Conference realignment winners and losers?

Fuck Jim Delany

Moderators: 88BuckeyeGrad, Left Seater, buckeye_in_sc

User avatar
Terry in Crapchester
2012 March Madness Champ
Posts: 8995
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 12:56 pm
Location: Back in the 'burbs

Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Terry in Crapchester »

Just looking for people's takes on how everyone came out in the latest round of musical chairs. My take, fwiw:

Winners

Utah: Makes the jump to BCS level.

Notre Dame: Preserves its independence. Eliminates any contentions that it is no longer relevant, even in the face of a prolonged on-field drought. No BCS conferences bite the dust. I'd say that's pretty close to a home run end result for ND.

Texas: Now the undisputed king of the new Big XII. The conference was weakened slightly, but they wound up with a renegotiated TV deal, which is what they wanted more than anything else.

USC: In an ordinary year, news of the penalties the NCAA imposed on USC might have been the biggest story of the offseason. Because of realignment news, however, it became a one-day story.

Big East: Widely thought to be the most vulnerable BCS conference, they emerge unscathed.

Losers

Kansas, Missouri, Rutgers: They all survived (for now, anyway), but were all put on notice that they might not have a place at the table if/when seismic realignment occurs. On the plus side for Kansas and Missouri, the final result could have been much, much worse.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
King Crimson
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 8978
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: La Choza, Tacos al Pastor

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by King Crimson »

Colorado fans couldn't be happier. they felt alienated geographically in the Big XII and were sort of OK with the Big 8. i feel the "cultural" kinship with Cali is a bit overstated but having Utah, U of A, and ASU as a big part of their division makes sense and feels right. CU has large alum bases in California and Arizona....far more than any of the Big XII states. CU peeps are relying on this to improve donor giving and grow the program. people who met with him from the CU admin seem impressed with Larry Scott's vision. at minimum, i'd say CU was "fortunate" if not a winner....since they were able to make a very popular move that appears on paper to have a beneficial impact on the program once they fire Dan Hawkins. especially at a time when both CU's revenue sports are at an all-time low since the late 70's....they were lucky that didn't flush them. and the Baylor thing was hilarious. that will be a hot ticket this fall.

edit: not only did they get the Pac move they've always wanted, but they also got out of UT's sphere of influence which was a big deal to them. i report this, not comment on. it really couldn't have worked out better, a Pac 16 division where a Danny Hawk team is playing OU, UT, ATM, TT, OSU every year was not all that rosy a prospect, either. i DO think they will take some more beatings for a few years no matter where they would be playing.
""On a lonely planet spinning its way toward damnation amid the fear and despair of a broken human race, who is left to fight for all that is good and pure and gets you smashed for under a fiver? Yes, it's the surprising adventures of me, Sir Digby Chicken-Caesar!"
"
User avatar
Truman
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3665
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:12 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Truman »

Terry in Crapchester wrote: Losers

Kansas, Missouri, Rutgers: They all survived (for now, anyway), but were all put on notice that they might not have a place at the table if/when seismic realignment occurs. On the plus side for Kansas and Missouri, the final result could have been much, much worse.
While I'm inclined to agree with your Loser assessment of KU out of General Principal and just plain orneriness, Terry, I believe your categorization of Mizzou and Kansas to be just a bit harsh. "Pyrrhic victors" might just be a bit more apt.

After all: Not only did the two schools survive AND manage to retain their BCS status, they also doubled their television revenue haul if published reports are to be believed. And not to mention preserved their fertile recruiting ground in the Long Horn state that promises to continue bringing the type of top shelf talent that currently fleshes out their rosters, while playing the exciting brand of football we've all come to enjoy lately in these parts. Not bad for two schools facing certain Purgatory, if not Oblivion, this time last week.[/glass-half-full]

HOW.
EVER.

At what cost?

The Reality of the XII Lite is that our new Texas Overlord has benevolently bestowed the Right for Mizzou, Kansas, and five other of its minion institutions to battle it out for a third place Conference finish and an annual trip to San Diego.

Which isn't to say that one of the Lesser-Haves couldn't rise up and challenge the Birthright of UT or OU in a given year. If moons, planets, stars, tides, dust storms, locust plagues, tornadoes AND wheat famines were all to allign and conspire, one of the pissant-eight might just find itself in a position vying for a BCS #2 Conference Bowl slot. Hey, it COULD happen... Every millenia or so...
Goober McTuber
World Renowned Last Word Whore
Posts: 25891
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:07 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Goober McTuber »

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Notre Dame: Preserves its independence. Eliminates any contentions that it is no longer relevant, even in the face of a prolonged on-field drought.
Or perhaps simply postponed the inevitable.
Joe in PB wrote: Yeah I'm the dumbass
schmick, speaking about Larry Nassar's pubescent and prepubescent victims wrote: They couldn't even kick that doctors ass

Seems they rather just lay there, get fucked and play victim
King Crimson
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 8978
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: La Choza, Tacos al Pastor

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by King Crimson »

Truman wrote:
The Reality of the XII Lite is that our new Texas Overlord has benevolently bestowed the Right for Mizzou, Kansas, and five other of its minion institutions to battle it out for a third place Conference finish and an annual trip to San Diego.
actually, starting this year the "XII" #3 is the Alamo Bowl....it and the Holiday sort of swapped Big XII invitees. Holiday is now XII #5 and Pac #3 and the Pac #2 replaces the Big 10 in the Alamo to face the XII #3. something like that.

