The PAC12 THREAD v.2

[socaljim242]

How many big name teams are willing to go into Boise to play a game?

Why when you can play Chattanooga at home and help that poor school get some much needed money? Boise has enough money so no need to play them.

 

[Codaxx]

Why when you can play Chattanooga at home and help that poor school get some much needed money? Boise has enough money so no need to play them.

-
I do remember hearing that BSU asks about 1mm to play a game on the road.

 

[WizardHawk]

What you can't seem to grasp, at least for me, is I totally understand your position, and even agree with parts of it, but I disagree as to other parts. No matter how many times you post it here, not everyone is going to agree with you. So, say it as often as you want, but just because others disagree doesn't mean they don't understand what you are saying.

You: I want quality football, and I bitch at my school when they don't schedule it.
Others: We recognize that to win the NC, you can't play 3 or 4 top OOC games with your IC schedule.
You: Pussies.
Others: It is what it is ... that's how the system works if you want to get a NC.
You: Pussies.
Others: Meh.
You: You don't understand my argument.
Others: Meh. Ignore.

You are mixing my posts up with others or just misunderstanding what I've said. The SEC as a whole is happy with the status quo and why wouldn't they be? If you can get two teams into a NC game why make things harder than they need to be? That's not being pussies, that's being smart. I can say that and still say I don't like it and wish something would change to benefit us all can't I?

Saban even wants that extra IC game and he has won how many titles? If he gets his way and that 1 extra fluff game is dropped it will raise the overall SOS of your conference right? If the SEC SOS goes up then HC's from around the rest of the power conferences will also have to at least reevaluate theirs. If you agree that the overall Pac SOS is below the SEC already then it would stand to reason that the SEC's going up would force others to also improve their own. At least if being taken seriously for the playoffs is a goal of theirs. That would add a few more great games across the country every season. Who wouldn't like that? Well besides those only interested in their own teams trophies anyway.

None of that is as you have characterized it to be. Yes, you can win a title while playing 6 bad teams over a season so why would you voluntarily play only 4 or 3 when others won't be? As a fan base of the overall sport we all win if they do collectively stop this backward trend. That's all I've been saying. You keep saying it's obvious and yet 420 (must be stoned so why not change his name to match) is off in la la land about my team sucking and some other total BS not related because he cannot defend his statements without doing so. If what I say is so obvious then why are others getting stuck on it and why do you over reach the characterization of it?

And don't confuse me with smiles or the other haters again. I have questioned his own teams scheduling for years now and know full well he can throw eggs at others, but simply cannot put it into perspective with his own team. I've told him I get why BSU scheduled the way they did and why wouldn't they if they were able to breach the top 10 while doing it? Same thing here, but until they do stop it we will all keep seeing this sport continue to slowly get worse and worse as it has over the last 20 years or so.

 

[socaljim242]

-
I do remember hearing that BSU asks about 1mm to play a game on the road.

100 million dollar (or more budgets) , milions from SEC network. Do you think that money is really a deterrent to playing them? I'm sure you'd actually make more money than playing Chattanooga to lay down.

 

[WizardHawk]

The truth is, if you cared even remotely about this crap you keep talking about then you should be thanking the SEC for bring about the changes that have improved the game. But you can't because you and everyone else ignorantly assumes that because the SEC has success, then everything in college football is to blame on them.

Prove it. Show me where I've blamed the SEC for all of footballs ills without giving them credit for anything good they have done. You can't. More garbage spewed because you can't defend the topic at hand. PERIOD.

Tell me anything the SEC is responsible for and I'd be happy to acknowledge it for you if that makes you feel better. Hell, I've told you many times I like your team and your HC. Of course you can't admit that because it would go against this narrative you are trying to fabricate, but you know it's true.

UW was more responsible for the creation of the BCS than any SEC team so I'm not sure how I can be expected to give them credit for that. BYU getting the NC in '84 started the shit storm that laid the foundation and the co-champion UW/Miami title in '92 was the last straw. No SEC there. As for the playoffs if you can give me a good reason to thank them then by all means I will, but people have complained about the BCS since it first started and the push for real playoffs has been going on for some time.

And since when don't I blame the Pac for things they have screwed up? I blamed them for the delays in the BCS and have been quite outspoken on the topic. The whole situation over the RB and trying to hold onto that was a huge burden in getting progress. When have I ever denied that? Right, I haven't.

