09 Real Deal College Football Discussion/No Homers - Lets geh geh GET IT!

i just posted it just to post it
laugh.gif
....i know it doesnt mean #!#@ lol
 
Washington State
Travis Long, DE, So: Back in the Cougars' glory days -- folks, it wasn't really that long ago, either -- they always had ends who were disruptive. Long led the Cougars with 6.5 tackles for a loss and two sacks as a true freshman in 2009. Those numbers will more than double in 2010.
Click to expand...


Any relation to the other Long that played at WSU?
 
Steve Kragthorpe is coming back to A&M to be the WR coach. I guess Sherman isn't going to hire an OC since he calls all of the plays anyways.

Here's to hoping Kragthorpe can coach up receivers as well as Cromwell could...

...

Also, Texas has their Junior Days these next two weekends. It'll be interesting to watch the commitments pile up. I usually don't start following A&M recruiting for the next year until after Texas has those Junior Days
laugh.gif
 
Originally Posted by 5am6oody72

2010 VT defensive tackle recruit Nick Acree (4* Rivals, 3* Scout) just came off of a bad ACL tear last year but is now fully healthy. At 6'6, 320, he now runs a legit 4.85 in the 40, and this is about a year removed from tearing his ACL. He also benches close to 500 lbs.

Crazy measurables, but I've heard he's one of those Gholston type dudes who looks like Tarzan and plays like Jane. If the light ever comes on though he's gonna be DISGUSTING.
Click to expand...

No, he doesn't.
 
Originally Posted by ddot7

Originally Posted by 5am6oody72

2010 VT defensive tackle recruit Nick Acree (4* Rivals, 3* Scout) just came off of a bad ACL tear last year but is now fully healthy. At 6'6, 320, he now runs a legit 4.85 in the 40, and this is about a year removed from tearing his ACL. He also benches close to 500 lbs.

Crazy measurables, but I've heard he's one of those Gholston type dudes who looks like Tarzan and plays like Jane. If the light ever comes on though he's gonna be DISGUSTING.
Click to expand...

No, he doesn't.
Click to expand...
x2. I'm sorry but a dude that big could crack 5.0 but isn't running in the 4.8. He had times of 5.1 and 5.3 on all the major sites.  Plus, VT is known for their garbage 40 times with Jones and DeAngelo running 4.17 and 4.22. 
roll.gif
 
Originally Posted by Newbs24

Originally Posted by ddot7

Originally Posted by 5am6oody72

2010 VT defensive tackle recruit Nick Acree (4* Rivals, 3* Scout) just came off of a bad ACL tear last year but is now fully healthy. At 6'6, 320, he now runs a legit 4.85 in the 40, and this is about a year removed from tearing his ACL. He also benches close to 500 lbs.

Crazy measurables, but I've heard he's one of those Gholston type dudes who looks like Tarzan and plays like Jane. If the light ever comes on though he's gonna be DISGUSTING.
Click to expand...

No, he doesn't.
Click to expand...
x2. I'm sorry but a dude that big could crack 5.0 but isn't running in the 4.8. He had times of 5.1 and 5.3 on all the major sites.  Plus, VT is known for their garbage 40 times with Jones and DeAngelo running 4.17 and 4.22. 
roll.gif
Click to expand...
Those 40 times are accurate, but they were run on the turf in Rector Fieldhouse here, which is RIDICULOUSLY fast and inflates (or deflates I guess) the numbers a lot. So if you see that Deangelo ran a 4.18 here, he probably did, but it's because of the turf, not the faulty stopwatches. And of course once he runs on a normal surface he's going to slow down. As far as current players go, I guarantee you Tyrod won't run any faster than a 4.6 at the combine (if he's invited).

That being said as far as I know Acree didn't run on our track for the 40 time I quoted. Also I copy pasted from another site, so the "legit 4.85" was probably sensationalized. He is definitely a freak of nature though.
 
klsjfdj'ksdfjasdfjadsjfadsf those times are NOT accurate. they could be running with flubber sole shoes on trampolines and they not crankin out no 4.1s...

there is no surface on earth that knocks 3 tenths of peoples times.
 
