the PAC 12 was able to get just to the $20 million per year average for their new contract and that demand was not needed to be met

with the way things are now who knows if USC and UCLA would make those demands again or how they would be met, but it is HIGHLY unlikely that you could take 4 teams (or even 2) in a conference with 6/8 other members making significantly more money in one conference and add them to 12 others and then boost the money high enough to cover exit fees and make it worth it to the teams coming to the PAC 12

Actually, in the case of let's say ESPN & FOX, it would be advantageous for the networks to look at "consolidating product" by placing let's say 6 XII members with 10 PAC members, and instead of paying 22 schools P5 revenues, the networks only pay 16 schools in a PAC-XII merger... Assuming WVU is absorbed into an ESPN conference property of either the ACC or SEC, there is a reduction of 5 schools no longer required the revenues of the current setup... Also the networks gain more inventory of tier 1 competitive games as:

California v Texas/ Colorado v Oklahoma/ USC v TCU/ Texas Tech v Arizona State in football in a  UCLA v Kansas in basketball, for example...

[ButtFumble 5,183]

10 minutes ago, kopp0e said:

Actually, in the case of let's say ESPN & FOX, it would be advantageous for the networks to look at "consolidating product" by placing let's say 6 XII members with 10 PAC members, and instead of paying 22 schools P5 revenues, the networks only pay 16 schools in a PAC-XII merger... Assuming WVU is absorbed into an ESPN conference property of either the ACC or SEC, there is a reduction of 5 schools no longer required the revenues of the current setup... Also the networks gain more inventory of tier 1 competitive games as:

California v Texas/ Colorado v Oklahoma/ USC v TCU/ Texas Tech v Arizona State in football in a  UCLA v Kansas in basketball, for example...

but there is still the factor of a $40+ million per team cost to get 6 schools out of the Big 12 and that is just not going to go away the legal precedent is fully there and I have no idea what the PAC 12 contract is, but I doubt they can just get rid of two teams with no cost there

not to mention that you are still adding a smaller number of teams that command better money to a larger number of teams that command less money......it would be just as easy for the networks to tell the PAC 12 they do not want all of their second tier content only a portion of it along with the first tier content and they can take their additional second tier content and put it on their little PAC 12 networks and make a go of it themselves with that and the content they currently have on the PAC12ns

and Tech fully met their contract requirements with mike it was a simple fact that mike and his fat little lawyers and fat little agents were too stupid to understand the contract and made a lot of really stupid mistakes thinking they would force the hand of Texas Tech....and they did and it cost mike a shit ton of money because he was too stupid to wait a few days to swing his stupid little sword

[pigmeat markham 135]

19 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

and Tech fully met their contract requirements with mike it was a simple fact that mike and his fat little lawyers and fat little agents were too stupid to understand the contract and made a lot of really stupid mistakes thinking they would force the hand of Texas Tech....and they did and it cost mike a shit ton of money because he was too stupid to wait a few days to swing his stupid little sword

It's fun to play make believe.

[ButtFumble 5,183]

6 minutes ago, pigmeat markham said:

It's fun to play make believe.

yea but unfortunately for penis leachers no one believes their bs that mike was wronged when everything that happened is out there clear as day

if mike had simply followed the university procedures before filing a lawsuit his contract bonus would have come to the completion date, but instead he went right to filing a lawsuit and thus Tech had to fire him and that was before the bonus was due.....too bad so sad for mike and the few idiots that still think he would have done anything meaningful at Tech besides find another way to self destruct (like will be most likely happening at WSU this year since all the things are in place for a full on mike melt down)

mike was never going to accomplish anything of significance at Texas Tech and he never will at WSU either because his focus is on building the cult of mike and trying to land a next level job at a school that would never want nor would they put up with his self centered clown show

top programs want wins and their program to be the focus of their football not mike catching a fish or saying something stupid about the playoffs or anything else especially when he will never sniff the playoffs unless he buys some tickets to go to them

[pigmeat markham 135]

