Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
Author Message
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,231
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #1
Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
No wonder A&M, Missouri, Nebraska and Colorado decided to leave that attitude.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...a-comments
08-12-2014 09:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


LSUtah Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,139
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 50
I Root For: LSU
Location: Salt Lake City
Post: #2
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
What? A Texas AD speaking in a condescending manner? Shocker...
08-12-2014 09:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
domer1978 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,469
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 367
I Root For: Notre Dame/Chaos
Location: California/Georgia
Post: #3
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
It's a really arrogant comment that's not even true
08-12-2014 09:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pony94 Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 25,650
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 1177
I Root For: SMU
Location: Bee Cave, TX
Post: #4
Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
Makes you wish for Dodds
08-12-2014 09:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PirateMarv Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,508
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 191
I Root For: ECU
Location: Chicago and Memphis
Post: #5
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
Bowlsby is just as bad.
08-12-2014 09:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #6
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
One more small step.
08-12-2014 10:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
Wait....UT thinks it's the only one that matters and the rest are just lucky to be in their presence?!?!

Shocked.

Shocked I tells ya!
08-12-2014 10:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tallgrass Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,396
Joined: Nov 2002
Reputation: 91
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
I catch a lot of grief on this board but what Texas AD states is basically the philosophy of all BCS teams and conferences. The Texas AD is publicly saying what all other BCS schools are thinking internally...but keeping a public lid on it.

Regarding Longhorn greed, it was PAC greed and invitation to B12 schools that started this whole realignment mess. That PAC invitation is/was a statement of greed...and how about B1G invitation to Maryland? That, too, is greed. Ditto loss of Orlando, Charlotte, and Pinstripe Bowls for Nbe/AAC. There is greed all over the BCS place.

They (BCS) are all greedy. To see greed as a Texas Longhorn phenomena is to miss the entire point.

The only thing I see in the OP of this thread is that the Texas AD was foolish to publicly admit it....but, then again, it is all out there for everyone to see. His statement is not shocking to me--and it is the obvious BCS greed that is the basis for just about all my posts.
(This post was last modified: 08-12-2014 10:31 PM by Tallgrass.)
08-12-2014 10:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
I still maintain that Texas gets a very unfair bad reputation. Why exactly is 100% equal revenue sharing for teams in a conference on all levels of TV contracts considered something morally necessary?

Heck, when this whole business started, the Big 12 had a system with much more equal revenue sharing than the PAC-10 and until the SEC bought back the 3rd tier rights, it actually had the identical set-up. On top of that, Nebraska and Texas A&M were two other schools opposed to more equal sharing.

The winds of change have currently favored more equal revenue sharing, but they can just as easily slide back. Let's also remember that unequal revenue sharing has been things that have saved conferences. The Big East never would have had Miami (FL) without unequal sharing and probably never would have been a BCS conference. The Mountain West never would have kept Boise State.

Beyond all this, I think all the talk of greed is misplaced. I get that there are serious structural issues than need to be discussed, but a school feeling they should be able to keep more money if they are the ones generating more money doesn't sound greedy to me.
08-12-2014 10:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #10
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
(08-12-2014 10:29 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  I catch a lot of grief on this board but what Texas AD states is basically the philosophy of all BCS teams and conferences. The Texas AD is publicly saying what all other BCS schools are thinking internally...but keeping a public lid on it.

Regarding Longhorn greed, it was PAC greed and invitation to B12 schools that started this whole realignment mess. That PAC invitation is/was a statement of greed...and how about B1G invitation to Maryland? That, too, is greed. Ditto loss of Orlando, Charlotte, and Pinstripe Bowls for Nbe/AAC. There is greed all over the BCS place.

They (BCS) are all greedy. To see greed as a Texas Longhorn phenomena is to miss the entire point.

The only thing I see in the OP of this thread is that the Texas AD was foolish to publicly admit it....but, then again, it is all out there for everyone to see. His statement is not shocking to me--and it is the obvious BCS greed that is the basis for just about all my posts.

He isn't foolish for admitting it. He is more likely purposefully admitting it with full knowing of the reaction he will get for admitting it. He isn't an idiot. He knows what he is doing by publicly stating this.

People, and this isn't necessarily directed at you Tallgrass, need to learn to connect the dots better.
08-12-2014 11:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
Patterson is a prime example of how so many schools have lost their way. Not the arrogance but rather his background.

Patterson has spent a whopping 29 months as an AD and only 37 months in intercollegiate athletics yet he leads the richest program in the country. Charlie Strong was his first major coaching hire ever (and I like the hire).

He has essentially no experience working with other AD's or presidents nor did he emerge from the culture and traditions of intercollegiate athletics and I doubt full understands the nuances of how universities interact with one another. To me it is much like taking someone to an island some place, teaching them the skills of baseball and plopping them on a team with no understanding of the unwritten rules of the game then being surprised when he flips his bat and points to where the ball went he hits a homerun or being shocked that he bunts when he is the third batter in the 9th inning of a no hitter or steals second with his team up by 9 runs in the 8th.

