Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
Author Message
Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,979
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 182
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-16-2016 05:23 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 05:12 PM)westwolf Wrote:  Uconn is not wanted by any P5 conference.

I understand what you are getting at, but the correct statement may be UConn, right now, is not wanted by any P5 conference -- but is at the top of the list for these conferences if openings arise.

That's fair.

The only two possibilities that I really see is the Big Ten and the ACC. And I don't see UConn getting in on their own, only as a 16th.

Now who would the Big Ten or ACC add that would require a 16th? That's an entirely different debate.
10-17-2016 09:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
allthatyoucantleavebehind Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 942
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Penn State
Location:
Post: #42
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-17-2016 05:07 AM)bearcat_df Wrote:  I think it is time to talk about conference consolidation. I'm not sure any of the P4 have a compelling reason to expand. TX and OU might find landings. I used to think it would be either 5 conferences of 14 (70 teams) or 4 conferences of 16 (64 teams). There are now 64 teams (Big 10 - 14, SEC - 14, ACC - 14/ND, PAC - 12, BIG 12 - 10). It could be that they consolidate to 56 or 54. During the BCS era they were at 65 and the big programs were upset that the UCs of the world were getting bowl spots . . .

Exactly. Carving up the Big 12 is the easiest, best way for this to happen. However, since college athletics has no "commissioner's office" to do this, it's every man for himself.

Unfortunately for the Big 12, all 10 schools are not currently desirable.
10-17-2016 11:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
allthatyoucantleavebehind Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 942
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Penn State
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-17-2016 09:05 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 05:23 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 05:12 PM)westwolf Wrote:  Uconn is not wanted by any P5 conference.

I understand what you are getting at, but the correct statement may be UConn, right now, is not wanted by any P5 conference -- but is at the top of the list for these conferences if openings arise.

That's fair.

The only two possibilities that I really see is the Big Ten and the ACC. And I don't see UConn getting in on their own, only as a 16th.

Now who would the Big Ten or ACC add that would require a 16th? That's an entirely different debate.

I've stated my opinion on UT and OU...but if the Pac-12 could somehow pull off the coup of the century and steal the Texlahoma 4 (to be the Pac-16), then I could see the Big Ten taking Kansas. Missouri would be its desired partner with Kansas at that point, but if they couldn't dislodge Mizzou, then UConn would be a strong #16. The Big Ten would be waving the white flag for status as THE premier football conference at that point...but they'd be the best basketball conference hands-down.
10-17-2016 11:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
allthatyoucantleavebehind Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 942
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Penn State
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-16-2016 04:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  5. The SEC won't split money with schools that don't pay their own way and neither will the Big 10. At an estimated 43 million payout within a few years for the Big 10 you might not even be enamored with Kansas. The SEC will not take Oklahoma State and W.V.U. when we will be making 40 million. Neither bring enough to cover that. There are 5 schools that could earn the SEC more money and fit our culture more or less: Texas, Oklahoma, a North Carolina school, a Virginia school, and to a lesser extent Florida State. We might consider a school that gave us a larger % of DFW. Texas does that, Oklahoma does that, and maybe that's a reason to give T.C.U. a look.

If we don't land what we want and need we simply won't expand.

6. The PAC won't take leftovers either.

We are at an impasse because priorities aren't aligning. Waiting 8 years doesn't fix that.

I know you have a good feel for the math of expansion, JRSEC, but you forget that, in this scenario, there is no more Big 12. Some of that money, essentially, is now free for the TV networks to throw at the conferences who pick up the biggest pieces. The bolstering of conference ranks (the SEC at a robust 16, even with good/not great programs added) adds value to the league. Remember, TAMU and Missouri were NEVER seen as a home-run additions...but they added quality programs and upped the overall inventory (while devaluing the Big 12).

Most of the 30 million that Iowa State and Kansas State and TCU? TTECH? Baylor? each get currently from their Big 12 deal is going immediately elsewhere. Those unfortunate programs will dip down to the AAC/MtWest level (a few million a year?)