14 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

yea but unfortunately for penis leachers no one believes their bs that mike was wronged when everything that happened is out there clear as day

if mike had simply followed the university procedures before filing a lawsuit his contract bonus would have come to the completion date, but instead he went right to filing a lawsuit and thus Tech had to fire him and that was before the bonus was due.....too bad so sad for mike and the few idiots that still think he would have done anything meaningful at Tech besides find another way to self destruct (like will be most likely happening at WSU this year since all the things are in place for a full on mike melt down)

mike was never going to accomplish anything of significance at Texas Tech and he never will at WSU either because his focus is on building the cult of mike and trying to land a next level job at a school that would never want nor would they put up with his self centered clown show

top programs want wins and their program to be the focus of their football not mike catching a fish or saying something stupid about the playoffs or anything else especially when he will never sniff the playoffs unless he buys some tickets to go to them

Given your unrestrained and unjustified bitterness, I'd have to guess as a kid, Mike Leach must have stolen your candy.  Your remarks defy reality.

[ButtFumble 5,183]

9 minutes ago, pigmeat markham said:

Given your unrestrained and unjustified bitterness, I'd have to guess as a kid, Mike Leach must have stolen your candy.  Your remarks defy reality.

what do I have to be bitter about?

mike came to Tech he reached the max level that his coaching skills (and more so his personality) will ever allow, he tried desperately to get away from Tech and was rejected time and again by better jobs (and some jobs that were not remotely better at the time like UW) and he became bitter and turned on his players and started to make stupid coaching mistakes and throwing his players under the bus for them and then self destructed and did so in a way that saved Tech $800,000

I am not the one hiring old washed up reporters to try and dig up dirt on Texas Tech administrators that left the university years ago, I am not the one filing lawsuits against Tech 7 or 8 years later.....I am not the one still making stupid coaching decisions that cost a team wins and I am not the one that comes out two years in a row and manages to find a way to lose to D1-AA teams to start the season.....all while demanding more money, having another failed "next level" job search and while still trying to jab at Texas Tech.....mike is the one doing all of that stupid shit and it is not selling well to the WSU fans and administration either and it will sell less and less well as time goes on

but I know I know mike says stupid shit, mike caught a fish and shot a bear, mike does hop scotch (and probably drinks some scotch) as he walks to work....but of course he still is a shitty recruiter, he still sucks at clock management, he still has shitty special teams, he still understands nothing about getting younger players ready for the next season, his teams still start like shit at the first of the year, his teams still play like shit after a bye week, he still finds a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory (New Mexico
Bowl and Colorado with WSU), and he still pretty much gets the brush off when "better jobs" come open......shit the ink was not even dry on the aggy check and drunken kevin sumlin had a job at AU while Tennessee fucking fired their AD when they found out he was going to talk to mike (and that was what the 3rd time mike wished he had the Tennessee job and was not remotely in the running)

[Jack Wilson 313]

8 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

what do I have to be bitter about?

mike came to Tech he reached the max level that his coaching skills (and more so his personality) will ever allow, he tried desperately to get away from Tech and was rejected time and again by better jobs (and some jobs that were not remotely better at the time like UW) and he became bitter and turned on his players and started to make stupid coaching mistakes and throwing his players under the bus for them and then self destructed and did so in a way that saved Tech $800,000

I am not the one hiring old washed up reporters to try and dig up dirt on Texas Tech administrators that left the university years ago, I am not the one filing lawsuits against Tech 7 or 8 years later.....I am not the one still making stupid coaching decisions that cost a team wins and I am not the one that comes out two years in a row and manages to find a way to lose to D1-AA teams to start the season.....all while demanding more money, having another failed "next level" job search and while still trying to jab at Texas Tech.....mike is the one doing all of that stupid shit and it is not selling well to the WSU fans and administration either and it will sell less and less well as time goes on

but I know I know mike says stupid shit, mike caught a fish and shot a bear, mike does hop scotch (and probably drinks some scotch) as he walks to work....but of course he still is a shitty recruiter, he still sucks at clock management, he still has shitty special teams, he still understands nothing about getting younger players ready for the next season, his teams still start like shit at the first of the year, his teams still play like shit after a bye week, he still finds a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory (New Mexico
Bowl and Colorado with WSU), and he still pretty much gets the brush off when "better jobs" come open......shit the ink was not even dry on the aggy check and drunken kevin sumlin had a job at AU while Tennessee fucking fired their AD when they found out he was going to talk to mike (and that was what the 3rd time mike wished he had the Tennessee job and was not remotely in the running)

Aw, shit--you've done it now.