Originally Posted by Bigmike23

the texas to big 10 rumors have always come from the big 10 side and never texas, its the same for texas to the pac-10. both conferences want texas because its a big name school and they bring money but at the end of the day how much would texas gain by leaving the big 12?


the good ol boys down in texas would never let them leave
Click to expand...


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
 
Originally Posted by Fear The Ibis

NCAA banned writing messages on your eye black.
Click to expand...

Worst rule ever
indifferent.gif

One of the guys on SC's staff has been in charge of doing that for players the since Reggie was here.
 
If it had been UF instead of UCF, would NCAA have given out same penalty?
College Football, UCF, University of Florida, Urban Meyer — posted by mike bianchi on February, 12 2010 6:24 AM
http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=...ves-ucf-a-heaping-helping-of-bcs-justice.html

One of the central figures in NCAA investigation at UCF has ties to Lane Kiffin: Need we say more? 
010209lane-kiffin_t6001.jpg
 

  Tell me if you think there’s something wrong with this picture?
  UCF seemingly did everything honestly and righteously in discovering,self-investigating and even self-reporting NCAA violations and yet theschool was placed on two years of probation Thursday.
  Meanwhile, the staff members who are responsible for the cheating arenow at big-time BCS schools and were given a “two-week
 


Texas is THE big fish and other rules of college football Radical Superconference Realignment
American Football, BCS, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, Bowls, Conference USA, ESPN, NCAA, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Pac-10, Playoff, Rose Bowl, SEC, Television, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, WAC, college football, conference realignment, scheduling, sports — posted by tim stephens on February, 12 2010 5:56 PM
coltmccoy-150x150.jpg
The news that Texas, according to the Lawrence World-Journal, has had discussions with the Big Ten should be viewed as potential landscape-changing news. So much so, that almost immediately, Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne told the Lincoln Star-Journal that his school would listen to a phone call.Nebraska would be a coup, a big fish to land. But Texas is not just abig fish in The Great Conference Fishing Expedition of 2010. TheLonghorns  are THE big fish.

Independent Notre Dame could join a conference and it would rock theboat. Likewise for Nebraska making a move. But Texas leaving the Big12? That has the potential to sink it, and drag a conference — or twoor three — into the NCAA’s forgotten seas. The Big Ten is unlikely tobe the only conference to cast toward Austin. Will the Longhorns takethe bait?

As we get watch the lines and wait for wiggles and jiggles, let’s remember some very important rules about Radical Superconference Realignment:

1)It’s all about the money.
2)Forget every bit of “conventional wisdom†about conference size, rivalries, etc., you think you know.
3)If your team isn’t already in one of the big conferences, you canstop worrying and just start watching. You are either pining for aconference that is not going to exist soon, one that won’t be what youthink it will be, or you are never getting invited to the party,period. Game’s already lost.
4)If your school is not drawing 70,000 or more to your football gamesand people don’t particularly care to watch it on TV, you could bejoining those to whom Rule No. 3 applies.
5)When in doubt, see Rule No. 1.

Let’s start with Rule No. 1, and let’s all agree on a few things that are clearly established.
A)There’s a wide gap between the haves and have-nots in Division I-A sports.
B)There’s a wide revenue gap between the conferences themselves.
C)There is a substantial – and a rapidly growing – revenue gap between the BCS conferences.
D)Television revenue fuels the massive expansion of college athletics budgets, and not everybody can keep up.
E)Some schools are worth a whole lot more to TV than others.
F)Even the richest athletic programs need more money, and while aplayoff system might generate billions, the big schools are more concerned with protecting the regular season and bowls – and not sharing the wealth with the schools that don’t generate it.

Now we move to Rule No. 2, and this tricky conventional wisdom. Such as:
–Conferences larger than 12 would have too many mouths to feed. It won’t work.
Answer: Yeah, it won’t work if you are the WAC. Nobody willthrow Powerball-style TV dollars at the WAC. But for the right groupingof schools rich with TV cache, the windfall could be unlike anything wehave ever seen. The best-positioned major conferences – those who haveor are attempting to secure their own networks or have billions ofdollars coming to them from existing ones – will be looking tostrengthen the depth of their weekly TV lineups. The networks who’ll bepaying the freight would actually prefer the consolidation. For theright teams, 14 or 16 could besignificantly better than 12.


