The PAC12 THREAD v.2

[smilesid]

Smiles, I would imagine most teams would be a 7 or 8 to 1 ratio against yours in fanbase no matter where you played outside the great state of Ihadaho

Which makes it so much fun when we kick ass.

 

[Kid Vicarious]

I'm so glad the SEC presidents read this forum.

 

[smilesid]

Bandwagon,
The issue here is that way too many people only consider college football to be a business. Your business analogies show that you seem to be one of these types.

In this mindset, the idea is never fairness, but working the system in any and every way possible to put your team in the best advantage, even if it means "stretching" the concept of fair play.

Most of us are embarrassed or angry when our schools do such scheming. You seem downright proud that your school routinely cheats, er, arranges the schedule to play an entire third or your games as ones in which you've carefully arranged them to be easy wins against overwhelming inferior teams.

To me, such an attitude is shameful. It's like you enjoy picking fights with children, and then pounding your chest afterwards, boasting about how "awesome" you are. When challenged you typically respond with posts like these instead of acknowledging what you damn well know to be true, but just can't admit.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

Bandwagon,
The issue here is that way too many people only consider college football to be a business. Your business analogies show that you seem to be one of these types.

In this mindset, the idea is never fairness, but working the system in any and every way possible to put your team in the best advantage, even if it means "stretching" the concept of fair play.

Most of us are embarrassed or angry when our schools do such scheming. You seem downright proud that your school routinely cheats, er, arranges the schedule to play an entire third or your games as ones in which you've carefully arranged them to be easy wins against overwhelming inferior teams.

To me, such an attitude is shameful. It's like you enjoy picking fights with children, and then pounding your chest afterwards, boasting about how "awesome" you are. When challenged you typically respond with posts like these instead of acknowledging what you damn well know to be true, but just can't admit.

I have never once condoned what my school does, nor will you find it in print where I have stated i like the FCS and lower tier games. Since I dont buy season tickets due to travel and work constraints, I dont voice my opinion to the school as much as i should, but I have stated several times to them that I thought our level of competition should be greater now that Saban is the coach.

My analogy is not one to show I am a business sense kinda guy in terms of the sport, I like the old days of college football. What my analogy is stating is that I understand why they are doing it and that this model does seem to be working for them(posting record profits each of the last several years and showing up the NHL)
Report: Alabama athletic revenues higher than all 30 NHL teams, most NBA teams | SI Wire

So when you see me speaking about why they are doing what they are in terms of neutral games, you can rest assured that I am not in favor of the lower tier and FCS teams that litter the rest of the season, but I am in favor of them doing the one off games as it makes good business sense in this, the most trying of economic times.

 

[WizardHawk]

I would love for you to show all of us where anyone has said this. What has been stated is that its a win/win for a neutral game and both teams get big money payouts versus one getting its costs paid for and the other getting a home game take. Let me ask you this, do you show up for work everyday to get paid strictly for your costs or do you want to be paid a fee/wage that better suits your budget and finances? I wont wait for an answer because I know what it should be and hope you're smart enough to want the latter(although I am starting to think otherwise with your recent posts)

You cannot seem to grasp the concept of money trumps all and in these days of shitty economy due to numerous reasons, state run school are being asked to cut back. While some are doing so, The University of Alabama has found a way to not have that instance happen for them and is making full use of its ability to continue to stay in contention for titles and great bowl games. Your thought on it being cowardly clearly shows a lack of understanding of the situation and truthfully, a really big chip on the old shoulder from some perceived slight in your past possibly. In the end we have you and Smiles who clearly are in the same boat, lets hope it doesnt meet a Titanic like ending.

Oh no, I think they are getting it just fine. In order to justify why most SEC teams won't travel outside of the south you and some of your other fans claim it's all about the money. It seems they are too poor to afford to travel and play real games with risk on the road. The team that has the most success in modern football can't afford a real road game. I mean every other power conference can afford them, but not the mighty tide.

I'm sorry, but most of us view that as excuses. The money is only part of it. They are winning titles with less risk than any other team/conference in the nation AND making extra money doing it.

