DentonStang
-
Posts
633 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1 -
Points
19,295 [ Donate ]
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
GoMeanGreen.com
Posts posted by DentonStang
-
-
42 minutes ago, NT80 said:
No. Coaches of bigger programs are encouraging good players from smaller programs to go into the portal. The proposed transfer restrictions are meant to protect schools from being poached by the Alabamas of the world.
That's just not what actual data shows. Yes, there are good players transferring up, but far more #2 guys transferring down for playing time rather than ride the bench at Texas.
UNT has not learned to exploit it yet, but go pull up teams on a recruiting service page.
Stopping the transfers protects the big brands who will always be able to put recruit the smaller brands with promises of glory, way better funding, and under the table money and now NIL.
-
3
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Harry said:
I can't help but think this would be huge for us. So many good players we are sitting near here and they would not be able to bolt like the twins after one good year without sitting out. Coach Dilfer made some great points about tampering with players on the roster and coaches from other teams encouraging the players to enter the portal.. those types of infractions have to be dealt with in this new legislation as well.
Most players are transferring down, not up. This protects the Alabamas of the world who can continue to recruit (dirty) and stockpile talent on their bench, not the UNTs. Transfers level the playing field.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, PlummMeanGreen said:
If this is still all about a P5 vs G5 NCAA D1 existence we should wish American Athletic Conference Commissioner Areska good luck 🍀 in getting those 2 designations dropped. With a 12 team football playoff what do the designations really mean any more?
Also:
The Dan Patrick Show reported San Diego State still intends on going to the Pac-12, and that SMU, Boise State, and UNLV are possible additions for the conference as well.
SAY WHAT?!?!😳 Those in the PAC12 now or in the future who are extremely academic-conscious (like Stanford among others) should really get excited about possible future PAC12 member Boise State U’s Truck Driving School being in its curriculum. https://cdltrainingtoday.com/schools/id/boise-state-university/
GMG!
Doesn't make sense does it? That's because it's just BS thrown against the wall to see what sticks. It's not based on actual reporting, sources, or fact. That's what practically ALL of the reporting on this topic has been for 6+ months (including pro-PAC articles).
We're a long way from Walter Kronkite.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Doesn't really mean anything other than they aren't immediately kicked out over their bizarre letter stunt
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
-
If only those conference executives were as smart as poster on this board
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, NT80 said:
Games at Tulane, Rice, UTSA, UNT, Tulsa and even UAB could be bus trips. You can't bus to the PAC 12, and neither can fans by car.
Yes, it's more $$. But when UNLV, Boise, Colo St, you and SDSU replace the core Pac12 legacy teams is it really worth it just to have a P5 patch? I mean unless you're in the SEC or BIG10 (P2) everybody else is going to be G8 anyway.
Yes, it is objectively better.
It's looking like 3 tiers. If it ever gets to just 2 tiers, well everyone is going to reconfig into geographic conferences and cut way back then anyway. Why give up and not try just because there is a possible scenario 15 years down the line where you end up......no worse than you are today.
-
1
-
-
Any attempt to restrict NIL is racist. The only equity blah blah blah is unrestricted NIL like today
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, NT80 said:
You will need it to ship your volleyball team to Pullman and your soccer team to Tucson.
So you think that's all that different financially from where soccer and volleyball are going now already, like Temple, or UConn, or the multiple west coast games they play?
-
1 hour ago, Rudy said:
And the mousestangs STILL won't win the conference, even without UCLA or USC
I'll be crying into our extra $20M+/yr in media money
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Rudy said:
All these $mut fans remind me of Baghdad Bob back in the day. Saying on TV, "There are no American Troops in Bagdad.". All while there are American Troops taking over the airport.
Believe me, I'm not saying it's totally fine. If it were known to be totally fine there would be a deal in place.
I'm just saying we don't know if it's fine, kinda fine, not very fine, complete disaster, or something else. None of the info leaking is reliable, and the vast major is just total BS. Practically every media personality who has commented positive or negative has been wrong repeatedly over the last year. It's all BS clickbait.
