(08-08-2023 02:10 PM)Engblazr Wrote:  https://www.al.com/uab/2023/08/goodman-h...utType=amp

Y’all heard it here first, UAB to Big 10.




(this is sarcasm but I know this fragile bunch….)

If you make it to the B1G, put in a good word for us.

(08-08-2023 11:37 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 08:25 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 06:03 AM)ATXUTSAGRAD Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 03:44 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 01:42 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  where is any evidence at all that the AAC has a "renegotiation clause" in their contract

and why would ESPN want to pay ($5.5 million X 8) + ($4 million X 6) + ($12.5 million X 2) = $93 million to get WSU and Oregon State into the AAC

even if there is a renegotiation clause in the AAC contract which seems unlikely ESPN just got through "renegotiation" with the AAC to pay zero dollars a year to split the money they were going to pay 3 members between 4 new members and to add two years to an already extremely long contract

that does not seem like the type of "leverage" or value on the part of the AAC that makes them suddenly get $5.5 million each n new money for 8 long term members, $4 million each for the 4 new half share members and $12.5 million for each of two new members

that at best sounds like something ESPN might say "here is $14 to $25 million you guys figure out how to split it up between the 16 of you if you want Oregon State and WSU to join"......which I don't think they would really look to be doing that

There is a league composition clause in the contract, which allows review by ESPN if teams leave or are added. It kicked in when UH, Cincy, and UCF left and the C-USA 6 were added. There was no change in dollars. If OSU and WSU are added, I doubt there is a big bump in dollars, as those schools don't bring much in the way of eyeballs. Maybe there is value in acquiring the PAC 12 name. Have a hard time believing there would be any 'autonomy' associated with it.

I don’t see us maintaining the autonomy the Pac 12 has, but keep in mind there would no longer be a fifth “p5” conference after this year, and the playoff structure likely changing to 5 +7. I assume ESPN would pay to regain west coast time slots and hedging their bet trying to ensure or establish a clear fifth conference.

+ two more of SDSU/Boise/airforce/Fresno. That would be a competitive conference. Would get regular CFP payouts.

the whole meaning of autonomy is "autonomy" conferences getting two votes on NCAA business while G conferences get one

as of now you have 10 autonomy votes vs 5 G votes

if the PAC was to lose autonomy then it would be 8 autonomy votes vs 6 G votes

do you think the autonomy conferences are interested in having only two votes difference between them and the G conferences?....I don't

do you think that the 4 PAC members want to jump in with all of the AAC members and then have all that as an autonomy conference (if they even could)....I don't......do you think the other autonomy conferences want that....I don't

do you think the PAC schools would rather hand pick their new members and almost certainly keep their autonomy with those hand picked members?....I do

do you think the other autonomy conferences would be much more comfortable with a PAC formed like that that still has autonomy?.....I do

that vs getting the votes to 8-6 or getting an 18 team "spac" merged AAC into the PAC that keeps their autonomy

I think the other autonomy conferences prefer a PAC that is hand picked that keeps autonomy and I think the PAC schools prefer that too

Voting is not the sole autonomy advantage. They vote themselves giant shares of the CFP money, independent of who actually gets in, and with the 12 team playoff looming. that will be insane money now.

The tricky thing about autonomy is nobody really anticipated an A5 conference collapsing, and there is no mechanism in place to deal with it or vote them out, since the NCAA office created it to keep the P5 conferences from breaking away.

And moving to the new CFP contract in 2 years has nothing to do with which conferences are autonomous or not, b/c A5 status is not really tied into the contract. It's a separate process.

Will be interesting to see how this is handled if the remaining Pac-4 teams decide to rebuild.

the NCAA did not create the autonomy it was voted on by the member conferences of the NCAA.....the NCAA does not create things their members do....just like a conference does not create things the members do

in addition the NCAA has nothing at all to do with the football playoffs and never has......having two votes in NCAA business is not why P5 teams get $80 million each from the football playoffs while the G5 conferences split $100 million between all five and then ND gets a share and the other independents get a smaller share

the reason the P5 conferences get a larger share of the playoff money is because those conferences owned the bowl games that made the playoffs possible