Then your fans tell us our teams are stupid for not doing it too. If we follow what your conference wants out of college football we will all be playing half our schedules every year against high school level talent and having our only decent non home non conference games played at a large venue near us.

Of course if any of us say that's not what we want out of college football we are told we are only complaining because our team isn't as good as your team.

No, I think we all have the SEC rhetoric down quite well thank you.

 

[WizardHawk]

Which makes it so much fun when we kick ass.

With Petersen gone I'm not so sure your days of kicking ass are in the present tense.

 

[WizardHawk]

I have never once condoned what my school does, nor will you find it in print where I have stated i like the FCS and lower tier games. Since I dont buy season tickets due to travel and work constraints, I dont voice my opinion to the school as much as i should, but I have stated several times to them that I thought our level of competition should be greater now that Saban is the coach.

My analogy is not one to show I am a business sense kinda guy in terms of the sport, I like the old days of college football. What my analogy is stating is that I understand why they are doing it and that this model does seem to be working for them(posting record profits each of the last several years and showing up the NHL)
Report: Alabama athletic revenues higher than all 30 NHL teams, most NBA*teams | SI Wire

So when you see me speaking about why they are doing what they are in terms of neutral games, you can rest assured that I am not in favor of the lower tier and FCS teams that litter the rest of the season, but I am in favor of them doing the one off games as it makes good business sense in this, the most trying of economic times.

Both you and Law are more reasonable than some up here. You end up getting lumped in with those less reasonable people just like we do from them.

At the end of the day I just want to see quality college football. If we are only going to have 12 games a year then I'd like to see at least 10 games of value in it. I mean obviously I'd take all 12, but it seems there is no chance any conference drops playing at least a couple of bad teams each year.

To bring it back to the topic at hand, I think if we are going to have a playoff system that all of the conferences should have at least the same number of conference games each year. They can use their OOC schedule to make up for SOS differences between them. My hope is if they do all go to the same that it isn't everyone doing 8. I really don't want to pay for more garbage games and I really don't want to see more of them on TV each week. Some would rather we all go to 8 and that the game gets watered down even more as long as it benefits their team.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

Oh no, I think they are getting it just fine. In order to justify why most SEC teams won't travel outside of the south you and some of your other fans claim it's all about the money. It seems they are too poor to afford to travel and play real games with risk on the road. The team that has the most success in modern football can't afford a real road game. I mean every other power conference can afford them, but not the mighty tide.

I'm sorry, but most of us view that as excuses. The money is only part of it. They are winning titles with less risk than any other team/conference in the nation AND making extra money doing it.

Then your fans tell us our teams are stupid for not doing it too. If we follow what your conference wants out of college football we will all be playing half our schedules every year against high school level talent and having our only decent non home non conference games played at a large venue near us.

Of course if any of us say that's not what we want out of college football we are told we are only complaining because our team isn't as good as your team.

No, I think we all have the SEC rhetoric down quite well thank you.

First off, i have not spoken on condition of any school but my own, so that ends that part of your spin right there. And I have not once stated they could not afford to travel anywhere, I have stated that there is more money to be made playing the one off games at a neutral site. I would think, and certainly hope someone of your apparent intelligence could recognize the difference in the statements, but apparently not. Must be the Anti-SEC blinders clouding your vision and judgement.

Its funny that you use the "high school level talent" reference due to the fact that many of these teams players are but a year or so removed from such a venue and most have to grown beyond that even with coaching. Out of all the 120 plus FBS teams and the hordes of FCS and Div III teams players, the NFL accepts into its ranks around 220 some odd players. All teams are playing high school level talent, its just better talent at some school than others, but its still pretty much high school level with a twist.

I like the fact that you are so passionate about this issue, but i can assure you that money is a big factor in decisions of scheduling and again i defy you or anyone to show where i have stated that I am a fan of how my team schedules 3 of its games each year. I dont mind the one off neutral site game and the SEC in conference schedule, but I am not a fan of the lower tier and FCS games and have stated so before in this thread.