Equally BS is the idea of deadlines. If media day or any of the other "must be done by or" dates mattered the PAC would have at least attempted to soften the publicity or make excuses or throw a bone. They haven't. They don't care. The dates don't matter. They obviously don't care about the publicity. They have at least 6 more months before they approach real contractual deadlines that matter due to the expiration of the current contract a year from now.
-
1
-
1
-
-
So, no sources, no actual info on the negotiations, just talking head opinion piece. As meaningless as everything else.
What would "dire" even mean?
This data is a bit long of a time period and includes USC/UCLA and UT/OU but this shows Stanford would be the #2 team in viewership among the B12 left behind, and just barely.
https://sicem365.com/s/13048/how-many-viewers-did-your-ncaa-team-attract
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Side.Show.Joe said:
SMU will end up in the PAC. But, it probably won't look much like the PAC at that point. Colorado is within weeks if not days for bolting to the Big12. Once they officially announce, things are going to get interesting.
No they aren't. It makes no rational sense for they to happen for a ton of reasons, including from the B12 perspective.
If the PAC is so worthless that their media deal is so low teams will want to bolt, why would the B12 want one of their lowest value teams? It would be substantially dragging B12 down. It's gobbledygook.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
-
On 7/14/2023 at 10:40 AM, MrAlien said:
What is the Pac12 going forward? its certainly not what it once was, and it continues to trend down. sure they could spend a lot of money, but what do they get in return, other then putting a Pac12 logo on their jerseys.
Really? If you are really asking this question, then you are pretty clueless. I don't mean this as an insult. There are obvious and substantial benefits to joining a post-USC/UCLA PAC.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:
Academics aren't a thing anymore. Prestige is an ivy/academic thing, too.
It's about the money. The brand. It boils down to TV dollars. The PAC has clearly lost leverage. Pretty much all of it. It makes great sense for the Big12 to want the 4 corners. And greater sense for the 4 corners to want the Big12. It's happening. When, you rightfully should worry, no idea. It's happening. The ACC is untouchable due to their sneaky grant of rights with their members not ending until mid 2030's.
6 univeristies that are currently in the PAC will not be there in less than 5 seasons. These are presumed facts. If the MW absorbs the rest they are the de facto best G5 or P6, if you will.
Just prepping you and your wonderful financial placebo university.
Again, sure, if the PAC money is vastly less than B12. But nobody legitimate thinks this will be the case. Maybe less than B12, but not substantially.
By legitimate I mean industry people, retired network executives, media that write serious articles on sports media (not people relying on Twitter traffic or who write for single conferences like Swaim or Canzano).
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:
It's pretty wideapread that the big12 wants the 4 corner schools. It's also widespread that Oregon and Wash will inevitably end up in the Big10. The PAC will have to pluck and that will be from the MW. To be honest, I'm not sure MW members will be up for that. If anything, I could see a scenario where the MW (maybe others) is doing the plucking of the PAC leftovers.
What kind of power in the world of athletics does Oregon State, Wash State, Cal, Stanford wield? Answer is not much. If the 6 schools that are probably leaving, actually leave, the PAC will disband. MW will absorb those leftovers.
Sure, if Oregon & Washington or anyone else gets raided by B10, situation changes. But that's not happening, at least not soon. If the B10 wanted those schools they could have them tomorrow. Now's the time with ending PAC contract. B10 either doesn't want them at all, or they are waiting on raiding ACC first. Who knows. But waiting a year and having Oregon try to fight out of a new PAC GOR is nonsense.
In the likely scenario where PAC is not raided (ever or soon) it makes zero sense for a variety of reasons for any other PAC team to go to the B12. It doesn't make financial sense, academic sense, prestige sense, cultural sense, etc.
-
1 hour ago, Mike Jackson said:
The most effective "propoganda" released during this entire cycle was the Pac 12 school presidents talking about the future of their conference and membership in it being conditional. The other is piece of the that propoganda is the schools not signing a grant of rights extension. They could easily sign an iron clad grant of rights agreement with a length (past 5 years) to be determined once a primary media partner is found. The Pac 12 hasn't put forth a unified front but it's Big 12 propoganda? 🙄. If they were unified and committed to stay together (whatever the size of the payout), SMU and SDSU would at the very least have definitive Yes or No on expansion.