I suppose down the road some of the old Big 8 teams could play Colorado (after Dan Hawkins buries himself this year and someone else is hired) in one of those in a "return to the past" type matchup.
""On a lonely planet spinning its way toward damnation amid the fear and despair of a broken human race, who is left to fight for all that is good and pure and gets you smashed for under a fiver? Yes, it's the surprising adventures of me, Sir Digby Chicken-Caesar!"
"
User avatar
Truman
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3665
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:12 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Truman »

King Crimson wrote:
actually, starting this year the "XII" #3 is the Alamo Bowl....it and the Holiday sort of swapped Big XII invitees. Holiday is now XII #5 and Pac #3 and the Pac #2 replaces the Big 10 in the Alamo to face the XII #3. something like that.
Better fit. Easier to sell the Texas kids on the possibility of playing three games a season in their home state and in a "big" bowl at that. At least, that was the Party Line reportedly out of Columbia when Mizzou accepted their Cotton Bowl bid after being out maneuvered by Kansas for the Orange....
User avatar
Cornhusker
2018/2019, 2023/2024 and 2024/2025 Pick ‘em Champion
Posts: 1483
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 4:13 am
Location: The Prairie

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Cornhusker »

Truman wrote:After all: Not only did the two schools survive AND manage to retain their BCS status, they also doubled their television revenue haul if published report are to be believed.

Therein lies the problem, there is no negotiated TV contract till after next season.

http://www.gocyclones.com/news.php?ID=2946
Beebe says himself "Hopefully the projection is theres a high level of interest." Hopefully Dan.

It's all speculation and Big 12 coolies need to ask themselves who's going to buy a product where the fat cats have all the marbles and the 45-6 beat-downs will be a common occurrence on your new Fox Big 12 game of the week, orrrr...you can catch that Baylor - Iowa St. grudge match battle to a 6-6 tie. Let's see how that matches up opposite an SEC, Big 10, or ACC game.
The "only" known is Uterus will be able to have their own TV plan and keep every penny for themselves.
User avatar
Truman
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3665
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:12 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Truman »

Cornhusker wrote:
Truman wrote:After all: Not only did the two schools survive AND manage to retain their BCS status, they also doubled their television revenue haul if published report are to be believed.

Therein lies the problem, there is no negotiated TV contract till after next season.

http://www.gocyclones.com/news.php?ID=2946
Beebe says himself "Hopefully the projection is theres a high level of interest." Hopefully Dan.
The re-allignment storm passed, Corntraitor, and a unified Big XII demonstrated a Leap of Faith that Beebe is gonna get a deal done. Unlike that of the popCorn, who ran like a bunch of screaming little girls for high ground the moment they first felt the sprinkles. Turns out it was only Texas pissing down their leg. Again.
It's all speculation and Big 12 coolies need to ask themselves who's going to buy a product where the fat cats have all the marbles and the 45-6 beat-downs will be a common occurrence on your new Fox Big 12 game of the week
As opposed to those 76-39 thrashings we saw on ABC from Lawrence or those 52-17 humiliations we witnessed on ESPN from Lincoln? And here I thought Nebraska had left the Big XII. BTW, your marble-heavy fat cats were in charge when those beat-downs occurred too....
orrrr...you can catch that Baylor - Iowa St. grudge match battle to a 6-6 tie.
True. Probably can't count on BU to cough up the ball seven-or-eight times enroute to a Cyclone victory.
Let's see how that matches up opposite an SEC, Big 10, or ACC game. The "only" known is Uterus will be able to have their own TV plan and keep every penny for themselves.
Sorry, Indiana-Northwestern or Nebraska-Minnesota ain't gonna keep me from washin' my car or mowin' my grass come October. 'Specially once the popCorn adjusts to the Big Ten's signature three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-punts style of play.

Enjoy your money Losers. Second in the North; second in the Big Ten West: Same over-rated shit in a different over-rated conference.
Last edited by Truman on Sun Jun 20, 2010 12:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan
Baby Bitch
Posts: 2882
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 8:29 am
Location: Tempe, AZ

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan »

I would add Boise St. and the MWC to the "Losers" list. If Utah had stayed put, it would've been hard to argue against giving them an automatic BCS bid, especially if a couple other strong mid-majors or Big XII castoffs had hopped on board. As it stands, they're pretty much back to square one. I suppose you could argue that BSU still improved their lot, since the MWC is a much tougher conference than the WAC, with or without Utah. But I seriously doubt an undefeated MWC team is going to get an invite to the BCSCG anytime soon.
"Keys, woman!"
User avatar
Mace
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3598
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:18 am