–It doesn’t make geographic sense.
Answer: Yeah, maybe if you are talking about mid-majors. Themega schools in play here will scoff at your map. If the right shiftshappen, the major conference are likely to expand beyond 12, and theywill have geographically sensible DIVISIONS. Think two mini-made-for-TVconferences under one umbrella locking down a large swath of television sets.

–Notre Dame would never join a conference.
Answer: Sure about that? Notre Dame’s TV deal will pay the Irishabout $10 million per year. Sounds great. All that prime time exposure,too. Ah, but wonder how the Irish feel when Northwestern’sannual cut off the Big Ten deal more than doubles Notre Dame’s TV pot?Besides, Notre Dame is not the key to this whole realignment thing.Texas is. The Longhorns are, right now, the biggest brand in collegesports. Their TV power, marketability and overwhelming strength at thetop of the Big 12 means they hold the fate of the Big Ten, Pac-10, Big12 – and perhaps even the Big East, ACC and SEC – in their hands. IfTexas goes anywhere, the Big 12 is swimming in chum and the othersharks are scrambling to gobble up the pieces.

–The schedules would be a mess.
Answer: Nah, not much different than now. 14- or 16-team superconferences will likely play 9-game conference football schedules. Sixor seven division games, and one or twocrossover games. Not muchdifferent than now. That still leaves three games to schedule othertraditional rivals or money games. The Big East has proven a 16-teamleague works just fine in basketball and in other sports.

–These power schools won’t want to beat up each other. It will kill them in the BCS.
Answer: Who says there will even BE a BCS when this reaches itsconclusion? Or if there is, it won’t radically change things.Superconferences based on mega television deals only ENHANCE the valueof the regular season. Rather than spur playoff push — which couldhappen certainly, — it might actually strengthen the BCS with fewerconferences requiring automatic bids. The regular-season and conferencechampionship games become even bigger.

–But what about the NCAAbasketball tournament? No way these leagues merge up. They’ll just costthemselves NCAA Tournament bids.
Answer: Really? Tell that to Big East basketball. Anddidn’t I just read something about expanding the NCAA Tournament? Hmmm…. Wonder why anyone might possibly want it set upso that any BCS conference team with a decent record makes the field?

–The conferences wouldn’t eliminate other conferences.
Answer: Southwest Conference, please come to the white courtesyphone. The Metro and Great Midwest conferences would like a word withyou.

–Texas would never leave the Big 12.
Answer: Right. Like it would never blow up the SWC. Or explore going to the Pac-10 or Big Ten way back when (itdid). Or be in a conference without rival Oklahoma (gee, seems likethey managed that one fine for years), or leave behind Texas A&M(Texas was more than willing to do that previously before politiciansgot involved). And travel miles? Please. That won’t even be aconsideration. Besides, see the point about geography. If Texas goes,it probably will be bringing along a few high-rolling friends for tohelp fill out a division.

Rule No. 3: If you’re not in now, you’re probably not getting in.
If the power conferences – and more importantly, the TVnetworks — saw value in any teams not currently in the BCS conferencepower structure, those teams would already be in it. The truth of thematter is that there are no teams outside the current BCS conferenceswho can add to the money pot. Any realignment scenarios that mentionany non-BCS team as a likely candidate are grounded in wishful thinkingbut not much reality.

Oh, perhaps a couple might get in simply to balance divisions orfill a particular regional gap in TV markets, depending on how thedominoes fall. That’s you, Utah and perhaps BYU. That’s you, TCU.That’s probably not you, Boise State. Only if you get lucky with theway things break, UCF. Everybody else? Better just focus on the mirrorinstead of that pie in the sky. The goal of true RadicalSuperconference Realignment will not be to ADD teams. It will be toconsolidate the power and SHED the financial weak links.