Keep right on making up stuff and making this conversation about me or my school because you can't adequately defend your positions otherwise. Trust me, everyone sees it for what it is and it is amusing.

 

[Codaxx]

100 million dollar (or more budgets) , milions from SEC network. Do you think that money is really a deterrent to playing them? I'm sure you'd actually make more money than playing Chattanooga to lay down.

It is a fact you make more from Chatt, than BSU

 

[7Samurai13]

It is a fact you make more from Chatt, than BSU

I don't doubt it but do you have any actually proof to that statement?

 

[WestEndVol]

Sweet offseason Jesus!! 500 replies?

 

[outofyourmind]

How many big name teams are willing to go into Boise to play a game?

He was talking about how Alabama was screwing over their fans by their scheduling and all I did was point out that Boise does the same thing. If they wanted to schedule better, they would, but they don't, so they screw their fans over with a High School Schedule.

 

[7Samurai13]

He was talking about how Alabama was screwing over their fans by their scheduling and all I did was point out that Boise does the same thing. If they wanted to schedule better, they would, but they don't, so they screw their fans over with a High School Schedule.

Yes Boise does, but is it their fault that no big name schools want to go there? The only thing that people have to argue against it is the size of their stadium. So should reject doing any road games because every other school in the country has a tiny stadium compared to them?

 

[4down20]

How many big name teams are willing to go into Boise to play a game?

Boise St is a 5 cent piece of bubble gum with a $100 price tag. They like to sit around and pretend like nobody will play them, but the reason it's near impossible to strike a deal with them is because they want the other team to give them crazy amounts of money.

They want a home and home with big teams. When Boise goes to the other teams stadium, they want that team to pay Boise St like $1 million dollars or more. Yet when that team goes to play Boise, the other team will get basically nothing in return because Boise St has a stadium that only seats about 36,000 people. So basically, the teams have to pay to come play @ Boise St.

Teams have tried to get games with Boise St in the past, but most don't release this type of information about the deals. Nebraska did release the details of what Boise St wanted, so it's been known since then that the entire "Nobody will play Boise St" is pure non-sense.

If I remember correctly, Nebraska said - well we pay you that to come in and play, but not that and the home and home - Boise St refused.

Boise St would rather sit back and refuse offers and pretend like nobody will play them than to actually play in a game. So at best you might get a neutral site game with Boise St.

All the while, dipshits like smiles will sit around posting on forums acting like everyone else is "scared" to play Boise St, while the same teams he claims this about play 4 and 5 teams a year that are more difficult.

 

[4down20]

Yes Boise does, but is it their fault that no big name schools want to go there? The only thing that people have to argue against it is the size of their stadium. So should reject doing any road games because every other school in the country has a tiny stadium compared to them?

Yes, it is 100% Boise St's fault.

 

[outofyourmind]

Yes Boise does, but is it their fault that no big name schools want to go there? The only thing that people have to argue against it is the size of their stadium. So should reject doing any road games because every other school in the country has a tiny stadium compared to them?

They could make it lucrative enough to make it happen, but it all comes down to money now doesn't it.
And making money shouldn't be the primary concern to a lot of fans in this thread, it should be good matchups and great entertainment.

Hell, there are a few teams that would go into Boise. Are the phones broken up there???

 

[4down20]

Prove it. Show me where I've blamed the SEC for all of footballs ills without giving them credit for anything good they have done. You can't. More garbage spewed because you can't defend the topic at hand. PERIOD.

Tell me anything the SEC is responsible for and I'd be happy to acknowledge it for you if that makes you feel better. Hell, I've told you many times I like your team and your HC. Of course you can't admit that because it would go against this narrative you are trying to fabricate, but you know it's true.

I just gave you a list of things in the post you are replying too.

UW was more responsible for the creation of the BCS than any SEC team so I'm not sure how I can be expected to give them credit for that. BYU getting the NC in '84 started the shit storm that laid the foundation and the co-champion UW/Miami title in '92 was the last straw. No SEC there. As for the playoffs if you can give me a good reason to thank them then by all means I will, but people have complained about the BCS since it first started and the push for real playoffs has been going on for some time.