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Mace »

The big winner was Texas, who proved that the rest of the Big 12 members are along for the ride and to provide blowjobs. Nebraska proved to have the balls to tell them to go fuck themselves and make the jump to the Big 10, where they will make more money and not have to wait for Texas to throw out some scaps. The rest of the Big 12 will still be looking for a new home in a few short years when the super conferences come to fruition and Texas takes the money and runs.
MgoBlue-LightSpecial
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 21259
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:35 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by MgoBlue-LightSpecial »

Goober McTuber wrote:
Terry in Crapchester wrote:Notre Dame: Preserves its independence. Eliminates any contentions that it is no longer relevant, even in the face of a prolonged on-field drought.
Or perhaps simply postponed the inevitable.
Pretty much. TiC wants to claim bode because ND survived the calm before the storm. Whatever helps him sleep.
User avatar
Terry in Crapchester
2012 March Madness Champ
Posts: 8995
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 12:56 pm
Location: Back in the 'burbs

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Terry in Crapchester »

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:
Terry in Crapchester wrote:Notre Dame: Preserves its independence. Eliminates any contentions that it is no longer relevant, even in the face of a prolonged on-field drought.
Or perhaps simply postponed the inevitable.
Pretty much. TiC wants to claim bode because ND survived the calm before the storm. Whatever helps him sleep.
Not quite. Goober left off (purposely?) the last leg that I posted, which was:
No BCS conferences bite the dust.
Simply put, the 4x16 model would have been a nightmare for Notre Dame, as it would have forced ND to choose between joining a conference (which most of its fanbase doesn't want, at least some of them to the point where dropping football would be the prefereable alternative) and being left out of the national championship picture completely. Beyond that, you've got the fact that the Big East wasn't touched, which was great news for ND, as well as the fact that while the Big Ten didn't get the fish they wanted, they got a big enough one to allow them to spin it favorably, and maybe even sate their expansion lust for awhile.

Time will tell exactly what happens, but every day ND is not in the Big Ten is a good day.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
User avatar
PSUFAN
dents with meaning
Posts: 18324
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: BLITZBURGH

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by PSUFAN »

the Big Ten's signature three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-punts style of play.
Have you watched much CFB in the past 5 years? I just have to ask.
King Crimson wrote:anytime you have a smoke tunnel and it's not Judas Priest in the mid 80's....watch out.
mvscal wrote:France totally kicks ass.
User avatar
War Wagon
2010 CFB Pickem Champ
Posts: 21127
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:38 pm
Location: Tiger country

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by War Wagon »

Mace wrote:The big winner was Texas, who proved that the rest of the Big 12 members are along for the ride...
I suppose if the only sport you consider is football, that might be the case. But as you of all people know quite well, there's a lot more to these athletic programs than football.

Nebraska proved to have the balls to tell them to go fuck themselves and make the jump to the Big 10...
That didn't take balls. They panicked when CU jumped and thought the ship was going down. They just happened to have the good fortune of being the 2nd rat in line for a lifeboat.
The rest of the Big 12 will still be looking for a new home in a few short years when the super conferences come to fruition and Texas takes the money and runs.
Pure conjecture, you have no way of knowing what this or any conference will look like in 5 years. Texas did what was best for them which was stay the course. Contrary to all reports, the ship wasn't sinking. Indeed, we sail forward stronger (and richer) than ever minus two backstabbing rats.

If anything, Nebraska will be having 2nd thoughts when they realize they walked away from tradition and rivalries that go back over a 100 years, and for what?
Goober McTuber
World Renowned Last Word Whore
Posts: 25891
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:07 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Goober McTuber »

Terry in Crapchester wrote:
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote: Or perhaps simply postponed the inevitable.
Pretty much. TiC wants to claim bode because ND survived the calm before the storm. Whatever helps him sleep.
Not quite. Goober left off (purposely?) the last leg that I posted, which was:
No BCS conferences bite the dust.
No, Terry, not intentional. Feel free to add the "No BCS conferences bite the dust" as a postponed inevitable. It's going to happen. It's the way that the big schools kill the BCS and tap into the megabucks to be had in a playoff. Notre Dame will end up in a conference. That, or they can become the Harlem Globetrotters of college football.
Joe in PB wrote: Yeah I'm the dumbass
schmick, speaking about Larry Nassar's pubescent and prepubescent victims wrote: They couldn't even kick that doctors ass

Seems they rather just lay there, get fucked and play victim
User avatar
Mace
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3598
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:18 am

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Mace »

War Wagon wrote:If anything, Nebraska will be having 2nd thoughts when they realize they walked away from tradition and rivalries that go back over a 100 years, and for what?
More money and a conference that doesn't include an arrogant Texas who was ready to gut the Big 12 and leave the remaining schools to fend for themselves. You also might want to get off your high horse here, Wags, and remember that your Tigers were the 3rd rat ready to jump ship...only no one wanted them....yet.