Just because you’re in a BCS league doesn’t mean you will stay in one. This is rule No. 4.
If realignment feeding frenzy comes, there are no guaranteesall conferences currently in the BCS will stay there, or even if theywill exist at all, or even if the BCS as we think we know it willexist. The Pac-10 and Big Ten easily could do a number of the Big 12,which suffers from the same top-heavy structural flaws that helped takedown the Southwest Conference. In fact, it’s in the Pac-10’s and BigTen’s interest to carve up the heartland’s power base and leave thescraps (hello Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State and Texas Tech) for theMountain West or WAC to clean up.

The same rules apply to the Big East, where a half-dozen wannabesfrom Conference USA are getting all gussied up to join … um …Conference USA?

It is in the ACC’s vital interest to kill off what’s left of the BigEast as a marketable football entity through expansion into thenortheast, and that needis reciprocal. The Big East teams need the ACCjust as much, and they especially needthe former Big East teamsresiding there now. The only way those schools can generate the kind oftelevision dollars to compete with the Big Ten and SEC is to truly bethe Atlantic Coast Conference from New York to Miami.Translation: Ifit happens, bye-bye, Big East football. Whatever is left of the Big 12after that league’s top tier bolts can reunite with some of their oldSWC castoffs, who’ll know just how they feel. Cincinnati, Louisvilleand South Florida? Youmighthave to hello to your little (old) C-USAfriends.

And the SEC? Do you really think they will sit by and watch the other leagues make a big money grab?

Which brings us back to Rule No. 5. The money …
Money is the driving force behind decades of incrementalchange in college sports. Conferences have been changing from the timecollege men first put on sweaters and kicked around a pig bladder. Theevolution has accelerated in the age of television, leading us to aperfect storm of economic factors that could bring about massiverealignment across the landscape. It has been foretold for decades, andlaid out as manifest destiny as soon as Georgia and Oklahoma wontelevision independence for college sports via the Supreme Court in1984.

The only thing stopping the inevitable cartel cannibalism has beenthe fact that college presidents didn’t have the courage to make themoves – to go all in. Oh, and the money. It hasn’t been quite the right time, and the dollars not quite right. But the day may soon arrive when the dollars cannot be ignored,and even the politicians cannot stand in the way. Perhaps thepresidents will again explore the options and take the conservativeapproach of past expansionist periods. A move here, a move there, andwe’re done for a while, until the next ripple. Maybe. History says thatwill be the case.But if they conclude otherwise — and they arecertainly going to hear otherwise from the networks and theirconference commissioners –then America will be stunned at how quicklythe dawn of the superconferences arrives.

The lines will be cast. If Texas bites, we’re all going to need a bigger boat.
 
Texas leaving the Big XII would derail the conference and lead to some HUGE restructurings...

Conference cannot and will not survive without Texas...
 
Why is the Big 12 potentially in the position to get torn apart though?

I mean, the Big 10 has been down for a good bit now and seems to be potentially on the verge of creating a Super Conference.

I guess why is the Big 12 on the verge of being blown up is my question (other than $)...?
nerd.gif


If this super conference does end up in the mid west and it becomes the Big 14, Notre Dame is going to be kicking themselves...

Also, that Jaws clip is random as hell at the end of that article.
laugh.gif
 
Money. Big Ten teams are making almost double what UT makes including the likes of Northwestern and Indiana.

More than Notre Dame too.
 
And what is crazy is Missouri leaving would be just as damaging leaving the conference as Texas would, just not as big of a impact on the national scene.

I just think either/or, the Big 12 won't be around going into 2020.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

eracism
Texas ranked worst state for quality of life
5 6 7
Replies
165
Views
9K
Mark Antony
M
Arthur Shelby
Air Jordan 3 Doernbecher “Hugo” - December 2nd $210
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
airforce1king
airforce1king

Latest News

View All News

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

Site contents may not be incorporated into AI training data or any other derivative works without prior express written consent.

Links to participating merchants may generate referral or affiliate commissions that help support our community. See our policies for details. NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom