Jump to content

NT80

Members
  • Posts

    13,548
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    53
  • Points

    107,283 [ Donate ]

Posts posted by NT80

  1. 18 hours ago, TripleGrad said:

    https://billfarley.substack.com/p/the-pac-2s-contracts-with-the-mwc

    The interesting thing is that 2Pac is not required to take ALL the MWC if they choose to rebuild the PacX.  

     

    Correct.  The MWC Commish is trying to put an "all or none" face on it, but in reality, any that the PAC ask will move over if the PAC payout vs buyout is positive.   I expect the PAC-2 to try and cherry pick the best of the MWC based on media rights opinions. 

  2. 51 minutes ago, MCMLXXX said:

    If true, then I assume they will not interact with or play games against teams that are not in their conferences. Unlike the NFL that seeks parity through the draft and salary cap no such equalizer will be in place. Schools like Northwestern and Vanderbilt among others will permanently (perhaps they already are anyway) field losing teams with no chance for any Championship and will solely participate for any revenue sharing.   

    In my opinion, all schools remaining in the NCAA should enact a rule banning games against any of those teams.

    They may form a playoff between themselves, then a Super Bowl of sorts between SEC and Big10. 

    But they need other FBS schools to play OOC games with so they can all get their 7 home football games and 20 home basketball games, etc.   

    It will be fun to see OU, Oregon, USC, Penn St, A&M, etc start going 6-6 during the football seasons, because of increased opponent strength.  There will be more coaches fired and calls to split apart these Mega-Conferences.

    • Upvote 1
  3. Tulane's only lead of the game was 2-0, but it never felt like we could put this one away.  We should have pulled away by 20, only to let them get back within a single possession several times. 

    Still doesn't look like we are firing on all cylinders yet even with a healthy roster.  Too many forced shots at the end of the shot clock, a turnover or violation.  But as they say any road win is a good win, so...

     

    • Upvote 1
  4. "The CFP modeling is tricky, as college sports remain a moving target. This ESPN deal would run through the 2031 season, and it's naïve to think the conference map will look the same as it does today.

    One high-ranking official involved in the discussions told ESPN on Wednesday that the presidents and chancellors in both the SEC and Big Ten are having conversations about whether to continue their NCAA membership. It's a move that would impact and could possibly derail the TV agreement."

    "Those conversations are happening," the source said, adding some feel "pretty strongly about pulling away. I'd say very strongly."

    https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/39619331/sources-14-team-college-football-playoff-momentum

     

    • Upvote 2
    • Haha 1
  5. 1 hour ago, DeepGreen said:

    Tulane is private, but they have the money.  Maybe more than smut.

    Rice also is private, as well as Tulsa.  Rice may have more money than the other AAC privates combined?

    Tulane used to be in the SEC, and won 3 SEC Football Championships.  Rice at one time was a National power as a member of the Southwest Conference and won 7 SWC Football Championships. 

    Tulane left the SEC in1966 due to financial difficulties, a desire to de-emphasize athletics, and a focus on academic pursuits. This decision had repercussions for the university's football program.

    Rice has the second-smallest undergraduate enrollment of any FBS member, ahead of only Tulsa.

  6. 8 hours ago, Cooley said:

    Unless we are a perennial top 20-25 program, I don't know why it is acceptable to knowingly sign bench/role players. J. Morgan was not a good player in high school. Why would we expect more from him now?  Stone was the 3rd best kid on his Oklahoma HS team. Why would he be a key guy on the G5 level? The kid from Kilgore JC (not sure he is on scholarship) just started playing the game. Our recruiting has been boom or bust for the past 5-6 years. Half of the recruits have excelled while the other half have been busts. Stop wasting valuable scholarships on kids of great character that may be great in practice. Treat each scholarships like it's the only one we have. There are too many good/great players that we pass up that could really help this program. (with no known issues) More so in football.     

    Just my weekly rant

    This!

  7. 3 hours ago, greenminer said:

    I see a statement that TTech wants 7 home games.

    Has TTech actually taken any moves forward to buy out our game?

    They have a large alumni base in Dallas.  It's an easy road game, and fan-friendly to their fans.  I bet they keep the game in Denton.  I hate rich P5 schools trying to bully everybody else.  But it shows the value of football in having more home games vs away games.  

    • Upvote 1
  8. 4 hours ago, HoosMeanGreen said:

    Impossible to field a team with 12 “playable” players simultaneously. The talent divide is large enough within the team. The talent divide grows exponentially when you play another team. It will never be a one for one swap. Hey Coach, I’m about to rest my best player. They are all good, but Johnny here is the best. I need you to sit Billy so the talent level remains as close to being equal as possible. My #1 for your #1, as we recognize that your #1 is clearly better than my #1.

    IMG_2697.jpeg

    We are allowed 15 useable players, not 12.   We all know about Hodge bringing Tylor Perry (best player on the team) off the bench.  Starting five are not always the best five.  Player #9 or #11 on the bench depth chart should still be able to contribute something.  They are on scholarship because of some skill a coach saw in them.  To never play 7 guys says poor recruiting evaluation or players not up to college game speed.  We have players 3 years on the bench.  Why?

    • Downvote 2
  9. 18 minutes ago, BigWillie said:

    We don't know the full situation there, we just see the end result. I can't criticize them because we don't get to see them play. I can criticize Stone because I have seen him play.

    In other words, I don't know if they are worth their scholarships, I just know that Stone isn't. 

    Yes, but that in itself is the criticism.  They don't play yet take up valuable roster space during a season with injuries that we needed other contributors.   Either play them or trade them, as they say.

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1
  10. 29 minutes ago, BigWillie said:

    Old days = before NIL.

    So for your logic, we should just give away scholarships to players that give our best players rest? I think if that's your standard, there are probably several walk ons that would be a warm body on the court for you.

    Isn't that what Hodge has now, 7 guys that basically just sit on the end of the bench and never play?  

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.