Notre Dame's relevance in this entire drama is the tv market they bring to the table, not their relevance on the field.
Goober McTuber
World Renowned Last Word Whore
Posts: 25891
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:07 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Goober McTuber »

Mace wrote:
War Wagon wrote:If anything, Nebraska will be having 2nd thoughts when they realize they walked away from tradition and rivalries that go back over a 100 years, and for what?
More money and a conference that doesn't include an arrogant Texas who was ready to gut the Big 12 and leave the remaining schools to fend for themselves. You also might want to get off your high horse here, Wags, and remember that your Tigers were the 3rd rat ready to jump ship...only no one wanted them....yet.
Too bad the Big 10 didn't take them. More cannon fodder for the West division. Iowa could have had Missouri for their season-ending rivalry game, and Wisconsin could have rightfully taken back Minnesota as theirs.
Joe in PB wrote: Yeah I'm the dumbass
schmick, speaking about Larry Nassar's pubescent and prepubescent victims wrote: They couldn't even kick that doctors ass

Seems they rather just lay there, get fucked and play victim
User avatar
Mace
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3598
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:18 am

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Mace »

Goober McTuber wrote:Too bad the Big 10 didn't take them. More cannon fodder for the West division. Iowa could have had Missouri for their season-ending rivalry game, and Wisconsin could have rightfully taken back Minnesota as theirs.
If I'm Iowa's AD, I'd be willing to give up the season ending Minnesota game in exchange for playing Nebraska in the finale. There's going to be some give and take from all of the schools when they hammer out the schedule, with the OSU-Michigan game being the only truly untouchable season ending matchup.
User avatar
War Wagon
2010 CFB Pickem Champ
Posts: 21127
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:38 pm
Location: Tiger country

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by War Wagon »

Mace wrote:You also might want to get off your high horse here, Wags, and remember that your Tigers were the 3rd rat ready to jump ship...only no one wanted them....yet.
No high horse, I was opposed to the move from day one and never really warmed to the idea. The thought of not being able to talk trash to Jayhawk fans around here was a deal breaker in my book.

Actually, Mizzou might've been the 1st rat in line, I don't really know. So much scuttlebut and rumor mongering going on. Suffice to say that from my perspective that even though I know Mizzou was used like a cheap whore and a pawn in this chessmatch.... at the end of the day I'm pleased with the result.
Goober McTuber
World Renowned Last Word Whore
Posts: 25891
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:07 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Goober McTuber »

War Wagon wrote:Suffice to say that from my perspective that even though I know Mizzou was used like a cheap whore and a pawn in this chessmatch.... at the end of the day I'm pleased with the result.
If rape is inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it.
Joe in PB wrote: Yeah I'm the dumbass
schmick, speaking about Larry Nassar's pubescent and prepubescent victims wrote: They couldn't even kick that doctors ass

Seems they rather just lay there, get fucked and play victim
User avatar
Mace
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3598
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:18 am

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Mace »

War Wagon wrote:
Mace wrote:You also might want to get off your high horse here, Wags, and remember that your Tigers were the 3rd rat ready to jump ship...only no one wanted them....yet.
No high horse, I was opposed to the move from day one and never really warmed to the idea. The thought of not being able to talk trash to Jayhawk fans around here was a deal breaker in my book.

Actually, Mizzou might've been the 1st rat in line, I don't really know. So much scuttlebutt and rumor mongering going on. Suffice to say that from my perspective that even though I know Mizzou was used like a cheap whore and a pawn in this chessmatch.... at the end of the day I'm pleased with the result.
I think it's entirely probable that, if the Big 10 goes to 14 teams, Missouri will receive one of the invites. I'm afraid that the landscape of college football is changing and that super conferences are the new future. Tradition, rivalries, and loyalty matter very little these days, as it's all about the money. As for the other sports, they matter very little too. Football revenue supports the entire athletic program and, like I said, it's all about the money. Missouri would have jumped to the Big 10 and taken the $22 million a year in BTN money, just as Nebraska did, but the Cornhuskers were the bigger catch. Missouri fan calling Nebraska and Colorado "rats" or "traitors" seems hypocritical to me, as Missouri was poised to jump ship if they had received an offer.
User avatar
War Wagon
2010 CFB Pickem Champ
Posts: 21127
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:38 pm
Location: Tiger country

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by War Wagon »

Mace wrote:Missouri fan calling Nebraska and Colorado "rats" or "traitors" seems hypocritical to me, as Missouri was poised to jump ship if they had received an offer.
Perhaps it is hypocritical, though I'd have been none too happy if they had jumped. And no one here really knows if they would've. Doesn't really matter now, does it?