[Guest]

Mike Leach never peaked at Tech.

 

That’s the travesty in the past decade of bullshit and embarassment we have endured.

 

Enjoy that fucking BBQ...

[pigmeat markham 135]

Buttfumble,  whew, you're out there dude.  It doesn't matter to me a bit if you don't like Mike Leach, but seems to me there would be value in getting a grip on reality.  His W/L loss record alone pretty much debunks the gist of your overly emotional rants.

Edited July 16, 2018 by pigmeat markham

[ButtFumble 5,183]

anyone that looks at the last 3 games of "da season doh" and the UH game the next year and does not understand that mike reached his max level at Tech and was not going to stay at that level or surpass it is just clueless

then you add in he is still doing the exact same stupid shit at WSU and you would have to be brain dead to not understand that mike will never be a next level coach he is a coach that wins a lot of games against spare teams (when he is not shitting the bed to them occasionally) and that is pretty much it

no coach that has a higher plateau comes into their 4th season at a program and loses a game to a D1-AA program at home to start the season and no next level coach does the same to start their 5th year at a program.....much less the ability to still clutch defeat from the jaws of victory in their 10th, 11th, and 12th season as a head coach

mike fans will always point to some "big win" that "Tech should not have won", but that just tells you where mike had Tech in a position where people never really expected them to have a big win so when they did it was "amazing", but coaches that have a higher level or that get to the next level have their team in the position where they are EXPECTED to win some of those big games and more importantly those coaches do not make CLEAR AS DAY idiotic coaching decisions that cost their team a win over a team they easily would have beaten and that they were 100% in the position to beat in the game until their coach fucked it up for them

you can't point to a big unexpected win and say that you have a coach with higher potential and all the worse when that coach still just fucks up games that were a clear win.....not to mention the games that should have been a win, but mikes teams just came out and shit the bed like losing to a D1-AA team in year 4 and 5 at a program

[Guest]

Nope.  Leach wasn’t perfect.  Nobody here is claiming that.

 

The Texas Tech GOBs and administration made sure he never had the chance to do his best work in Lubbock.

 

We’re still munching on the same shit sandwich they’ve been servin up since his departure.  There’s never been accountability for what happened...and the fissure in our fanbase still exists because of it.

 

FTR, my posts are never meant to change your mind, but they will always be in response to the twisted bullshit you post in some perverse attempt to rewrite history.  

 

You fuckers still wanna play like nothing wrong ever happened.  You could not be any farther from being correct, regardless of how many times you say the lies.

[Bash Riprock 1,695]

Craig James killed five hookers

[kopp0e 1,135]

2 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

but there is still the factor of a $40+ million per team cost to get 6 schools out of the Big 12 and that is just not going to go away the legal precedent is fully there and I have no idea what the PAC 12 contract is, but I doubt they can just get rid of two teams with no cost there

not to mention that you are still adding a smaller number of teams that command better money to a larger number of teams that command less money......

The XII GoR's allow for a dissolvement of current contracts as long as 80% (8 schools) vote to disband... Keep in mind that the networks themselves would play an integral role in moving properties to new leagues... If the ACC accepted West Virginia, while the SEC adds Oklahoma State & TCU, there would only need 5 more schools to agree to exiting... If the PAC & XII merge 6 from the XII by allowing Texas/ Texas Tech/ Oklahoma/ Kansas/ Iowa State, the GoR's is void, and the league has 16 members (+ 1 additional school)...

Also remember the PAC signed a more lucrative 1st & 2nd tier media rights contract than the XII: PAC - 12 years 3 billion split 12 ways/ XII - 13 years 2.4 billion split 10 ways... The issue that would be fixed immediately would be in having a swath of rabid fan bases located in the CTZ to go with the large markets of the PTZ on the 100% owned PACN... Even the option of selling a percentage of the PACN to ESPN would be possible in the upcoming media negotiations of around 2023 (PAC) to 2025 (XII)...

 

[pigmeat markham 135]

Yep ButtFumble, ML is still "doing the exact same stupid shit at WSU".  At least we agree on that--he's had 9 win seasons in 2 of the last 3 years.  Also received a PAC 12  Coach of the Year award too.  Same ol', same ol'.