 

[WizardHawk]

First off, i have not spoken on condition of any school but my own, so that ends that part of your spin right there. And I have not once stated they could not afford to travel anywhere, I have stated that there is more money to be made playing the one off games at a neutral site. I would think, and certainly hope someone of your apparent intelligence could recognize the difference in the statements, but apparently not. Must be the Anti-SEC blinders clouding your vision and judgement.

Its funny that you use the "high school level talent" reference due to the fact that many of these teams players are but a year or so removed from such a venue and most have to grown beyond that even with coaching. Out of all the 120 plus FBS teams and the hordes of FCS and Div III teams players, the NFL accepts into its ranks around 220 some odd players. All teams are playing high school level talent, its just better talent at some school than others, but its still pretty much high school level with a twist.

I like the fact that you are so passionate about this issue, but i can assure you that money is a big factor in decisions of scheduling and again i defy you or anyone to show where i have stated that I am a fan of how my team schedules 3 of its games each year. I dont mind the one off neutral site game and the SEC in conference schedule, but I am not a fan of the lower tier and FCS games and have stated so before in this thread.

You obviously didn't read my following post before making this reply. It was all addressed there.

 

[socaljim242]

I would love for you to show all of us where anyone has said this. What has been stated is that its a win/win for a neutral game and both teams get big money payouts versus one getting its costs paid for and the other getting a home game take. Let me ask you this, do you show up for work everyday to get paid strictly for your costs or do you want to be paid a fee/wage that better suits your budget and finances? I wont wait for an answer because I know what it should be and hope you're smart enough to want the latter(although I am starting to think otherwise with your recent posts)

You cannot seem to grasp the concept of money trumps all and in these days of shitty economy due to numerous reasons, state run school are being asked to cut back. While some are doing so, The University of Alabama has found a way to not have that instance happen for them and is making full use of its ability to continue to stay in contention for titles and great bowl games. Your thought on it being cowardly clearly shows a lack of understanding of the situation and truthfully, a really big chip on the old shoulder from some perceived slight in your past possibly. In the end we have you and Smiles who clearly are in the same boat, lets hope it doesnt meet a Titanic like ending.

We get it. Alabama has only gone to another teams home field three times in ten years because well they make more money if they just play at home. Well no shit. Every team would make more money if they played them all at home and scheduled every local Jr college to come and lay down for a paycheck. But then we wouldn't get USC vrs Ohio State, USC vrs ND, USC vrs Syracuse, UCLA vrs Texas, Oregon vrs Michigan State durring the regular season. Funny how all the other schools in other conferences can go play other big time schools every year while Alabama who would still make a ton of money plays three road OCC games in ten years. Yes you have a good record and you make some more money but it's cowardly and when you have a recruting budget of a million and pay your coach 7 million a year it's hilarious to say you're doing it because of money.

 

[The Crimson King]

With Petersen gone I'm not so sure your days of kicking ass are in the present tense.

beat me to it

 

[Kid Vicarious]

Btw, has anyone seen IPW?

 

[TexasExes98]

With Petersen gone I'm not so sure your days of kicking ass are in the present tense.

As long as BSU continues to play in their weak as hell conference, any coach can win at that school. Im wondering if Petersen will be the next former BSU head coach to fail miserably in a real, big boy conference?

 

[WizardHawk]

As long as BSU continues to play in their weak as hell conference, any coach can win at that school. Im wondering if Petersen will be the next former BSU head coach to fail miserably in a real, big boy conference?

While BSU only needs to win a couple of games a year, they still have to win those. Something they didn't/couldn't do last year as it is and now have an entirely new coaching staff. Total change from the ground up. Petersen won there over 8 years of coaching it so he did it with different players all the way through.

As for being successful at the next level, what it takes to win is solid recruiting first and foremost. He came in and put together a fucking outstanding class considering Sark poached all of the meat that had been in that class and he only had a month to recover from it. Getting 4star Baker to flip from Oregon to UW was huge. He isn't viewed as a lowly mid-major HC by recruits and that's what counts. We already know he can coach up kids and turn the ones others passed on into pros. If he can keep on recruiting like he shows early signs of he will do just fine.

Boise? Got knocked down a few rungs on the ladder and it will take time to get back up, if they get back up at all.