As for the comments. I think they reflect his lack of understanding of what is going on. As I've noted and as have others, most of the P5 believes there is value being associated with the rest of FBS and the rest of Division I and the NCAA as a whole. That is reflected in the CFP deal, it is reflected in how the NCAA operates and distributes funds, and in how despite more than six decades of saber rattling no one has ever seriously pursued a break from the organization.

The comments also reflect a cultural shift in the nation. From about World War I to the mid-80's a university administrator at a public college making such an elitist comment would have disappeared from the scene because politically it was unthinkable to take such a "to the manor born stance public."

Now many receive such comments gleefully as would have probably happened circa 1850 to 1914
08-13-2014 12:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #12
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
He is who he is. If outsiders wish to condemn and whatnot, so be it. For me, I couldn't care less who the F Texas decides upon to run their Athletic Department.

What it shows me though is that it is business as usual. Texas will still prefer the ACC. Why? Because Texas is thinking about themselves first and foremost. The ACC is the only major conference that has shown they are willing to do a partial membership contract with a University.

Texas wants more control over their football program and whom they play? Six OOC games and six contracted games against the ACC is the best deal they will find today when it comes to having the most control possible in terms of maximizing their money making potential.

They will leave behind the Big 8 leftovers that they really don't care about and never have. They will maintain relations with Oklahoma on the side. They can maintain relations with Tech and then take with them two other Texas programs. They will once again leave everyone else behind JUST as they did before with the SWC. Another program only means something to Texas if it provides some value to Texas. Love it or hate it, it is whom the Longhorns are at heart and they have the power to follow their heart in this. They are not going West and they are not staying in a region that they only used as a stepping stone to step out of a conference based almost entirely within the State of Texas.

That is their M.O. Save the judgement, it makes no difference.
08-13-2014 12:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardFan1 Offline
Red Thunderbird
*

Posts: 15,148
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 644
I Root For: Louisville ACC
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
(08-13-2014 12:08 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  He is who he is. If outsiders wish to condemn and whatnot, so be it. For me, I couldn't care less who the F Texas decides upon to run their Athletic Department.

What it shows me though is that it is business as usual. Texas will still prefer the ACC. Why? Because Texas is thinking about themselves first and foremost. The ACC is the only major conference that has shown they are willing to do a partial membership contract with a University.

Texas wants more control over their football program and whom they play? Six OOC games and six contracted games against the ACC is the best deal they will find today when it comes to having the most control possible in terms of maximizing their money making potential.

They will leave behind the Big 8 leftovers that they really don't care about and never have. They will maintain relations with Oklahoma on the side. They can maintain relations with Tech and then take with them two other Texas programs. They will once again leave everyone else behind JUST as they did before with the SWC. Another program only means something to Texas if it provides some value to Texas. Love it or hate it, it is whom the Longhorns are at heart and they have the power to follow their heart in this. They are not going West and they are not staying in a region that they only used as a stepping stone to step out of a conference based almost entirely within the State of Texas.

That is their M.O. Save the judgement, it makes no difference.

BINGO!
08-13-2014 05:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Maize Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,340
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 555
I Root For: Athletes First
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
(08-13-2014 05:29 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  
(08-13-2014 12:08 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  He is who he is. If outsiders wish to condemn and whatnot, so be it. For me, I couldn't care less who the F Texas decides upon to run their Athletic Department.

What it shows me though is that it is business as usual. Texas will still prefer the ACC. Why? Because Texas is thinking about themselves first and foremost. The ACC is the only major conference that has shown they are willing to do a partial membership contract with a University.

Texas wants more control over their football program and whom they play? Six OOC games and six contracted games against the ACC is the best deal they will find today when it comes to having the most control possible in terms of maximizing their money making potential.

They will leave behind the Big 8 leftovers that they really don't care about and never have. They will maintain relations with Oklahoma on the side. They can maintain relations with Tech and then take with them two other Texas programs. They will once again leave everyone else behind JUST as they did before with the SWC. Another program only means something to Texas if it provides some value to Texas. Love it or hate it, it is whom the Longhorns are at heart and they have the power to follow their heart in this. They are not going West and they are not staying in a region that they only used as a stepping stone to step out of a conference based almost entirely within the State of Texas.

That is their M.O. Save the judgement, it makes no difference.

BINGO!

I think he just might be correct as well...04-bow
08-13-2014 05:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #15
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
(08-12-2014 10:29 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  I catch a lot of grief on this board but what Texas AD states is basically the philosophy of all BCS teams and conferences.

Yes, for some reason, many around here think there's something especially 'greedy' or money-driven about Texas and Notre Dame compared to anyone else.