And he lost a game he shouldn't have.  Remember when Nick Saban at Bama lost at home to La-Monroe?  Can he not coach either?  It's football, it happens.

And I'll have you know I'm thinking about turning you in to the message board EEO dept. for not being an equal opportunity ranter.  Nobody in modern TT football history has been worse at recruiting, game management, special teams and winning than Kliff.  Yet all quiet on the ButtFumble front. Selective, very selective.

 

[pigmeat markham 135]

8 minutes ago, Bash Riprock said:

Craig James killed five hookers

Dead.  Graveyard dead.

[kopp0e 1,135]

1 hour ago, pigmeat markham said:

Dead.  Graveyard dead.

Never underestimate the income and determination of Craig James to bring 'em back to life:

 

Edited July 16, 2018 by kopp0e

[ButtFumble 5,183]

1 hour ago, kopp0e said:

The XII GoR's allow for a dissolvement of current contracts as long as 80% (8 schools) vote to disband... Keep in mind that the networks themselves would play an integral role in moving properties to new leagues... If the ACC accepted West Virginia, while the SEC adds Oklahoma State & TCU, there would only need 5 more schools to agree to exiting... If the PAC & XII merge 6 from the XII by allowing Texas/ Texas Tech/ Oklahoma/ Kansas/ Iowa State, the GoR's is void, and the league has 16 members (+ 1 additional school)...

Also remember the PAC signed a more lucrative 1st & 2nd tier media rights contract than the XII: PAC - 12 years 3 billion split 12 ways/ XII - 13 years 2.4 billion split 10 ways... The issue that would be fixed immediately would be in having a swath of rabid fan bases located in the CTZ to go with the large markets of the PTZ on the 100% owned PACN... Even the option of selling a percentage of the PACN to ESPN would be possible in the upcoming media negotiations of around 2023 (PAC) to 2025 (XII)...

 

the GOR has noting in it that allows for withdrawal from the conference.....it is a totally and completely different contract from the 99 year contract for conference membership

http://www.big12sports.com/fls/10410/pdfs/handbook/ConferenceHandbook.pdf

above is a link to the contract for conference membership

section 3 page 23 Withdrawal

specifically section 3.2 part c

(C)  if  a  third  party  offers  to,  or  attempts  to  induce a Member to, leave the Conference and/or breach or not to fully performits future obligations under the Grant of Rights Agreement and the Member does not both (1) inform the Conference of such action as promptly as possible (butin  any  event  not  later  than  twelve  (12)  hours  after  such  action)  and  (2)  immediately and  unconditionally  reject  that  offer  in  a  form  and  manner  reasonably acceptable to the Commissioner; or (D) if a Member otherwise takes 18 or  fails  to  take  actions  that  are  determined  by  a   Supermajority  of  Disinterested   Directorsto be contrary to the best interests of the Conference taken as a whole.

 

when you read part C along with parts A and B just above it you will see that a member is said to have withdrawn if they do not follow part C (which is actually a requirement of TWELVE HOURS not twelve days as I said previously) to notify the conference of ANY contact to leave the conference

so unless you believe that 8 members of the Big 12 are all going to sit down and in 12 hours find a way to all leave the conference to acceptable other conferences and then "notify the conference" and then vote to disband the conference then what you are saying is not possible

because once it goes past 12 hours of contact between a conference member and some other conference or some other individual or entity trying to get a member or members to leave then any of the members that have had contact and not made notification to the conference of that contact AND made notification of their LACK OF INTEREST IN LEAVING THE BIG 12 to the other party then they have technically "withdrawn from the conference and thus are not eligible to vote on conference business

so it is not possible for 8 members of the Big 12 to all get together and find suitable homes and then vote to disband the conference unless you believe that can happen in 12 hours or less and the reality is there are not going to be 8 members that would sit down and collude to try and break that section of the contract nor that would believe that they would be able to find a suitable home in a period of time less than MONTHS and thus they are not going to be a party to any 8 member back door deals especially when doing so could result in them being left out in the cold if they were found to have broke that 12 hour notification and the 2 remaining members of the big 12 decide to screw them as pay back