 

[smilesid]

As long as BSU continues to play in their weak as hell conference, any coach can win at that school. Im wondering if Petersen will be the next former BSU head coach to fail miserably in a real, big boy conference?

Trust me, Boise is moving heaven and earth to find a better fit. Perhaps you've never looked at a map of the United States. The PAC wanted land grant, large endowment schools when it expanded, hence Utah and Colorado, with tons of money and big TV markets. Boise? Too small, too poor, too feisty, too hungry, too dangerous. Besides, most of you big talkers wouldn't be caught dead in Boise, you know as well as I that it would probably be a loss. And not enough money to boot. But we can't wait for UW next year!

We will miss Coach Pete, and yes, last year was a down year, the worst in a decade! When you have 8 or so guys from the previous years making NFL rosters, well, I guess one can get a pass. Still Boise is used to winning, such mediocrity isn't acceptable. And UW with the new facilities, West Coast recruiting, and suitcases full of money were too much for Pete to pass up, we get it. I think the opening in Atlanta will tell a lot. If Ole Miss wins big, Boise will need to get back to the drawing board. It might take a year with all new staff and almost all new talent. But I'd be careful about writing up the obituary quite so quick, if I were you.

But hey, like I said, Boise has a long tradition of kicking lazy big guys square in the nuts. That's a tradition we don't plan on forgetting.

 

[WizardHawk]

But hey, like I said, Boise has a long tradition of kicking lazy big guys square in the nuts. That's a tradition we don't plan on forgetting.

Part of me hopes you get back to those one or two upsets a year so we don't lose the brash and cocky little mid-major fans on the boards. Otherwise those memories are all you will have and you will end up running out of steam for all your ammo against the Pac and SEC.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

We get it. Alabama has only gone to another teams home field three times in ten years because well they make more money if they just play at home. Well no shit. Every team would make more money if they played them all at home and scheduled every local Jr college to come and lay down for a paycheck. But then we wouldn't get USC vrs Ohio State, USC vrs ND, USC vrs Syracuse, UCLA vrs Texas, Oregon vrs Michigan State durring the regular season. Funny how all the other schools in other conferences can go play other big time schools every year while Alabama who would still make a ton of money plays three road OCC games in ten years. Yes you have a good record and you make some more money but it's cowardly and when you have a recruting budget of a million and pay your coach 7 million a year it's hilarious to say you're doing it because of money.

Wow, you really still dont get it do you, it appears to me that reading comprehension is not a strong suit of yours.

Playing a neutral site game is not playing at home no matter how many times you say it. It is for all intents and purposes a neutral site game that is played away from the "home" stadium of both teams. I know you cannot possibly be this stupid, which leads me to believe you must either be the biggest asshole troll on this board or fucking with me intentionally. This is the last time i will respond to you as you appear to be on the same level thought wise as The Authority and not many around here like him either. I made my stance clear and its apparent that you just cannot grasp it.

Look at the numbers of what goes out for the Athletic department at Alabama versus how much of it comes back to them from football revenue plus a profit each year and you will see why its a no brainer to play one Neutral site game per year. The rest of the OOC i have not commented on to you nor will I because you wouldnt grasp that explanation any better than you got this one.

 

[smilesid]

Part of me hopes you get back to those one or two upsets a year so we don't lose the brash and cocky little mid-major fans on the boards. Otherwise those memories are all you will have and you will end up running out of steam for all your ammo against the Pac and SEC.

We'll have our chances. We've got you guys, Mich. St., UConn, UVA, Florida St., Wash. St., and BYU all signed up. All home & home contests. Unless they back out before coming to Boise, there will be opportunities. Frankly, we are getting tired of always being the road team. We've doubled the size of the stadium, with plans for another expansion on the back burner (with no BCS loot, it's a slow process, you know).

But it doesn't matter, no matter how much we fancy the place up, no SEC school is coming here. That's the whole problem, those boys ain't going ANYWHERE, if they can help it.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

^ I thought OSU and Boise had future games as well smiles...Yeah?

2016 @ home against Bosie, no return game tho...HA!

 

[4down20]

^ I thought OSU and Boise had future games as well smiles...Yeah?

Grats to both teams on adding more weakness to your schedules.