The PAC 12 and Big 10 owned the Rose Bowl

the SWC then the Big 12 owns the Cotton Bowl

The SEC SEC SEC owns the Sugar Bowl

The Big East had a strong tie to the Orange Bowl, but did not own it and then when the BE fell apart the ACC took over that tie to the bowl

all of those bowl games made the conferences that owned them lost of money so it was in the best interest of those conferences all throughout the pre-playoff era to keep things as they were because media companies and ticket sales made a lot of money

it was only when media companies made a financial offer that proved more appealing and lucrative to all the conferences that owned those bowl games that those conferences decided to depart from the system where the various conference winners went to those specific bowls no matter what and then bid for opponents to play against them (except for the Rose that had two conferences)

so make that deal happen the conferences that had those bowls needed to be compensated or it did not make sense.....so at first they all agreed that whatever conference had the two two teams would give them up to play in a rotation of sites to be the single championship game

then it was expanded from there....but the conferences still own those bowl games and even with the last round of expansion the Rose Bowl was the last hold out to sign to agree to the 12 team expansion because they wanted protections for the dates and times the Rose Bowl would be played when it was not hosting a playoff game (and this was not THE actual Rose Bowl Game)

once that was secured expansion happened

most of the above took place WELL before the P5 conferences had the two votes in NCAA business and again the NCAA has nothing to do with the playoffs at all because it was formed from the conferences that had the very lucrative bowl games agreeing to a "coalition" The BCS (Bowl Coalition) happened in 1992 the NCAA autonomy happened in 2015

and with the expanded playoffs there will be more money, but it is all but certain that the P5 conferences will still take a much larger %

and that extra money will help a conference like the PAC have a financial advantage to lure teams away from ones that are G5

as it is not with $80 million to a P5 and $100 million / G5 if you normalize for a 10 team conference that is a difference of $6 million per year per member

I would imagine that will grow to a $9 or $10 million differential with the new money coming in

Autonomy was voted on by the NCAA Board of Directors 16-2. That's what I meant, as opposed to the 5 conferences bestowing autonomy on themselves, which is what a lot of people seem to think.

Which was started by the idea that the other 4 can just vote the Pac 4 out. They cannot. The entire NCAA board has to do it, which represents all conferences. I just called it the NCAA, as opposed to saying NCAA Board of Directors repping all conferences.

Quote:On Thursday, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors voted 16-2 in favor of a new governance model that would give the so-called power-five conferences—the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC—an unprecedented level of legislative autonomy.

NCAA President Mark Emmert expressed his satisfaction with the vote in a statement:

I am immensely proud of the work done by the membership. The new governance model represents a compromise on all sides that will better serve our members and, most importantly, our student-athletes. These changes will help all our schools better support the young people who come to college to play sports while earning a degree.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2155...0autonomy.

(08-08-2023 12:37 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  With Cal and Stanford possibly going to the ACC, there's no great benefit of going to the Pac 2 anymore.

Offer Wash St and Oregon St a better deal than the MWC can offer. Maybe 10-12M in TV money and a 15M total annual payout, which could include travel payments for non revenue sports.

Once that is done, get Boise and SDSU to come over to the American. Get ESPN to give them equal shares which are larger than what they get in MWC. 18 team AAC with 4 western teams.

If necessary, do this under the PAC banner to maintain their autonomy status and tie ins.

This! Probably Aresco's primary plan because he knows that Stanford and Cal ain't gonna rub elbows with us unwashed heathens.

The exact strategy to build a West Division. You get OSU and WSU and then go after Boise, SDSU, Air Force and Fresno or some combo therein.

(08-08-2023 04:35 PM)RockyMTNTiger Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 12:37 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  With Cal and Stanford possibly going to the ACC, there's no great benefit of going to the Pac 2 anymore.

Offer Wash St and Oregon St a better deal than the MWC can offer. Maybe 10-12M in TV money and a 15M total annual payout, which could include travel payments for non revenue sports.

Once that is done, get Boise and SDSU to come over to the American. Get ESPN to give them equal shares which are larger than what they get in MWC. 18 team AAC with 4 western teams.

If necessary, do this under the PAC banner to maintain their autonomy status and tie ins.

This! Probably Aresco's primary plan because he knows that Stanford and Cal ain't gonna rub elbows with us unwashed heathens.