 

just as an example if Texas, OU, OkState, Tech, KSU, KU, ISU, and WVU got together and said "we can do this" and they all went out there and tried to do it and in a few days all but ISU had found a home and the other members said "well we have to let TCU and Baylor know what is up and we are prepared to pay the exit fees anyway or we are prepared to litigate and to try and get that exit fee down to $25 or $35 million each" and ISU says "no wait we need more time to find a home" and the other seven say "we are gone no matter what and we are letting TCU and Baylor know"

at that point none of those above 8 members can vote to disband the conference and more importantly in the case of ISU that has not found a home they are no longer considered a member of the Big 12 and thus they are actually still on the hook for the withdrawal fee

the "best case" for them would be that TCU and Baylor voted to keep the Big 12 in tact, they voted to litigate with the other 8 members and they told ISU that they would let them back into the conference (with bad blood), but they could easily tell ISU that part of getting back in the conference is that they get ZERO of the dollars that the other 7 members have to pay to exit the conference and that only Baylor and TCU split that money and that ISU gets nothing from any left over NCAA credits and that ISU does not even get their NCAA credits 

the worst case would be that TCU and Baylor tell ISU they want nothing to do with them and they go after them for an exit fee just like the other and ISU gets stuck paying what the other 7 pay AND they have no new conference home

plus if you read that contract closely I read it as to the fact that if any members of the Big 12 sit down and talk with each other about leaving the Big 12 together to a conference or to different conferences and especially if they discuss breaking the GOR or the contract for conference membership that in and of itself requires 12 hours notification to the Big 12 and can possibly be considered as withdrawing or it can make them ineligible to vote on conference business especially business related to keeping the conference whole or disbanding the conference or changing any exit fees

the contract is very clear that you are in violation of that contract if you try and go talking to other conferences even "causally" or if some "third party" talks with you about "what you would do if this happened" which is why I am surprised that the idiot david boren stated publicly that "he is always talking to his people about the GOR and what it means"......if that drooling old fool is still alive if and when any major shake up happens to the Big 12 those word s could really haunt OU especially and could cost them a shit ton of money 

[kopp0e 1,135]

11 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

the GOR has noting in it that allows for withdrawal from the conference.....it is a totally and completely different contract from the 99 year contract for conference membership

http://www.big12sports.com/fls/10410/pdfs/handbook/ConferenceHandbook.pdf

above is a link to the contract for conference membership

section 3 page 23 Withdrawal

specifically section 3.2 part c

(C)  if  a  third  party  offers  to,  or  attempts  to  induce a Member to, leave the Conference and/or breach or not to fully performits future obligations under the Grant of Rights Agreement and the Member does not both (1) inform the Conference of such action as promptly as possible (butin  any  event  not  later  than  twelve  (12)  hours  after  such  action)  and  (2)  immediately and  unconditionally  reject  that  offer  in  a  form  and  manner  reasonably acceptable to the Commissioner; or (D) if a Member otherwise takes 18 or  fails  to  take  actions  that  are  determined  by  a   Supermajority  of  Disinterested   Directorsto be contrary to the best interests of the Conference taken as a whole.

 

when you read part C along with parts A and B just above it you will see that a member is said to have withdrawn if they do not follow part C (which is actually a requirement of TWELVE HOURS not twelve days as I said previously) to notify the conference of ANY contact to leave the conference

so unless you believe that 8 members of the Big 12 are all going to sit down and in 12 hours find a way to all leave the conference to acceptable other conferences and then "notify the conference" and then vote to disband the conference then what you are saying is not possible

because once it goes past 12 hours of contact between a conference member and some other conference or some other individual or entity trying to get a member or members to leave then any of the members that have had contact and not made notification to the conference of that contact AND made notification of their LACK OF INTEREST IN LEAVING THE BIG 12 to the other party then they have technically "withdrawn from the conference and thus are not eligible to vote on conference business

so it is not possible for 8 members of the Big 12 to all get together and find suitable homes and then vote to disband the conference unless you believe that can happen in 12 hours or less and the reality is there are not going to be 8 members that would sit down and collude to try and break that section of the contract nor that would believe that they would be able to find a suitable home in a period of time less than MONTHS and thus they are not going to be a party to any 8 member back door deals especially when doing so could result in them being left out in the cold if they were found to have broke that 12 hour notification and the 2 remaining members of the big 12 decide to screw them as pay back