Yes, OU/UT/Kansas would demand the most of the 30 million each extra...but OkSt and WVU would see some of that too.
10-17-2016 11:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #45
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-17-2016 11:26 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 04:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  5. The SEC won't split money with schools that don't pay their own way and neither will the Big 10. At an estimated 43 million payout within a few years for the Big 10 you might not even be enamored with Kansas. The SEC will not take Oklahoma State and W.V.U. when we will be making 40 million. Neither bring enough to cover that. There are 5 schools that could earn the SEC more money and fit our culture more or less: Texas, Oklahoma, a North Carolina school, a Virginia school, and to a lesser extent Florida State. We might consider a school that gave us a larger % of DFW. Texas does that, Oklahoma does that, and maybe that's a reason to give T.C.U. a look.

If we don't land what we want and need we simply won't expand.

6. The PAC won't take leftovers either.

We are at an impasse because priorities aren't aligning. Waiting 8 years doesn't fix that.

I know you have a good feel for the math of expansion, JRSEC, but you forget that, in this scenario, there is no more Big 12. Some of that money, essentially, is now free for the TV networks to throw at the conferences who pick up the biggest pieces. The bolstering of conference ranks (the SEC at a robust 16, even with good/not great programs added) adds value to the league. Remember, TAMU and Missouri were NEVER seen as a home-run additions...but they added quality programs and upped the overall inventory (while devaluing the Big 12).

Most of the 30 million that Iowa State and Kansas State and TCU? TTECH? Baylor? each get currently from their Big 12 deal is going immediately elsewhere. Those unfortunate programs will dip down to the AAC/MtWest level (a few million a year?)

Yes, OU/UT/Kansas would demand the most of the 30 million each extra...but OkSt and WVU would see some of that too.

get a clue

how did A&M and MU devalue the Big 12 when the Big 12 had a contract with ESPN that was paying $60 million per year and due to end in 2015-16 and that was signed in 2008 when the Big 12 had a 12 teams including NU, MU, A&M and CU and played a CCG and then 4 or 5 months after TCU and WVU were added that contract was torn up 3 years early in Sept of 2012 and replaced with a contract paying almost $50 million per year more

and on top of that a month later the Big 12 signed a 12 year deal with ESPN and the Sugar Bowl to make $40 million two out of every three years to play the SEC SEC SEC that makes the same $40 million with 14 teams

if you are going to try and make a point at least try and not make it so easy to just end up looking clueless

and PS.....the SEC SEC SEC got NOTHING from CBS for adding MU and A&M and dual first name idiot travis clay is still butt hurt about that and there is ZERO evidence that ESPN ever gave them more money on the tier 2 deal that was in place.....the SECn SECn SECn was for third tier content that the teams had previously sold on their own it was not money for adding teams
10-17-2016 11:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
FrancisDrake Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,648
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 66
I Root For: Piecesof8
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-17-2016 08:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The networks are making it clear there aren't many programs out there that are worth the prices they are paying the power leagues.

Maybe, but I think its more to do with the networks knowing that television and viewer consumption is changing. They will not have bottomless pockets to doll out cash as they have had in the past. IMO its more to do with their means than G5s not being worth the money. The American pulls ratings far better than what they're currently paid.
10-17-2016 12:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
shizzle787 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,204
Joined: Oct 2015
Reputation: 101
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
I think New Mexico St. and UMass are in big trouble now. There is a rumor that the MW may expand by 2 and take some Texas schools from C-USA, but that would still leave the latter with 12 and no reason to expand.
10-17-2016 09:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,077
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3251
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
AAC may make another run at Boise.
10-17-2016 10:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #49
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-17-2016 10:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  AAC may make another run at Boise.

he put the ball on the T for you David State now velcro up your shoes and get in here and swing for the fences!
10-17-2016 11:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,962
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 656
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
There is an issue that the networks want. They want the best products in the Power conferences. Some of the schools that the Big 12 on the list of 11 was not what the networks want in the power conference. Some of the schools left off in the final list they do want like Boise State, Memphis and East Carolina. Those are dollar signs for the networks. I think some of the G5 schools will be taken off the table by the other 4 power conferences before the Big 12 can decide to expand. Houston would be taken by another conference like ACC or PAC 12?
10-18-2016 02:46 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
megadrone Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,306
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 46
I Root For: Rutgers
Location: NJ
Post: #51
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-17-2016 07:55 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 11:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 07:23 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 04:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. We won't know until tomorrow afternoon if the Big 12 is, or isn't expanding and we may not know then either.