Besides, it's fun calling cornfan names. Better brush up on them since they're going to be your rival now.

oh, and I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that two of the most infamous calls in CFB history went against Mizzou while they were playing those two schools. The 5th down and the kicked ball, calls we will never forgive or forget. I wish them both much bad fortune in their new digs.
User avatar
Truman
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3665
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:12 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Truman »

Mace wrote:... Missouri would have jumped to the Big 10 and taken the $22 million a year in BTN money, just as Nebraska did, but the Cornhuskers were the bigger catch. Missouri fan calling Nebraska and Colorado "rats" or "traitors" seems hypocritical to me, as Missouri was poised to jump ship if they had received an offer.
Chancellor Brady Deaton was quoted back in May that Missouri will "always do what is best for the university" and that the university was willing to listen were the Big Ten to come calling. That's it. While I do not necessarily disagree with anything you posted, Mace, suggesting that Mizzou indeed would have abandoned the Big XII is simply conjecture. I cannot prove either way what Missouri would have done had the Big Ten extended an invitation to join them, and neither can anybody else to this point.

As for TigerFan hypocrisy, last I checked, this is still a Smack Board. The Big Rid turned their back on 100 years of tradition and bailed; we didn't. Hell, 14-year-member TEXAS showed more loyalty to the Conference than Nebraska did. And instead of accepting their invitation to join the Big Ten graciously, a petulant Tom Osbourne read a bitterman statement taking shots at both Missouri and Texas and napalming every bridge they had remaining to their old conference.

The smack-gloves came off. Fine and dandy.

They left. We didn't.

We call them rats and traitors because we CAN.
User avatar
Cornhusker
2018/2019, 2023/2024 and 2024/2025 Pick ‘em Champion
Posts: 1483
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 4:13 am
Location: The Prairie

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Cornhusker »

Truman wrote:
Cornhusker wrote:
Truman wrote:After all: Not only did the two schools survive AND manage to retain their BCS status, they also doubled their television revenue haul if published report are to be believed.

Therein lies the problem, there is no negotiated TV contract till after next season.

http://www.gocyclones.com/news.php?ID=2946
Beebe says himself "Hopefully the projection is theres a high level of interest." Hopefully Dan.
The realignment storm passed, Corntraitor, and a unified Big XII demonstrated a Leap of Faith that Beebe is gonna get a deal done. Unlike that of the popCorn, who ran like a bunch of screaming little girls for high ground the moment they first felt the sprinkles. Turns out it was only Texas pissing down their leg. Again


I have to assume you didn't know at the Big 12 meetings two weeks ago NU's Harvey Perlman asked Texas if they had any intentions of using all media rights for the good of the conference to which they answered "NO." That was the straw that broke the camels back..NU is not a traitor, nor are they a butt licker (see OU & A&M)
If media rights were to be distributed equally and Texas wasn't to be the main beneficiary, NU would still be in the Big 12.
What I find humorous is Misery fan calling NU a traitor when MU lobbied last December for an invite that never came...your football program lacks...that's not from me, but from the Big 10.
Jealous much?

In 3-5 years you'll be begging for a home. NU will be stable and secure in a great conference. The realignment storm is just beginning and now you're in the backseat of a drunk driver that's a bully to boot. And who gives a shit about 100 years of playing the same teams when those very teams voted in favor of a Texas driven league that was their agenda from day one.

Fuck Texas and their minions
King Crimson
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 8978
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: La Choza, Tacos al Pastor

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by King Crimson »

i'm having a hard time seeing this "OU butt-licker" angle when OU had the option to go to the Pac, had an SEC offer (all but confirmed by Pres. Boren in the OKC paper) but had to dump OSU or stay in the XII. just because it doesn't fit the hostile sanctimony of Nebraska fan's new hero story about itself.

pretty much OU kept it's powder dry, got 2 offers, and made the decision to stay in its own geographical, recruiting region--the Pac move was not popular in OK-- and maintain the relationship with OSU...that was pretty much a given.....once it became in its interest to do so. OU has been dealing with UT for 100 years. we know what they are all about. they have more money, they have all the advantages, and we still want to play them every year. that's who we are. I listened to NU fan (not here i don't think), CU fan...telling me OU was going to "get left behind"....well, hard to see that logic with the 3 fairly tasty $$$ options.

the number of "i want to believe this" narratives surrounding this is getting really funny.
""On a lonely planet spinning its way toward damnation amid the fear and despair of a broken human race, who is left to fight for all that is good and pure and gets you smashed for under a fiver? Yes, it's the surprising adventures of me, Sir Digby Chicken-Caesar!"
"
User avatar
Mace
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3598
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:18 am

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Mace »

Truman wrote:They left. We didn't.
They had somewhere better to go. You didn't.
call them rats and traitors because we CAN.
And we call them smart. Texas isn't loyal to the Big 12, they're loyal to Texas, and Nebraska chose to make more money while getting out of a conference that is totally controlled, at least politically, by the Longhorns. Can't say as I blame them.
User avatar
Cornhusker
2018/2019, 2023/2024 and 2024/2025 Pick ‘em Champion
Posts: 1483
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 4:13 am
Location: The Prairie

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Cornhusker »

Believe the Heupel wrote:OU also came out of this with almost twice the TV money they were getting
Show me the new contract with Fox..it doesn't exist...it's speculation!!! It's a house of cards played by Beebe and UT to band-aid the situation. The Big 12 could stay intact with the existing TV deal till 2014 or until Texas figures out a way to fuck you next!
and a brand-new TV network of their own.
To be viewed from the Texas border to the Kansas border while playing regional losers..good luck with that revenue juggernaut.
User avatar
War Wagon
2010 CFB Pickem Champ
Posts: 21127
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:38 pm
Location: Tiger country

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by War Wagon »

Cornhusker wrote: What I find humorous is Misery fan calling NU a traitor when MU lobbied last December for an invite that never came...
Link?