I've got plenty of criticism for PAC, they seem deeply disfunctional which shouldn't be a surprise for a California-based institution, I guess. They have totally bungled the PR aspect of this process, totally given away the narrative, etc.
None of that has anything to do with whether it would make sense for Colorado, ASU, or any other PAC team to jump to the Big12. It doesn't. It's like starting a rumor Duke is going to switch to the Big12 because they are focusing on basketball. Makes no sense once you start thinking about the details.
-
1
-
-
No PAC team was ever going to move to B12. It's a ridiculous scenario contrived by B12 propaganda efforts
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
4
-
-
On 7/11/2023 at 2:46 PM, NT80 said:
The Big12 already has a DFW school (TCU). UH, Cincy have enrollments near 45K, and UCF 65K. Smu is 12K.
Size matters for attendance and potential media.
Yes, It's very logical why they added who they did and who they didn't. I wouldn't add us if I were them given their current make up. Still don't have to like it.
-
4
-
-
On 7/10/2023 at 10:43 AM, bstnsportsfan3 said:
You are just salty that your perceived "little brother" has now caught up to you conference-wise. i don't see the Pac making a move anytime soon and no one else is desperate enough to add SMU. You will be in a conference for us for a long while and can no longer avoid us in basketball and other sports.
Really, no. UNT gets no more thought than other teams like Rice joining, which aren't any worse than most of the other AAC teams that were already here and not leaving.
But really, we are salty about being left behind by UCF UH Cincy. Who we're left with are all pretty much interchangeable.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, untphd said:
Just like at highland park?
Yes. It's going to be hard to fill the stadium against Charlotte or UNT unless we are undefeated
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Mike Jackson said:
This isn’t real estate. You can’t buy your way in with old money. JP Morgan is never going to be seen as the plucky overachieving underdog the people are just waiting to embrace and cheer for. I swear y’all sound like the awkward nerdy rich kid at the party with BO wondering why he isn’t the life of the party just because he is rich.
Excuse me, we have money, AND coke
-
2
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, NT80 said:
Winning is not the only thing that brings fans. It is the Opponents. You are who you associate with. UNT will draw fans for Texas Southern but will draw a lot more fans for Cal.
The chances to see a win are greater against Texas Southern, but the chance to see a win against a better opponent is the draw, not the actual winning. Cal and Vanderbilt don't often win in their conferences but their opponents draw home fans.
For sure. But since you're limited to what conference you are in and what OOC will agree to play you (this gets harder when you are a real threat) you can maximize attendance with what you have. No reason you couldn't be filling Apogee with undefeated seasons and proper marketing
-
1
-
-
I don't understand why everyone wants to put some historical or even metaphysical wrap around this topic.
Every school's potential is mostly the same, with some exception for extreme geography (Boise), etc.
The only thing that brings fans and attendance is winning.
The thing that brings winning is an administration that wants to spend resources, and more importantly provide curriculum and support programs and admissions policies etc.
Do that and recruit and win. Win enough and demonstrate financial commitment and get attention and move up in conference.
That's how everyone who has ever moved up has done it. Could be just about anyone. UNT could be Utah or TCU or UCF but has chosen not to be.
NIL is a potential wrinkle but we'll see how that plays out long term.
-
5
-
-
Current make up of the AAC
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
Pass Act aims to protect athletes, 'integrity' of college sports
in Mean Green Football
Posted
Just rolling through the AAC randomly grabbing teams, looking at transfers for 2023, ignoring transfers that haven't landed yet:
USF: 18 in (12 from P5) 16 out (8 P5)
ECU: 11 in (6 P5) 9 out (3 P5)
Memphis: 19 in (14 P5) 12 out (3 P5)
Tulsa: 8 in (7 P5) 5 out (4 P5)
SMU: 26 in (20 P5) 19 out (2 P5)
Temple: 8 in (5 P5) 4 out (1 P5)
UTSA: 6 in (3 P5) 3 out (1 P5)
That's over 40 P5 talent players coming in than going out. I know UNT is negative on P5 talent this year in the portal, but that's a (fixable) UNT problem, not a portal problem.