2. Only Big 10 guys think Texas wants anything to do with the Big 10. They don't. A Texas to move to the Big 10 would be in state suicide in recruiting and they aren't going to give the Aggies that advantage.

3. There aren't that many Sooners hankering to be in the Big 10 either. Boron and some faculty would be about it. The Donors see other options as being a better fit.

4. Kansas would pick the Big 10 over other options.

5. The SEC won't split money with schools that don't pay their own way and neither will the Big 10. At an estimated 43 million payout within a few years for the Big 10 you might not even be enamored with Kansas. The SEC will not take Oklahoma State and W.V.U. when we will be making 40 million. Neither bring enough to cover that. There are 5 schools that could earn the SEC more money and fit our culture more or less: Texas, Oklahoma, a North Carolina school, a Virginia school, and to a lesser extent Florida State. We might consider a school that gave us a larger % of DFW. Texas does that, Oklahoma does that, and maybe that's a reason to give T.C.U. a look.

If we don't land what we want and need we simply won't expand.

6. The PAC won't take leftovers either.

We are at an impasse because priorities aren't aligning. Waiting 8 years doesn't fix that.

An impasse does not hurt the SEC. The SEC has everything they need as does the B1G and now the ACC. It's the other two P5 conferences that may need to make changes in order to keep up.
That discrepancy is what will drive the next round of realignment. The SEC and B1G would be most interested in content, while the ACC would be most interested in acquiring additional markets. The PAC needs both content and markets

X, I was referring to the impasse in the Big 12 specifically, and to realignment in general. I agree that the Big 10 and SEC are absolutely fine as we are. I also agree content is what we will seek, but in the case of both conferences academics will matter.

Where I disagree slightly is in what the ACC or PAC might pursue. The PAC will only pursue markets, but will prioritize Texas if they expand. The ACC will look for branding that lends credibility to its football without harming its basketball. Academics will remain a factor, but not the main one.

JR, looking at a map, Texas (the state) is the only location that comes close to the existing PAC footprint that has any concentration of population (market). So to get a marketing presence in Texas would be critical if the PAC were to expand. There are more eyeballs in Houston that in Iowa, Kansas and Oklahoma combined. I do agree that an Oklahoma school would help marketing in the DFW area.

The ACC is in a sticky situation. Our priorities are all sports programs (with help in football), markets and academics AND in the Eastern Time Zone.
Our ideal situation would be to ONLY add Notre Dame and stop at 15.
Our primary market need is DC/Philadelphia/Baltimore (the New York market is fool's gold). The best market plays are Cincinnati or Navy and they are both in the ETZ (without grabbing a school from the B1G or the SEC which would seem unlikely at this time).

And at that, Navy probably wouldn't want full membership -- they are happy in the Patriot League for their other sports.

I think the ACC is stronger with a Big 12 stagnation or explosion -- the biggest concern was that Clemson or FSU would bolt, but the GOR and the addition of Louisville strengthens the conference.
10-18-2016 08:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bluesox Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,295
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 84
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
Big 10- no moves
Sec- no moves
PAC 12- possible Houston and x. X could be New Mexico
Acc- possible uconn or cincy with a nd type deal. Longshot would be byu football only to pair with nd

Most likely everybody waits to possibly feast on the big 12
(This post was last modified: 10-18-2016 09:19 AM by bluesox.)
10-18-2016 09:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
allthatyoucantleavebehind Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 942
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Penn State
Location:
Post: #53
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-18-2016 02:46 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  There is an issue that the networks want. They want the best products in the Power conferences. Some of the schools that the Big 12 on the list of 11 was not what the networks want in the power conference. Some of the schools left off in the final list they do want like Boise State, Memphis and East Carolina. Those are dollar signs for the networks. I think some of the G5 schools will be taken off the table by the other 4 power conferences before the Big 12 can decide to expand. Houston would be taken by another conference like ACC or PAC 12?