The only lobbying that was done was by a certain Democratic governor that I didn't vote for. Fucker never shoulda' opened his mouth. Nobody at Mizzou openly pined for an invite to the Big Televen.
your football program lacks..
Is that what you were saying two years ago when Mizzou simply humiliated you in Lincoln?

Jealous much?
Now this is what I find amusing coming from cornfan.

The bitch packs up her stuff and leaves, hopefully headed for a new home where the HMFIC doesn't abuse her. But she's oh so concerned with those she left behind, spreading dire warnings to all her friends not to take up with that bastard. In reality, she's the one who's jealous.

Just admit it.
King Crimson
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 8978
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: La Choza, Tacos al Pastor

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by King Crimson »

Cornhusker wrote: To be viewed from the Texas border to the Kansas border while playing regional losers..good luck with that revenue juggernaut.
see, in your constant need to force your own narrative on this....you are making nonsensical statements. OK, you make argument all over the board that pre-Big 10 offer NU is a national draw, national program. Hoo boy, you betcha. Yet, now, you are claiming OU is regional? and that's it. somehow, Big XII NU is a national draw (despite avg'ing about 7 wins a year over the last decade) while OU is consigned to an "Oklahoma only" TV draw (after average 10 wins, 6 BIg XII championships, and NC and playing in 6 BCS bowls in the last decade?). that's implausible reasoning. you can't even win by your own standard.

have fun in the Big 10, i'm sure you guys will be kings of Chicago in no time. all the fans in Columbus will start wearing red overalls and UM fan will be smoking corn cob pipes....and who knows, maybe Sparty will start eating bugs.

your sanctimonious rantings are getting obsessively repetitive.

as far as UT screwing us again as some fate....you did see the part about OU getting an SEC offer? you are kind at odds with what's going on except what Tom Shatel tells you to think....seems. but, again, the rah rah Omaha/Lincoln sports media have always made actual sidelines cheerleading look like the Socratic method.
""On a lonely planet spinning its way toward damnation amid the fear and despair of a broken human race, who is left to fight for all that is good and pure and gets you smashed for under a fiver? Yes, it's the surprising adventures of me, Sir Digby Chicken-Caesar!"
"
User avatar
SoCalTrjn
2007 CFB Board Bitch
Posts: 3725
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 7:42 am
Location: South OC

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by SoCalTrjn »

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Just looking for people's takes on how everyone came out in the latest round of musical chairs. My take, fwiw:

Winners

USC: In an ordinary year, news of the penalties the NCAA imposed on USC might have been the biggest story of the offseason. Because of realignment news, however, it became a one-day story.

I think USC and Trojan fans would disagree with you. USC would have liked the NCAA to answer for what they based the punishment on. Having read the depostiton from Lloyd Lake and seeing it had more holes than swiss cheese and more contradictions than a church sermon, the NCAA needs to answer why they took this persons word. And even if they had taken this persons word, what ties did he have to USC? Even the phone call he made to Todd McNairs cel phone was made late at night, was 90 seconds long and was after Reggie had already announced he was going pro. Based on that they want to force forfeitures over 2 seasons, bowl ban for 2 seasons and 3 scholarships?
Florida State had 61 athletes commit academic fraud and recieved a mere slap on the wrist. Florida has had 30 players arrested since Urban Meyer got to Gainesville, is that not a lack of control? The NCAA is basing their whole case on the word of a crack head who has been in prison more years than he has been out and cant show where he got the money he said he gave to Reggies step dad? If the NCAA wants to demand accountability, they need to show some. The lawsuit thats coming from USC will get what actually did happen and what USC was responsible for out there for the public to see it. Had there not been all the realignment news, the court of public opinion would have already heard about the hair thin case the NCAA had vs USC and even fans of other schools would be asking the NCAA where they came up with this punishment
User avatar
M Club
el capitán
Posts: 3998
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 11:37 am
Location: a boat

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by M Club »

oh, so reggie bush announced he was going pro, was allowing the agents courting him to pay for his night out, and usc saw fit to have him host a recruit? maybe that's your problem.
User avatar
M Club
el capitán
Posts: 3998
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 11:37 am
Location: a boat

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by M Club »

King Crimson wrote: have fun in the Big 10, i'm sure you guys will be kings of Chicago in no time. all the fans in Columbus will start wearing red overalls and UM fan will be smoking corn cob pipes....and who knows, maybe Sparty will start eating bugs.
actually, you're going to hear a lot of "so that's who invented it" coming out of big ten country in 2012.
User avatar
indyfrisco
Pro Bonfire
Posts: 11683
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:15 pm

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by indyfrisco »