 

just as an example if Texas, OU, OkState, Tech, KSU, KU, ISU, and WVU got together and said "we can do this" and they all went out there and tried to do it and in a few days all but ISU had found a home and the other members said "well we have to let TCU and Baylor know what is up and we are prepared to pay the exit fees anyway or we are prepared to litigate and to try and get that exit fee down to $25 or $35 million each" and ISU says "no wait we need more time to find a home" and the other seven say "we are gone no matter what and we are letting TCU and Baylor know"

at that point none of those above 8 members can vote to disband the conference and more importantly in the case of ISU that has not found a home they are no longer considered a member of the Big 12 and thus they are actually still on the hook for the withdrawal fee

the "best case" for them would be that TCU and Baylor voted to keep the Big 12 in tact, they voted to litigate with the other 8 members and they told ISU that they would let them back into the conference (with bad blood), but they could easily tell ISU that part of getting back in the conference is that they get ZERO of the dollars that the other 7 members have to pay to exit the conference and that only Baylor and TCU split that money and that ISU gets nothing from any left over NCAA credits and that ISU does not even get their NCAA credits 

the worst case would be that TCU and Baylor tell ISU they want nothing to do with them and they go after them for an exit fee just like the other and ISU gets stuck paying what the other 7 pay AND they have no new conference home

plus if you read that contract closely I read it as to the fact that if any members of the Big 12 sit down and talk with each other about leaving the Big 12 together to a conference or to different conferences and especially if they discuss breaking the GOR or the contract for conference membership that in and of itself requires 12 hours notification to the Big 12 and can possibly be considered as withdrawing or it can make them ineligible to vote on conference business especially business related to keeping the conference whole or disbanding the conference or changing any exit fees

the contract is very clear that you are in violation of that contract if you try and go talking to other conferences even "causally" or if some "third party" talks with you about "what you would do if this happened" which is why I am surprised that the idiot david boren stated publicly that "he is always talking to his people about the GOR and what it means"......if that drooling old fool is still alive if and when any major shake up happens to the Big 12 those word s could really haunt OU especially and could cost them a shit ton of money 

If the members of XII vote to nullify Baylor voting, 80% of 9 votes there would only need to be 7 yes votes to disband...
ACC - 1 West Virginia
SEC - 2 Oklahoma State/ TCU
PAC - 4* Texas/ Texas Tech/ Oklahoma/ Kansas, the conference has needed votes to disband the conference... (* both of Iowa State & Rice, if "merging" 6 schools with PAC)
Waiting until 2025 is likely a outcome, a myriad of options available to schools with leverage, as ESPN & UT has options to terminate or modify LHN if the school is compensated... The contract could be used as leverage in gaining a percentage (50%) of the PACN, and all 10 PAC members (if "reforming" without Cougars & Beavers), could form a national network; or particular schools as UT/ OU & USC/ UCLA could keep or create individual 3rd tier networks in the expanded league...

The new president at Oklahoma is a board member on the University of Colorado, all this is not impossible, but you make valid points that would need to be addressed as well...

[Valmy77 13,273]

Well what you are proposing is terrible and would suck hard for every single Big XII fanbase. That is a pretty valid point.

Well ok maybe WV might be better off...in whatever horribad 20 team monstrosity the ACC would be in this scenario.

[kopp0e 1,135]

7 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Well what you are proposing is terrible and would suck hard for every single Big XII fanbase. That is a pretty valid point.

Well ok maybe WV might be better off...in whatever horribad 20 team monstrosity the ACC would be in this scenario.

Are you willing to extrapolate on how you deem that a proposed merger would be a situation worse than the current of having the smallest P5 conference..?

[MyWifeIsBi.....Polar 6]

Nm 

Edited July 16, 2018 by MyWifeIsBi.....Polar
Nm

[Al_4_ISU 12,485]

The current Big 12 is profitable, you play the same schools every year, and 90% of the league is spread along the Great Plains, giving it at least some modicum of geographic continuity.

This is better than merging with the Pac, unless you hate everything about college football.

[Bash Riprock 1,695]