It's a ridiculous idea. 07-coffee3
08-13-2014 07:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Offline
The Black Knight of The Deplorables

Posts: 9,618
Joined: Oct 2013
I Root For: Army, SFU
Location: Michie Stadium 1945
Post: #16
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
And if every other program could be and act like Texas, they would. Texas makes the money, Texas has the brand, more power to them if they choose to cash in and ditch the driftwood. The latest conference realignment has already wrecked my childhood college football, if Texas heads to the ACC, so be it. I'm not letting a bunch of egos ruin my enjoyment of college football. Texas shouldn't be required share their loot.

Utah, Colorado, Missouri, A&M, TCU etc didn't leave their conferences for a moral crusade. They are just as greedy as the perceived Midas-desire of Notre Dame and Texas without having the biggest national branding.
08-13-2014 07:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #17
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
(08-13-2014 07:59 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  And if every other program could be and act like Texas, they would. Texas makes the money, Texas has the brand, more power to them if they choose to cash in and ditch the driftwood. The latest conference realignment has already wrecked my childhood college football ...

About Texas: Yep, everyone else sure would, meaning criticism of them (like that of Notre Dame) is pure jealousy.

As for your childhood, mine was the 1970s. And even though one can point to many changes in college football since then, to me it still has its essential character. E.g., in 1970 the SEC had 9 teams not 14, it didn't have a CCG, the mix of its best programs has changed considerably, and overall it wasn't nearly as good as it is now. But, it's still visibly the same essential "SEC". I think that is true of the rest of college football too. Even the monstrosity that is today's ACC is still the ACC.
08-13-2014 08:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Offline
The Black Knight of The Deplorables

Posts: 9,618
Joined: Oct 2013
I Root For: Army, SFU
Location: Michie Stadium 1945
Post: #18
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
(08-13-2014 08:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-13-2014 07:59 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  And if every other program could be and act like Texas, they would. Texas makes the money, Texas has the brand, more power to them if they choose to cash in and ditch the driftwood. The latest conference realignment has already wrecked my childhood college football ...

About Texas: Yep, everyone else sure would, meaning criticism of them (like that of Notre Dame) is pure jealousy.

As for your childhood, mine was the 1970s. And even though one can point to many changes in college football since then, to me it still has its essential character. E.g., in 1970 the SEC had 9 teams not 14, it didn't have a CCG, the mix of its best programs has changed considerably, and overall it wasn't nearly as good as it is now. But, it's still visibly the same essential "SEC". I think that is true of the rest of college football too. Even the monstrosity that is today's ACC is still the ACC.

I am college-aged, so my childhood is basically the last decade and a half. Needless to say, I find most change distasteful. Especially adulthood.

The jealousy of Texas and Notre Dame does get old.
08-13-2014 08:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,058
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 1016
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
Everyone not named Texas and OU in the B12 should be extremely concerned about their future. Without those 2 in the league it ceases to be a "power" football conference. If those 2 left I'd assume a few would find power conference homes, but there'd likely be a few stuck in a very bad position.
08-13-2014 08:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,296
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Texas' Patterson does not understand why they should share
(08-13-2014 12:00 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Patterson is a prime example of how so many schools have lost their way. Not the arrogance but rather his background.

Patterson has spent a whopping 29 months as an AD and only 37 months in intercollegiate athletics yet he leads the richest program in the country. Charlie Strong was his first major coaching hire ever (and I like the hire).

He has essentially no experience working with other AD's or presidents nor did he emerge from the culture and traditions of intercollegiate athletics and I doubt full understands the nuances of how universities interact with one another. To me it is much like taking someone to an island some place, teaching them the skills of baseball and plopping them on a team with no understanding of the unwritten rules of the game then being surprised when he flips his bat and points to where the ball went he hits a homerun or being shocked that he bunts when he is the third batter in the 9th inning of a no hitter or steals second with his team up by 9 runs in the 8th.

As for the comments. I think they reflect his lack of understanding of what is going on. As I've noted and as have others, most of the P5 believes there is value being associated with the rest of FBS and the rest of Division I and the NCAA as a whole. That is reflected in the CFP deal, it is reflected in how the NCAA operates and distributes funds, and in how despite more than six decades of saber rattling no one has ever seriously pursued a break from the organization.

The comments also reflect a cultural shift in the nation. From about World War I to the mid-80's a university administrator at a public college making such an elitist comment would have disappeared from the scene because politically it was unthinkable to take such a "to the manor born stance public."

Now many receive such comments gleefully as would have probably happened circa 1850 to 1914

I think you are missing the point. College sports is a business. Patterson was GM for for the Houston Rockets and several years for the Portland Trailblazers as well as the Houston Aeros hockey team and was Sr. VP for the Houston Texans and hired people in those jobs. He has all the business end and has hired coaches. That's the more important part of the job than working with other ADs.

Now Patterson has ticked off some of the rich alumni. He may not be real good at all the schmoozing. Mack Brown did that before for Texas and Charlie Strong doesn't like that part of the job. Meanwhile Deloss Dodds knew every AD in college sports already and Patterson doesn't have those connections.
08-13-2014 08:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.