The exact strategy to build a West Division. You get OSU and WSU and then go after Boise, SDSU, Air Force and Fresno or some combo therein.

I hope this is the plan and it comes to fruition, especially if CalStan and SMU find a way into the ACC.

(08-08-2023 04:35 PM)RockyMTNTiger Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 12:37 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  With Cal and Stanford possibly going to the ACC, there's no great benefit of going to the Pac 2 anymore.

Offer Wash St and Oregon St a better deal than the MWC can offer. Maybe 10-12M in TV money and a 15M total annual payout, which could include travel payments for non revenue sports.

Once that is done, get Boise and SDSU to come over to the American. Get ESPN to give them equal shares which are larger than what they get in MWC. 18 team AAC with 4 western teams.

If necessary, do this under the PAC banner to maintain their autonomy status and tie ins.

This! Probably Aresco's primary plan because he knows that Stanford and Cal ain't gonna rub elbows with us unwashed heathens.

The exact strategy to build a West Division. You get OSU and WSU and then go after Boise, SDSU, Air Force and Fresno or some combo therein.

The plan resolves the exit issue for the MWC. The AAC can wait for Boise AF, and SDSU. From a performance perspective, the “best of the rest” is a necessity. I hope the money will suffice.

(08-08-2023 04:44 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 04:35 PM)RockyMTNTiger Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 12:37 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  With Cal and Stanford possibly going to the ACC, there's no great benefit of going to the Pac 2 anymore.

Offer Wash St and Oregon St a better deal than the MWC can offer. Maybe 10-12M in TV money and a 15M total annual payout, which could include travel payments for non revenue sports.

Once that is done, get Boise and SDSU to come over to the American. Get ESPN to give them equal shares which are larger than what they get in MWC. 18 team AAC with 4 western teams.

If necessary, do this under the PAC banner to maintain their autonomy status and tie ins.

This! Probably Aresco's primary plan because he knows that Stanford and Cal ain't gonna rub elbows with us unwashed heathens.

The exact strategy to build a West Division. You get OSU and WSU and then go after Boise, SDSU, Air Force and Fresno or some combo therein.

The plan resolves the exit issue for the MWC. The AAC can wait for Boise AF, and SDSU. From a performance perspective, the “best of the rest” is a necessity. I hope the money will suffice.

I am anxious to see how things will play out with the ACC and SMU. My view is and has always been that they are replaceable; this is not a slight towards them at all as they are a "brand" but at the same time, they don't have much of a fanbase and a smallish potential to grow one. This is an issue many private schools have, particularly the smaller ones.

I've always liked them and would immediately start rooting for them in the ACC. With that said, we should do the following:

(1) Pull out all stops to add Washington State and Oregon State, even if it's for football-only.
(2) Replace SMU with Texas State. Yes, Texas State. They have shown that they will have good attendance when playing other schools in the state and their location suits the conference. They also have a large enrollment in excess of 33K. They can increase their fanbase, likely very quickly.
(3) When the MWC media deal is being renegotiated, let WSU and OSU make their picks. I would think that they would want the best of the MWC which would be Boise State, Fresno State, SDSU (if they are still around) UNLV, Colorado State and Air Force.

22 members, all sports, all play is kept as regional as possible. The best from the western half and the best from the eastern half meet each year for the football championship. SDSU, Memphis, Colorado State, North Texas, UAB and Utah State can host the basketball tournaments (we should absolutely have the men's and women's at the same venue going on at the same time each year)... and only the top 16 basketball teams make it in (the rest can have a seperate tournament).

Baseball's championship can be at ECU, Tulane, Oregon State, Wichita State or Fresno State. Like baseball, softball would be held at the same location during the same time.

Let's get creative; that's all I'm saying.

(08-08-2023 09:00 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 04:44 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 04:35 PM)RockyMTNTiger Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 12:37 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  With Cal and Stanford possibly going to the ACC, there's no great benefit of going to the Pac 2 anymore.

Offer Wash St and Oregon St a better deal than the MWC can offer. Maybe 10-12M in TV money and a 15M total annual payout, which could include travel payments for non revenue sports.

Once that is done, get Boise and SDSU to come over to the American. Get ESPN to give them equal shares which are larger than what they get in MWC. 18 team AAC with 4 western teams.

