**** sandy aggy (regarding the OP)
and **** texas. **** them all to hell.
**** sandy aggy (regarding the OP)
and **** texas. **** them all to hell.
Not sure I get the hostility. We're just talking about conference affiliation. That's what you do on message boards, right?
Anyway, I submit that the final money deals for both conferences will be roughly the same. I submit that CU's deal will not be materially better than whatever Tech or OSU ends up with when it's all said and done, which is what CU would have had.
I submit that your recruiting will be roughly the same.You will get the leftovers from CA, just as you do now, like Hansen and Mcknight.
Don't see how you are any better off. You see big urban areas in the pac10, sure, but the only school that has any support is SC, and that's only if they're winning.
Misguided animosity?
Apparently not.
Well in the adult world we can typically discuss a matter like this without becoming emotionally unhinged, even if you don't agree with what the other person is saying.
Anyway, I submit that the final money deals for both conferences will be roughly the same. I submit that CU's deal will not be materially better than whatever Tech or OSU ends up with when it's all said and done, which is what CU would have had.
Don't see how you are any better off. You see big urban areas in the pac10, sure, but the only school that has any support is SC, and that's only if they're winning.
You can't work a TV deal for your conference if you don't have a conference. The Mack 10 is doomed. And it's doomed precisely because of UT and it's arrogance and greed. The Pac 12 deal can't help but be better than the Big 12 deal because in another five years, there will not be a Big 12. And even if that weren't the case, and the money was the same, we'd STILL be better off for having told UT to go f**k themselves.
all things being equal, I would still be stoked with this move. **** texas. :woot: However, they are not.
Money= Probably more, can't be less.
Visiting: Way better places.
TV: Better markets, more national appeal (LA alone has far more national and international appeal than any city in TX)
Recruiting: We've always been stronger in Cali than in TX, and strangely, the great Big 12 S connections to texas are far less good than our new Pac 10 S ties to Cali. For instance, we are NOT EVEN GOING to Texas this year. We only go to Austin once every 4 years, and most other visits to texas go to **** places like Waco or Lubbock. Not a lot of help there. Now we are going to mother****ing LA baby. Population CENTER. Every year. And SF area every other year. Not to mention going to big areas in AZ every year. And big areas in the NW almost every year. So basically, we are now tied even tighter to a historically more important recrutiing ground then we ever have been in the big 8 or 12. WIN for Pac 12.
Rivalries: I already care as much about beating LA as I do about beating Iowa ****ing state. At least losing to them won't be embarassing most years, like losing to KSU, ISU. Less good geography.. Who cares? Geography only HELPS rivalries, games have to have national importance or else the rivalry doesn't matter. Which is why we care more about kNU than CSU. And will care more about USC/UCLA/ASU/AU/UU than we ever will about CSU/ISU/KSU/KU.
So ya, even if the recession hits hard and Scott stops being the CEO he has been at prior stops (hardly likely) when it coems to tv negotiations... **** texas, Good decision.
You are right. NorCal.Minor point. We won't be in SF every other year.
You are right. NorCal.
once every 3 or something. Other thread had ppl totally certain we were gonna be in Norcal every other year. **** off.That's not what I meant either.
With USC and UCLA playing Stanford and Cal every year, we won't play them every other year, or even 50% of the seasons. We'll be up in the Northwest more than we'll be in NorCal.
once every 3 or something. Other thread had ppl totally certain we were gonna be in Norcal every other year. **** off.
Well in the adult world we can typically discuss a matter like this without becoming emotionally unhinged, even if you don't agree with what the other person is saying.
Edit: You know...that comes across as totally condescending. I'm an asshole for writing that. My apologies.
Speaking of MTM, he is redshirting this season, is he not?Tuoti-Mariner
Even if that turns out to be true, that the income would be the same from the Pac or XII Lite, there are soooooo many other reasons that the move makes sense - which have been listed multiple times previously in the thread. I don't know if you are arguing this point for the sake of argument, or if you are one of the very few who actually believe that CU should stay in the XII Lite, but I submit to you that it is the right move at the right time.Anyway, I submit that the final money deals for both conferences will be roughly the same. I submit that CU's deal will not be materially better than whatever Tech or OSU ends up with when it's all said and done, which is what CU would have had.
.Even if that turns out to be true, that the income would be the same from the Pac or XII Lite, there are soooooo many other reasons that the move makes sense - which have been listed multiple times previously in the thread. I don't know if you are arguing this point for the sake of argument, or if you are one of the very few who actually believe that CU should stay in the XII Lite, but I submit to you that it is the right move at the right time.
CU can't even get TV ratings or attention in Colorado. Why do you think people in CA, AZ, OR and WA will care to watch?
CU can't even get TV ratings or attention in Colorado. Why do you think people in CA, AZ, OR and WA will care to watch?
Because we'll be playing their teams?
I know that you're pretending this is an adult discussion, but dude, you're being a real prick.
They don't even show up to watch their own teams. Stanford attendance avg is lower than Iowa State.
1. Equal revenue sharing is moot if the net take to CU is roughly equal under the new deals of either conf.
2. I'm not seeing the Cali recruiting pipeline. Every school in p10 has dead aim on top Cali recruits. It's the coach that brings em in, not the conference. CO has a hard time in CO, much less CA You're looking at Hansens and McKnights.
3. Possible, but remains to be seen.
4. Personally, I don't get the academics argument. It's an athletic conf. I've heard some of the reasoning but I don't buy it. Is NU a better academic institution for being associated with Texas for the past 15 years or so? Is NU going to turn into Northwestern now that they are in the b10?
1. Equal revenue sharing is moot if the net take to CU is roughly equal under the new deals of either conf.
2. I'm not seeing the Cali recruiting pipeline. Every school in p10 has dead aim on top Cali recruits. It's the coach that brings em in, not the conference. CO has a hard time in CO, much less CA You're looking at Hansens and McKnights.
3. Possible, but remains to be seen.
4. Personally, I don't get the academics argument. It's an athletic conf. I've heard some of the reasoning but I don't buy it. Is NU a better academic institution for being associated with Texas for the past 15 years or so? Is NU going to turn into Northwestern now that they are in the b10?