There is a reason that Houston/BYU/Cincy and others are not in a P5 conference now. I'm not a total hater. They are strong programs all. But I don't think anyone else will be expanding until the fate of the Big 12 is clear. Everyone would "technically" want UT. Many would be intrigued by OU and Kansas scenarios.

I don't think expansion is done...but no one is filling out dance cards (with fillers like UH/BYU/Cincy) until the belles of the ball are unavailable. :(
10-18-2016 09:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MikeRo72 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 80
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 4
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #54
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
Power 4 people.

Power 5 is dead, and by extention B12 will soon be dead. Once the current agreement runs-out (6 years? Can anyone confirm?) The B12 conference is going to get cannibalized by the P4.

I keep hearing that there is mutual interest between OU and PAC. But in order for PAC to land OU they will have to take OSU as well.

KU will have a decision to make, B10 or ACC.

Texas wil be the big prize, Im sure everyone will make a pitch to land them.

TCU, TTech, Baylor, KSU, ISU, WVU will be looking for landing spots.

Honestly, I cant see any conference wanting to add Baylor, TTech, KSU, nor ISU. Unless of course other instate schools lobby for them.
10-18-2016 10:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
loki_the_bubba Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,690
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 701
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-18-2016 09:17 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Big 10- no moves
Sec- no moves
PAC 12- possible Houston and x. X could be New Mexico
Acc- possible uconn or cincy with a nd type deal. Longshot would be byu football only to pair with nd

Most likely everybody waits to possibly feast on the big 12

I have never heard any plausible reason for the PAC to want Houston.
10-18-2016 10:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,845
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 885
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #56
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-18-2016 08:43 AM)megadrone Wrote:  
(10-17-2016 07:55 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 11:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 07:23 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(10-16-2016 04:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. We won't know until tomorrow afternoon if the Big 12 is, or isn't expanding and we may not know then either.

2. Only Big 10 guys think Texas wants anything to do with the Big 10. They don't. A Texas to move to the Big 10 would be in state suicide in recruiting and they aren't going to give the Aggies that advantage.

3. There aren't that many Sooners hankering to be in the Big 10 either. Boron and some faculty would be about it. The Donors see other options as being a better fit.

4. Kansas would pick the Big 10 over other options.

5. The SEC won't split money with schools that don't pay their own way and neither will the Big 10. At an estimated 43 million payout within a few years for the Big 10 you might not even be enamored with Kansas. The SEC will not take Oklahoma State and W.V.U. when we will be making 40 million. Neither bring enough to cover that. There are 5 schools that could earn the SEC more money and fit our culture more or less: Texas, Oklahoma, a North Carolina school, a Virginia school, and to a lesser extent Florida State. We might consider a school that gave us a larger % of DFW. Texas does that, Oklahoma does that, and maybe that's a reason to give T.C.U. a look.

If we don't land what we want and need we simply won't expand.

6. The PAC won't take leftovers either.

We are at an impasse because priorities aren't aligning. Waiting 8 years doesn't fix that.

An impasse does not hurt the SEC. The SEC has everything they need as does the B1G and now the ACC. It's the other two P5 conferences that may need to make changes in order to keep up.
That discrepancy is what will drive the next round of realignment. The SEC and B1G would be most interested in content, while the ACC would be most interested in acquiring additional markets. The PAC needs both content and markets

X, I was referring to the impasse in the Big 12 specifically, and to realignment in general. I agree that the Big 10 and SEC are absolutely fine as we are. I also agree content is what we will seek, but in the case of both conferences academics will matter.

Where I disagree slightly is in what the ACC or PAC might pursue. The PAC will only pursue markets, but will prioritize Texas if they expand. The ACC will look for branding that lends credibility to its football without harming its basketball. Academics will remain a factor, but not the main one.