If necessary, do this under the PAC banner to maintain their autonomy status and tie ins.

This! Probably Aresco's primary plan because he knows that Stanford and Cal ain't gonna rub elbows with us unwashed heathens.

The exact strategy to build a West Division. You get OSU and WSU and then go after Boise, SDSU, Air Force and Fresno or some combo therein.

The plan resolves the exit issue for the MWC. The AAC can wait for Boise AF, and SDSU. From a performance perspective, the “best of the rest” is a necessity. I hope the money will suffice.

I am anxious to see how things will play out with the ACC and SMU. My view is and has always been that they are replaceable; this is not a slight towards them at all as they are a "brand" but at the same time, they don't have much of a fanbase and a smallish potential to grow one. This is an issue many private schools have, particularly the smaller ones.

I've always liked them and would immediately start rooting for them in the ACC. With that said, we should do the following:

(1) Pull out all stops to add Washington State and Oregon State, even if it's for football-only.
(2) Replace SMU with Texas State. Yes, Texas State. They have shown that they will have good attendance when playing other schools in the state and their location suits the conference. They also have a large enrollment in excess of 33K. They can increase their fanbase, likely very quickly.
(3) When the MWC media deal is being renegotiated, let WSU and OSU make their picks. I would think that they would want the best of the MWC which would be Boise State, Fresno State, SDSU (if they are still around) UNLV, Colorado State and Air Force.

22 members, all sports, all play is kept as regional as possible. The best from the western half and the best from the eastern half meet each year for the football championship. SDSU, Memphis, Colorado State, North Texas, UAB and Utah State can host the basketball tournaments (we should absolutely have the men's and women's at the same venue going on at the same time each year)... and only the top 16 basketball teams make it in (the rest can have a seperate tournament).

Baseball's championship can be at ECU, Tulane, Oregon State, Wichita State or Fresno State. Like baseball, softball would be held at the same location during the same time.

Let's get creative; that's all I'm saying.

I think what's important that's not being discussed is the AAC needs a win. The AAC backfilled with teams that have a market.

Not trying to disparage any of them, but we need some teams that can get it done on the field.

UTSA has done a great job the last two years. Fans don't care about the size of your market. They care about what you're doing on the field.

Is Tuscaloosa a market? Stillwater OK? Ames Iowa? Manhattan KS? Madison WS (where I live now)? South Bend IN? I could go on forever.

TV executives are typical corporate people. They want want to keep their jobs. Who's going to fire someone taking Houston TX today? Nobody.

The #1 attendance in the AAC is a team from Greenville North Carolina. Are they as big as Houston Texas?

Fans don't give a **** about which school has the most endowments. They care about what they do on the field.

I'll leave it that. We need a win. We went backwards and we need to right the ship. Betting on futures is not the answer. We need either brands or proven winners to get this conference turned around.

(08-08-2023 10:06 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  UTSA has done a great job the last two years. Fans don't care about the size of your market. They care about what you're doing on the field.

Is Tuscaloosa a market? Stillwater OK? Ames Iowa? Manhattan KS? Madison WS (where I live now)? South Bend IN? I could go on forever.

Advertisers care very much about the size of markets. When a program has a national brand, it transcends the local market.

(08-08-2023 09:00 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 04:44 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 04:35 PM)RockyMTNTiger Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 12:37 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  With Cal and Stanford possibly going to the ACC, there's no great benefit of going to the Pac 2 anymore.

Offer Wash St and Oregon St a better deal than the MWC can offer. Maybe 10-12M in TV money and a 15M total annual payout, which could include travel payments for non revenue sports.

Once that is done, get Boise and SDSU to come over to the American. Get ESPN to give them equal shares which are larger than what they get in MWC. 18 team AAC with 4 western teams.

If necessary, do this under the PAC banner to maintain their autonomy status and tie ins.

This! Probably Aresco's primary plan because he knows that Stanford and Cal ain't gonna rub elbows with us unwashed heathens.

The exact strategy to build a West Division. You get OSU and WSU and then go after Boise, SDSU, Air Force and Fresno or some combo therein.