Wrong, the Pac12 and Big10 especially have always voted against any such changes to these things because they didn't want anything to interfer with the Rose Bowl. No matter if you want to admit it or not, the Rose Bowl has been the #1 thing behind stopping progress in college football ever since the Pac12 decided it was tired of getting it's ass whooped by the SEC way back before any of us were born and only allowed the Big10 to play in it.

As for the playoffs specifically. The SEC has been pushing for a playoff since at least 2003. In that time, the only other conference to vote in favor of a playoff was the ACC. The other conferences all voted against the playoff until after the 2011 season when the NCG ended up as LSU vs Alabama. So not only was the SEC and ACC the only conferences in favor of the playoffs, it took the SEC completely taking over the NCG to get the other conferences to budge.

And since when don't I blame the Pac for things they have screwed up? I blamed them for the delays in the BCS and have been quite outspoken on the topic. The whole situation over the RB and trying to hold onto that was a huge burden in getting progress. When have I ever denied that? Right, I haven't.

Keep right on making up stuff and making this conversation about me or my school because you can't adequately defend your positions otherwise. Trust me, everyone sees it for what it is and it is amusing.

What exactly is my position to defend here? All I've been doing is pointing out that for all of you who bitch and blame the SEC, your teams are actually worse at these things in general. You're all a bunch of hypocrites pointing fingers at everyone else.

 

[7Samurai13]

They could make it lucrative enough to make it happen, but it all comes down to money now doesn't it.
And making money shouldn't be the primary concern to a lot of fans in this thread, it should be good matchups and great entertainment.

Hell, there are a few teams that would go into Boise. Are the phones broken up there???

Hey, at least Michigan State is man enough to say screw the money, we will go and kick your ass in Boise foor our fans. What's your excuse? Afraid of the Statue of Liberty?

 

[4down20]

Hey, at least Michigan State is man enough to say screw the money, we will go and kick your ass in Boise foor our fans. What's your excuse? Afraid of the Statue of Liberty?

I think it's funny how when 2 teams don't play, 1 of them is always for some reason scared, and it's always the team the person making the accusation wants it to be.

Michigan St is scared to play Alabama, and that's why Michigan St isn't playing Alabama this year!

 

[7Samurai13]

I think it's funny how when 2 teams don't play, 1 of them is always for some reason scared, and it's always the team the person making the accusation wants it to be.

Michigan St is scared to play Alabama, and that's why Michigan St isn't playing Alabama this year!

Well we all know that Bama would have backed out of the game, so what does it matter? Bad example.

 

[socaljim242]

It is a fact you make more from Chatt, than BSU

Is that why Alabama plays Chattanooga in Nov? Because of money? The extra attention nationally , the buzz, the Boise fan base rather than Chattanooga fan base. Not enough to sway?

 

[4down20]

Well we all know that Bama would have backed out of the game, so what does it matter? Bad example.

Well, you get the point.

 

[socaljim242]

Boise St is a 5 cent piece of bubble gum with a $100 price tag. They like to sit around and pretend like nobody will play them, but the reason it's near impossible to strike a deal with them is because they want the other team to give them crazy amounts of money.

They want a home and home with big teams. When Boise goes to the other teams stadium, they want that team to pay Boise St like $1 million dollars or more. Yet when that team goes to play Boise, the other team will get basically nothing in return because Boise St has a stadium that only seats about 36,000 people. So basically, the teams have to pay to come play @ Boise St.

Teams have tried to get games with Boise St in the past, but most don't release this type of information about the deals. Nebraska did release the details of what Boise St wanted, so it's been known since then that the entire "Nobody will play Boise St" is pure non-sense.

If I remember correctly, Nebraska said - well we pay you that to come in and play, but not that and the home and home - Boise St refused.

Boise St would rather sit back and refuse offers and pretend like nobody will play them than to actually play in a game. So at best you might get a neutral site game with Boise St.

All the while, dipshits like smiles will sit around posting on forums acting like everyone else is "scared" to play Boise St, while the same teams he claims this about play 4 and 5 teams a year that are more difficult.

First off some teams( take your pick) wont play any road non conference games far from home especially against a team known to knock off bigger opponents and never more than one. last ten years how many times has Bama gone to play a road game against even a middle of the road school *** That they didn't have to ( non conference). I'm sure that's gonna be a huge list.