Bio not provided
The conferences with their own cable networks are the only ones that have to put raw numbers of cable households first, since they just need a larger potential subscriber base. The Big 12 does not have a cable network, and apparently won't because of the LHN. Therefore, they should just want the biggest "name" schools possible to create appealing matchups for the cable networks to whom they sell their broadcast rights. Boise State only looks bad if you're trying to sell subscriptions to a conference network and need a school's local fanbase to buy it -- but if you just want a game with a nationally-known team on Saturday night that will draw viewers from all over the nation to watch ABC, Boise starts to look pretty good.
For that reason, I think the Big 12 (if it survives) is a good home for both Boise and BYU, since they will produce games with some national interest, beyond the low numbers of local cable households in their markets.
But I think you may actually be wrong (in part one) about assuming the Big 12 is more likely to survive than the ACC. Other than the supposed grant of rights, every other factor -- including those population trends you put alot of stock into -- points to the ACC being the more stable conference. If Texas and OU decided to, they could probably leave the Big 12 and through negotiations either buy out the remaining schools or just find a way to dissolve the league, and the GOR wouldn't stop them. If you take Texas and OU out of that league, it's basically the Mountain West. Makes much more sense if we're going to superconferences to just have Texas and OU go join the PAC or the Big10 rather than have schools like Iowa State and Baylor and Texas Tech sitting at the big boy table purely by the grace of Big Tex.
5 months ago on Big Bang Theories: The Countdown To Super-Conferences (Part 2)
@Statesman This is the first I'm hearing of it, and I'm just going from the chancellor's own description that this was to protest the election results. If you've ever been to a political rally on a college campus, you know that some of the people's motives for protesting can be rather unsavory, and you can't always control what everybody says at those things. I stopped by an anti-war protest on the Mizzou campus when Iraq started back in '03, and some of the people protesting it had a bigger problem with Israel then they did with war, and there was some signage that could easily have started a heated confrontation with any visiting Israeli students. But protesting a war was clearly political, whatever the motivation of individual participants, just as protesting an election is. Protesting is a regular feature of college life for 50 years, and not something most university administrations try to break up by using police force. I get why Ole Miss would be particularly sensitive to this issue, but it takes more than sensitivity about the school's image and history for a public university to justify the use of force to disperse a political rally, which is what the chancellor described. If they were a private university, it would be a different matter. Alternatively, there are acts of violence that would justify breaking up a protest, but the chancellor is claiming either that those didn't happen or that police didn't observe them.
6 months, 2 weeks ago on UM Once Again In Racial Row; Freeze Not Happy With Media Portrayal
Why exactly are university police breaking up a political rally? From the description the chancellor gives, it sounds like the rally at the student union was a lawful political protest against Obama, and that the subsequent rally at the residence hall only turned ugly when police again intervened. You can call it uncivil or immature, but their viewpoints are as protected as anybody elses, and they are under no obligation to confine their views to social media and out of the public square just because the chancellor disagrees with them or thinks they express a message the university wants to distance itself from.
Oh I see, so games will be attended by a select group of the wealthy and privileged, and all the proles will be priced out of actually attending games. Why am I reminded of those scenes from "The Running Man" where the working class and the homeless are huddled together around barrel-fires watching the contests on the giant billboard-sized TV the government put up for them, while the elite are in-studio with Richard Dawson?
I predict the traditional college education model will collapse with the student loan bubble well before we even get to the restructuring you're talking about, and there won't be enough students or money at any college in the SEC to support a football program anyhow, but I think your vision of the future is actually worse than mine.
8 months, 2 weeks ago on Empty Seats An Issue Just About Everywhere
I suspect that "Illegal Smile" is the offical theme song of the Georgia secondary. Also, there are alot of us in SEC country who should probably be aware that our flag decals won't get us into heaven anymore.