The plan resolves the exit issue for the MWC. The AAC can wait for Boise AF, and SDSU. From a performance perspective, the “best of the rest” is a necessity. I hope the money will suffice.

I am anxious to see how things will play out with the ACC and SMU. My view is and has always been that they are replaceable; this is not a slight towards them at all as they are a "brand" but at the same time, they don't have much of a fanbase and a smallish potential to grow one. This is an issue many private schools have, particularly the smaller ones.

I've always liked them and would immediately start rooting for them in the ACC. With that said, we should do the following:

(1) Pull out all stops to add Washington State and Oregon State, even if it's for football-only.
(2) Replace SMU with Texas State. Yes, Texas State. They have shown that they will have good attendance when playing other schools in the state and their location suits the conference. They also have a large enrollment in excess of 33K. They can increase their fanbase, likely very quickly.
(3) When the MWC media deal is being renegotiated, let WSU and OSU make their picks. I would think that they would want the best of the MWC which would be Boise State, Fresno State, SDSU (if they are still around) UNLV, Colorado State and Air Force.

22 members, all sports, all play is kept as regional as possible. The best from the western half and the best from the eastern half meet each year for the football championship. SDSU, Memphis, Colorado State, North Texas, UAB and Utah State can host the basketball tournaments (we should absolutely have the men's and women's at the same venue going on at the same time each year)... and only the top 16 basketball teams make it in (the rest can have a seperate tournament).

Baseball's championship can be at ECU, Tulane, Oregon State, Wichita State or Fresno State. Like baseball, softball would be held at the same location during the same time.

Let's get creative; that's all I'm saying.

And it right there - great timing and ripe for picking. All it needs is the right leader to step up with the right bold vision - a meeting of the minds - and the backing of ESPN. Come on Aresco - make it happen! A truly new coast-to-coast conference comprised of the Best of the Rest. It's not just the best idea - its the only way the rest of us stay relevant in a college football world with the deck stacked against us.

(08-08-2023 10:16 PM)msu35 Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 10:06 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  UTSA has done a great job the last two years. Fans don't care about the size of your market. They care about what you're doing on the field.

Is Tuscaloosa a market? Stillwater OK? Ames Iowa? Manhattan KS? Madison WS (where I live now)? South Bend IN? I could go on forever.

Advertisers care very much about the size of markets. When a program has a national brand, it transcends the local market.

My point exactly. My Marketing degree has come in handy afterall.

Size of markets are important. Nobody disputes that. But it's lazy to use that as the determining factor.

Memphis outdrew Houston pre pandemic. Easily. Saw a report that only 3-4 % of the state of Texas are Houston fans.

You can't just look at the overall population of a city. Market analysis's are more important. Why aren't any of the Chicago metro schools in the conversation? Why aren't you hearing more about Temple? They're 58-54 in the AAC. 6 games ahead of SMU. Excellent academics.

How many other programs are you competing with in your city? Do you corner the market? Pro teams in your market? There's many factors. City population is a baseline. That's all.

(08-08-2023 11:02 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 10:16 PM)msu35 Wrote:  Advertisers care very much about the size of markets. When a program has a national brand, it transcends the local market.

My point exactly. My Marketing degree has come in handy afterall.

Size of markets are important. Nobody disputes that. But it's lazy to use that as the determining factor.

Memphis outdrew Houston pre pandemic. Easily. Saw a report that only 3-4 % of the state of Texas are Houston fans.

You can't just look at the overall population of a city. Market analysis's are more important. Why aren't any of the Chicago metro schools in the conversation? Why aren't you hearing more about Temple? They're 58-54 in the AAC. 9 games ahead of SMU. Excellent academics.

How many other programs are you competing with in your city? Do you corner the market? Pro teams in your market? There's many factors. City population is a baseline. That's all.

I agree that it's a lazy metric and crude on the surface. Comparing Memphis to New Orleans, for example, I feel we have the advantage evaluating our program against Tulane. Unfortunately, it seems the media power players don't care to take that into consideration.

One of the digs people love to take against Memphis is the perception of our school being dirty with regards to NCAA violations or vacated achievements. I find this interesting when SMU received the NCAA death penalty. Of course it doesn't fit the current narrative, so it gets glossed over, not even mentioned in the realignment conversation.