JR, looking at a map, Texas (the state) is the only location that comes close to the existing PAC footprint that has any concentration of population (market). So to get a marketing presence in Texas would be critical if the PAC were to expand. There are more eyeballs in Houston that in Iowa, Kansas and Oklahoma combined. I do agree that an Oklahoma school would help marketing in the DFW area.

The ACC is in a sticky situation. Our priorities are all sports programs (with help in football), markets and academics AND in the Eastern Time Zone.
Our ideal situation would be to ONLY add Notre Dame and stop at 15.
Our primary market need is DC/Philadelphia/Baltimore (the New York market is fool's gold). The best market plays are Cincinnati or Navy and they are both in the ETZ (without grabbing a school from the B1G or the SEC which would seem unlikely at this time).

And at that, Navy probably wouldn't want full membership -- they are happy in the Patriot League for their other sports.

I think the ACC is stronger with a Big 12 stagnation or explosion -- the biggest concern was that Clemson or FSU would bolt, but the GOR and the addition of Louisville strengthens the conference.

ND is unlikely to join the ACC in football. But, if it did, it may push for Navy/Georgetown instead of UConn.
(This post was last modified: 10-18-2016 10:49 AM by TerryD.)
10-18-2016 10:48 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,289
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1205
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #57
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-18-2016 09:17 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Big 10- no moves
Sec- no moves
PAC 12- possible Houston and x. X could be New Mexico
Acc- possible uconn or cincy with a nd type deal. Longshot would be byu football only to pair with nd

Most likely everybody waits to possibly feast on the big 12

B1G - no moves
SEC - no moves
PAC - no moves
ACC - no moves
B12 - no moves

I think that about covers it.
10-18-2016 10:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
ACC adds WV 05-stirthepot
(This post was last modified: 10-18-2016 10:55 AM by MplsBison.)
10-18-2016 10:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BigEastHomer Offline
Banned

Posts: 11,730
Joined: Oct 2011
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #59
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-18-2016 10:54 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(10-18-2016 09:17 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Big 10- no moves
Sec- no moves
PAC 12- possible Houston and x. X could be New Mexico
Acc- possible uconn or cincy with a nd type deal. Longshot would be byu football only to pair with nd

Most likely everybody waits to possibly feast on the big 12

B1G - no moves
SEC - no moves
PAC - no moves
ACC - no moves
B12 - no moves

I think that about covers it.

I think that's short-sighted...

Considering the three conferences on the Eastern half of the US (B1G, ACC, SEC) average over 14 members, while the two that point toward the Western half (Pac 12 and Big 12) average 11 members, there is a likelihood that we'll see growth in the West.

For many reasons.. Competitive balance being the most obvious.
10-18-2016 11:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,289
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1205
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #60
RE: Realignment Future (now that Big 12 not expanding)
(10-18-2016 11:08 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  
(10-18-2016 10:54 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(10-18-2016 09:17 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Big 10- no moves
Sec- no moves
PAC 12- possible Houston and x. X could be New Mexico
Acc- possible uconn or cincy with a nd type deal. Longshot would be byu football only to pair with nd

Most likely everybody waits to possibly feast on the big 12

B1G - no moves
SEC - no moves
PAC - no moves
ACC - no moves
B12 - no moves

I think that about covers it.

I think that's short-sighted...

Considering the three conferences on the Eastern half of the US (B1G, ACC, SEC) average over 14 members, while the two that point toward the Western half (Pac 12 and Big 12) average 11 members, there is a likelihood that we'll see growth in the West.

For many reasons.. Competitive balance being the most obvious.

Other than an irrational desire for symmetry, there is only one compelling reason for change in the two western conferences. That would be the PAC's interest in expanding the number of eyeballs in its marginally viable network. Texas and Oklahoma would accomplish that, but I don't believe either of them want to play their conference games in the Mountain and Pacific time zones. Thus, the status quo.
10-18-2016 11:54 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.