9 months ago on Headlines In The Works And A Thought For The Day
As a Mizzou fan, I look at that list and conclude it will be 20 years before we win a divisional title, and it'll be a pure fluke when it does. That list tells me that the historically powerful 6 teams, Georgia UT and UF in the East, Bama Auburn and LSU in the West, basically win everything because of their enormous money and recruiting advantages. Arky and USCe have poked their heads into the conversation lately, but their high water marks aren't even close to those that the traditional rotation of power teams keep returning to every few years. Having been a relatively close follower of MU football since 1996, I am encouraged by the excitement levels this year, the increased ticket sales, and the increase in donors (I myself finally joined the scholarship fund this year, along with many other first-timers). But I have zero illusions that our program will ever be able to join the elite circle of UF, UGA and UT as one of the privileged few that get to pass that trophy around every year amongst themselves.
9 months, 3 weeks ago on A&M And Mizzou Fans, You’ve Got To Know Your Limitations
I honestly can't see the ACC having even a 1 in 3 shot at landing Notre Dame football. ND's interest if it were forced to join a conference would be to keep as many of its traditional rivals as possible. ND has three of their biggest longtime rivalries in the Big 10: Purdue, Michigan, and Michigan State. In the ACC they would have only BC and occasional-rival Pitt, with the opportunity to revive the "Catholics vs Convicts" series against the U. It should be obvious which of those options ND would prefer. Probably the Irish's best case outcome would be to play a 9 game Big 10 schedule with guaranteed yearly games against their current Big10 rivals, plus USC, Navy, and BC as the non-con. As long as the Irish get to control their own fate, that's where they'd land. And don't tell me they still coudn't pick up the phone and get Delaney talking anytime they like.
1 year ago on Flip-Flop: Swofford Now Says ACC Prefers Conference Champ Model For Playoff
I agree with Perlman's plan. Instead of a playoff, I have always favored the idea of putting teams into their "traditional" bowl assignments, playing them out that way, re-ranking based on those outcomes, and then having a plus-one game. A seeded playoff has always seemed really cheesy to me, and ESPN-words like "bracketology" need to stay the heck away from college football. If there are brackets anywhere involved, it's not college football.
1 year ago on SEC, ACC, Big 12 And Others Should Push Big Ten, Pac-12 Toward Rose Bowl
Been coming here ever since the rumors started of Mizzou's move last year, when you guys were giving us fair coverage and good information. This site has become regular reading for alot of the folks on the Mizzou message boards, I suspect it's the most popular source for SEC news among the MU fanbase online. Appreciate the work you guys do, and glad to see Mizzou now officially in the fold!
1 year, 1 month ago on New Tabs And Pages For Missouri And Texas A&M Are Up
@Fayettechill14 Jack Welch, at least, did not diddle one of his employees, he had an affair with some publisher or something. I can't say I'm familiar with any of the others. An extramarital affair isn't what matters, that's not something for the public nor the employer to worry about normally. Nobody would be firing him for that, and probably not even for lying about it, which the public usually gives people a pass on (Bill Clinton could tell you that.) It's the fact that it's with a subordinate employee that matters. In fact, strategically speaking, if you can focus media attention on the affair and minimize the coverage of the sexual harassment issues, you can deflect alot of the criticism (as James Carville could tell you, lol.)
1 year, 1 month ago on Support Group Rallies To Back Petrino As A.D. Long Tries To Navigate Major Mess
@Fayettechill14 Man, I don't know where YOU work, but if you think that as a supervisor you could hire your mistress and lie to your boss about a major public relations fiasco in the making and still keep your job, I bet your HR department has other ideas. There wouldn't be any balancing of the good work you've done against the negative press and possible tort liability. You would be out the door by Friday one way or the other, after all the lawyers figured out the optimal way to fire you.
@Geemom I think you've hit on the issue here pretty well. It's not about the double-standard between your coach and mine or between a winning coach and a losing coach. It's about the double-standard between the head football coach and every other employee of the athletic department that either has in the past or will in the future commit such brazen violations of sexual harassment policy, up to and including what may have been a quid pro quo job-for-sex arrangement. If the athletic department doesn't fire him for this, what kind of message are they sending to other employees of the department? Aren't they basically encouraging sexual harassment by doing nothing in this scenario? Can you say "hostile work environment"? Lawyers sure can.
If you have sex with one of your employees, and that employee is half your age and engaged to another one of your employees, and you only hired this person in the first place because you were having sex with them... you're a pretty bad manager. You probably shouldn't be trusted to run the night shift at a Church's Chicken, let alone a major Division 1 college football program.