King Crimson wrote:
Cornhusker wrote: To be viewed from the Texas border to the Kansas border while playing regional losers..good luck with that revenue juggernaut.
see, in your constant need to force your own narrative on this....you are making nonsensical statements. OK, you make argument all over the board that pre-Big 10 offer NU is a national draw, national program. Hoo boy, you betcha. Yet, now, you are claiming OU is regional? and that's it. somehow, Big XII NU is a national draw (despite avg'ing about 7 wins a year over the last decade) while OU is consigned to an "Oklahoma only" TV draw (after average 10 wins, 6 BIg XII championships, and NC and playing in 6 BCS bowls in the last decade?). that's implausible reasoning. you can't even win by your own standard.

have fun in the Big 10, i'm sure you guys will be kings of Chicago in no time. all the fans in Columbus will start wearing red overalls and UM fan will be smoking corn cob pipes....and who knows, maybe Sparty will start eating bugs.

your sanctimonious rantings are getting obsessively repetitive.

as far as UT screwing us again as some fate....you did see the part about OU getting an SEC offer? you are kind at odds with what's going on except what Tom Shatel tells you to think....seems. but, again, the rah rah Omaha/Lincoln sports media have always made actual sidelines cheerleading look like the Socratic method.
Rack!

Seriously, I could care less Nebraska tucked tail and ran off to another conference. Few here have bashed Nebraska for the move until CornFan comes in puffing their Wags-like concave chest. No one cares you left. Scoot along. Hush hush.

And Mace, saying Texas cares not about the XII but only Texas and then saying Nebraska cared about the XII while bolting in the same sentence is laughable. Everyone cares about themselves first, rivalries next and then somewhere back there is conference.

Personally, I disagree with equal profit sharing when other schools don't earn, donate, spend equally. Same as I disagree with the Robin Hood wanna be chimp in the White House that think those who work/earn should pick up the slack for ShaRhonda and her 12 fatherless kids living on welfare who provide nothing but liability to this country. While Texas is our main rival, they've earned their position by maintining the size and quality of their network of alumni and their athletic program. While I still have hope A&M can topple them someday, for now, they've earned what they have.
SoCalTrjn wrote:The lawsuit thats coming from USC will get what actually did happen and what USC was responsible for out there for the public to see it. Had there not been all the realignment news, the court of public opinion would have already heard about the hair thin case the NCAA had vs USC and even fans of other schools would be asking the NCAA where they came up with this punishment
Well now, let's hope that case takes 5 years to appeal while punishment already rendered takes place.
Goober McTuber wrote:One last post...
User avatar
FLW Buckeye
2014 T1B FBBL Champ
Posts: 1396
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:14 am

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by FLW Buckeye »

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I'm interested to here what Reggie has to say when he takes the stand in that case. Seeing as how he's cooperating and all...
User avatar
Mace
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 3598
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:18 am

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Mace »

And Mace, saying Texas cares not about the XII but only Texas and then saying Nebraska cared about the XII while bolting in the same sentence is laughable. Everyone cares about themselves first, rivalries next and then somewhere back there is conference.
I'm not aware that I said "Nebraska cared about the XII". When it appeared that Texas, OU, et al, were going to bail out of the conferece, leaving the rest of the schools to fend for themselves, they decided to look for greener pastures and found it in the Big 10. It was a matter of survival for Nebraska and a move that will put more money in their coffers. Had Texas not been shopping for a new conference, Nebraska would have remained in the Big 12. The fact that the lesser schools in the XII paid off Texas, OU, and A&M, by forfeiting the money paid to the conference by Nebraska and Colorado (a payoff to keep them in the conference...at least for now) is indicative of how things work in the Big 12. The rich get richer and the poor live off the scraps thrown to them. Equal payouts for a conference tv network should be mandatory, imo, to level the playing field, at least financially. The Big 12 was held hostage by Texas, OU, and a&m and they paid the ransom when they should have told them to kiss their ass and be on their way. The Big 12 would have been a lesser conference by doing so, but they could have survived by bringing in other teams to complete the conference. Unfortunately for the Big 12, they felt it was more important to give in to the big dogs to maintain the prestige of having them in the conference. A mistake that they will someday regret, imo, when they bail out for a super conference at some point in the future.
User avatar
Killian
Good crossing pattern target
Posts: 6414
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:37 pm
Location: At the end of the pub with head in arms

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Killian »

SoCalTrjn wrote: Florida State had 61 athletes commit academic fraud and recieved a mere slap on the wrist. Florida has had 30 players arrested since Urban Meyer got to Gainesville, is that not a lack of control?
Florida State also launched an internal investigation and self sanctioned themselves when this came out. What did USC do? Their response to the NCAA was :hfal: . And as for Florida, kids getting arrested may be bad pub, but it's not against the rules. So your apples to oranges comparison falls flat, both times.
"Well, my wife assassinated my sexual identity, and my children are eating my dreams." -Louis CK
User avatar
Mr T
Riverboat Gambler
Posts: 3125
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 8:43 pm
Location: 'Bama

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Mr T »