(08-08-2023 11:14 PM)msu35 Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 11:02 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 10:16 PM)msu35 Wrote:  Advertisers care very much about the size of markets. When a program has a national brand, it transcends the local market.

My point exactly. My Marketing degree has come in handy afterall.

Size of markets are important. Nobody disputes that. But it's lazy to use that as the determining factor.

Memphis outdrew Houston pre pandemic. Easily. Saw a report that only 3-4 % of the state of Texas are Houston fans.

You can't just look at the overall population of a city. Market analysis's are more important. Why aren't any of the Chicago metro schools in the conversation? Why aren't you hearing more about Temple? They're 58-54 in the AAC. 9 games ahead of SMU. Excellent academics.

How many other programs are you competing with in your city? Do you corner the market? Pro teams in your market? There's many factors. City population is a baseline. That's all.

I agree that it's a lazy metric and crude on the surface. Comparing Memphis to New Orleans, for example, I feel we have the advantage evaluating our program against Tulane. Unfortunately, it seems the media power players don't care to take that into consideration.

One of the digs people love to take against Memphis is the perception of our school being dirty with regards to NCAA violations or vacated achievements. I find this interesting when SMU received the NCAA death penalty. Of course it doesn't fit the current narrative, so it gets glossed over, not even mentioned in the realignment conversation.

Ok...You're coming back around. If that's the case with Memphis, then why isn't anyone talking about SMU getting the death penalty?

You think we're dealing with honest people in all of this? How many times has the NCAA protected their love children? Arizona was investigated by the FBI, nothing happened.

Memphis was told Wiseman was good to go, then 3 days before the season started he might not be eligible. We don't play by the same rules. The Sacred Cows never get punished. You haven't figured that out yet?

Stand by your school. Nobody else is going to.

(08-08-2023 11:45 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 11:14 PM)msu35 Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 11:02 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 10:16 PM)msu35 Wrote:  Advertisers care very much about the size of markets. When a program has a national brand, it transcends the local market.

My point exactly. My Marketing degree has come in handy afterall.

Size of markets are important. Nobody disputes that. But it's lazy to use that as the determining factor.

Memphis outdrew Houston pre pandemic. Easily. Saw a report that only 3-4 % of the state of Texas are Houston fans.

You can't just look at the overall population of a city. Market analysis's are more important. Why aren't any of the Chicago metro schools in the conversation? Why aren't you hearing more about Temple? They're 58-54 in the AAC. 9 games ahead of SMU. Excellent academics.

How many other programs are you competing with in your city? Do you corner the market? Pro teams in your market? There's many factors. City population is a baseline. That's all.

I agree that it's a lazy metric and crude on the surface. Comparing Memphis to New Orleans, for example, I feel we have the advantage evaluating our program against Tulane. Unfortunately, it seems the media power players don't care to take that into consideration.

One of the digs people love to take against Memphis is the perception of our school being dirty with regards to NCAA violations or vacated achievements. I find this interesting when SMU received the NCAA death penalty. Of course it doesn't fit the current narrative, so it gets glossed over, not even mentioned in the realignment conversation.

Ok...You're coming back around. If that's the case with Memphis, then why isn't anyone talking about SMU getting the death penalty?

You think we're dealing with honest people in all of this? How many times has the NCAA protected their love children? Arizona was investigated by the FBI, nothing happened.

Memphis was told Wiseman was good to go, then 3 days before the season started he might not be eligible. We don't play by the same rules. The Sacred Cows never get punished. You haven't figured that out yet?

Stand by your school. Nobody else is going to.

It's not about me being in or out. I've always been in. I genuinely try to be objective, striving to see things without emotion or bias, to better understand what's really going into the sausage. Yes, it can be very frustrating, and it often seems unfair, especially when it comes to the favored programs. Hell, Miller from Alabama delivered a murder weapon and never even missed a beat. Trust me, I see it.

If there is one thing no one can say about me is that I don't love the Tigers and that I don't stand by my school. No matter what, even if we never upgrade to a power conference and we find ourselves perpetually at the kiddie table, my loyalty will never waver. I'm a lifelong Tiger and will support the school for as long as I'm able.

The Newbs will like this. Very complimentary and I learned a lot. One mans opinion, but...

About the 10:45 mark.