Killian wrote:
SoCalTrjn wrote: Florida State had 61 athletes commit academic fraud and recieved a mere slap on the wrist. Florida has had 30 players arrested since Urban Meyer got to Gainesville, is that not a lack of control?
Florida State also launched an internal investigation and self sanctioned themselves when this came out. What did USC do? Their response to the NCAA was :hfal: . And as for Florida, kids getting arrested may be bad pub, but it's not against the rules. So your apples to oranges comparison falls flat, both times.
Rack

But let me also add that FSU reported themselves to the NCAA. They could've swept everything under the rug and got away with it.
TheJON wrote:What does the winner get? Because if it's a handjob from Frisco, I'd like to campaign for my victory.
User avatar
Cuda
IKYABWAI
Posts: 10195
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 5:55 pm
Location: Your signature is too long

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Cuda »

King Crimson wrote:Colorado fans couldn't be happier. they felt alienated geographically in the Big XII and were sort of OK with the Big 8. i feel the "cultural" kinship with Cali is a bit overstated but having Utah, U of A, and ASU as a big part of their division makes sense and feels right. CU has large alum bases in California and Arizona....far more than any of the Big XII states. CU peeps are relying on this to improve donor giving and grow the program. people who met with him from the CU admin seem impressed with Larry Scott's vision. at minimum, i'd say CU was "fortunate" if not a winner....since they were able to make a very popular move that appears on paper to have a beneficial impact on the program once they fire Dan Hawkins. especially at a time when both CU's revenue sports are at an all-time low since the late 70's....they were lucky that didn't flush them. and the Baylor thing was hilarious. that will be a hot ticket this fall.

edit: not only did they get the Pac move they've always wanted, but they also got out of UT's sphere of influence which was a big deal to them. i report this, not comment on. it really couldn't have worked out better, a Pac 16 division where a Danny Hawk team is playing OU, UT, ATM, TT, OSU every year was not all that rosy a prospect, either. i DO think they will take some more beatings for a few years no matter where they would be playing.
I'll go ahead and put Colorado on the Losers side of the ledger for you. CU may have a large alumni contingent in Cali, but that doesn't necessarily translate into more donations. The ones likely to give $$$ are already giving. Most of the others will never give a dime. And Hawkins has, arguably, done more long term damage to that program than Chuck Fairbanks did.
WacoFan wrote:Flying any airplane that you can hear the radio over the roaring radial engine is just ghey anyway.... Of course, Cirri are the Miata of airplanes..
User avatar
Cornhusker
2018/2019, 2023/2024 and 2024/2025 Pick ‘em Champion
Posts: 1483
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 4:13 am
Location: The Prairie

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Cornhusker »

Mace wrote:
And Mace, saying Texas cares not about the XII but only Texas and then saying Nebraska cared about the XII while bolting in the same sentence is laughable. Everyone cares about themselves first, rivalries next and then somewhere back there is conference.
I'm not aware that I said "Nebraska cared about the XII". When it appeared that Texas, OU, et al, were going to bail out of the conferece, leaving the rest of the schools to fend for themselves, they decided to look for greener pastures and found it in the Big 10. It was a matter of survival for Nebraska and a move that will put more money in their coffers. Had Texas not been shopping for a new conference, Nebraska would have remained in the Big 12. The fact that the lesser schools in the XII paid off Texas, OU, and A&M, by forfeiting the money paid to the conference by Nebraska and Colorado (a payoff to keep them in the conference...at least for now) is indicative of how things work in the Big 12. The rich get richer and the poor live off the scraps thrown to them. Equal payouts for a conference tv network should be mandatory, imo, to level the playing field, at least financially. The Big 12 was held hostage by Texas, OU, and a&m and they paid the ransom when they should have told them to kiss their ass and be on their way. The Big 12 would have been a lesser conference by doing so, but they could have survived by bringing in other teams to complete the conference. Unfortunately for the Big 12, they felt it was more important to give in to the big dogs to maintain the prestige of having them in the conference. A mistake that they will someday regret, imo, when they bail out for a super conference at some point in the future.

This is an un-biased take that is as accurate as possible. An Iowa fan that understands what has happened clearer that 80% of the Big 12ers.
And I know for a fact Mace has no love for Nebraska.
User avatar
Cornhusker
2018/2019, 2023/2024 and 2024/2025 Pick ‘em Champion
Posts: 1483
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 4:13 am
Location: The Prairie

Re: Conference realignment winners and losers?

Post by Cornhusker »

IndyFrisco wrote:While Texas is our main rival, they've earned their position by maintining the size and quality of their network of alumni and their athletic program. While I still have hope A&M can topple them someday, for now, they've earned what they have.
This is borderline sad..They've earned it how?
By providing entertainment for their fans and alumni as you pointed out...
So if their was no on for them to compete against, their commodity is non-existent..right? Thus they rule no more and they no longer profit.
Your comparison to the current administration (while accurate) is unfair, because last i checked, Baylor was working their ass off to succeed. ShaRhonda and her 12 fatherless kids, not so much.
Post Reply