(04-06-2022 08:19 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  when will the madness stop?

With two conferences and lots of leftovers.

I just can't believe any one is taking these tweets seriously. This guy hasn't been right yet.

I don't see this, especially not for anything but football. But if it somehow happened for football it would be the 4 Cal schools, Washington, and Big Ten begrudgingly accepting Oregon's academics.

(04-07-2022 12:00 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(04-06-2022 08:49 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(04-06-2022 08:19 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  when will the madness stop?

When big wigs decide football is not worth all these headaches

Gaucho, Do you subscribe to Jon Wilner’s Mercury News?

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/
I have access to Wilner's article. The essence of the article is talent acquisition in the NIL era. Below are some excerpts:

"As it wades across the most turbulent era in the history of college athletics, the Pac-12 is drifting ever closer to an existential crisis.
It has nothing to do with conference realignment — with poaching by the Big Ten or SEC — and everything to do with talent acquisition.
Because after eight months of NIL, the so-called donor collectives (or consortiums) have emerged as the prime movers in the marketplace — the fundamental drivers of recruiting."

"Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?"
“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

How do they work? Typically, a group of donors or local business leaders will pool their resources and offer compensation to players for promotional opportunities that take little effort but pay well.
For example, the ‘Horns With a Heart’ program reportedly will pay each Texas offensive lineman $50,000 to support charitable causes. The founders are UT alumni and supporters.

"And to be clear: Some donor collectives are entirely legitimate, offering local business opportunities that clear a high ethical threshold.
Other collectives are merely fronts for pay-for-play.
Guess which are more popular with recruits?
“The Pac-12 has always thought it’s above that stuff, that it doesn’t need to step down into the dirt,” a conference source said. “You know, ‘We’re the Conference of Champions’ stuff.”
Some presidents and chancellors “feel like there are other uses for donor money” and “are ambivalent” about plunging into the world of donor collectives, another source said."

(04-07-2022 04:17 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 12:00 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(04-06-2022 08:49 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(04-06-2022 08:19 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  when will the madness stop?

When big wigs decide football is not worth all these headaches

Gaucho, Do you subscribe to Jon Wilner’s Mercury News?

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/
I have access to Wilner's article. The essence of the article is talent acquisition in the NIL era. Below are some excerpts:

"As it wades across the most turbulent era in the history of college athletics, the Pac-12 is drifting ever closer to an existential crisis.
It has nothing to do with conference realignment — with poaching by the Big Ten or SEC — and everything to do with talent acquisition.
Because after eight months of NIL, the so-called donor collectives (or consortiums) have emerged as the prime movers in the marketplace — the fundamental drivers of recruiting."

"Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?"
“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

How do they work? Typically, a group of donors or local business leaders will pool their resources and offer compensation to players for promotional opportunities that take little effort but pay well.
For example, the ‘Horns With a Heart’ program reportedly will pay each Texas offensive lineman $50,000 to support charitable causes. The founders are UT alumni and supporters.

"And to be clear: Some donor collectives are entirely legitimate, offering local business opportunities that clear a high ethical threshold.
Other collectives are merely fronts for pay-for-play.
Guess which are more popular with recruits?
“The Pac-12 has always thought it’s above that stuff, that it doesn’t need to step down into the dirt,” a conference source said. “You know, ‘We’re the Conference of Champions’ stuff.”
Some presidents and chancellors “feel like there are other uses for donor money” and “are ambivalent” about plunging into the world of donor collectives, another source said."

Like so much else these days, stepping down into the dirt is now legal, and mandating pay for play is likely to become law. Ivory tower or not, is this an issue upon which you fall on your sword? IMO, such posturing has now crossed the line into delusional self promoting pretentiousness, a commonly fatal disease of academics.

(04-07-2022 05:20 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 04:17 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 12:00 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(04-06-2022 08:49 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(04-06-2022 08:19 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  when will the madness stop?

When big wigs decide football is not worth all these headaches

Gaucho, Do you subscribe to Jon Wilner’s Mercury News?

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/
I have access to Wilner's article. The essence of the article is talent acquisition in the NIL era. Below are some excerpts:

"As it wades across the most turbulent era in the history of college athletics, the Pac-12 is drifting ever closer to an existential crisis.
It has nothing to do with conference realignment — with poaching by the Big Ten or SEC — and everything to do with talent acquisition.
Because after eight months of NIL, the so-called donor collectives (or consortiums) have emerged as the prime movers in the marketplace — the fundamental drivers of recruiting."

"Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?"
“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

How do they work? Typically, a group of donors or local business leaders will pool their resources and offer compensation to players for promotional opportunities that take little effort but pay well.
For example, the ‘Horns With a Heart’ program reportedly will pay each Texas offensive lineman $50,000 to support charitable causes. The founders are UT alumni and supporters.

"And to be clear: Some donor collectives are entirely legitimate, offering local business opportunities that clear a high ethical threshold.
Other collectives are merely fronts for pay-for-play.
Guess which are more popular with recruits?
“The Pac-12 has always thought it’s above that stuff, that it doesn’t need to step down into the dirt,” a conference source said. “You know, ‘We’re the Conference of Champions’ stuff.”
Some presidents and chancellors “feel like there are other uses for donor money” and “are ambivalent” about plunging into the world of donor collectives, another source said."

Like so much else these days, stepping down into the dirt is now legal, and mandating pay for play is likely to become law. Ivory tower or not, is this an issue upon which you fall on your sword? IMO, such posturing has now crossed the line into delusional self promoting pretentiousness, a commonly fatal disease of academics.

I agree. This is just a process that some of the schools need to go through. Change is not always easy. They will get there eventually.

(04-07-2022 05:40 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 05:20 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 04:17 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 12:00 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(04-06-2022 08:49 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  When big wigs decide football is not worth all these headaches

Gaucho, Do you subscribe to Jon Wilner’s Mercury News?

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/
I have access to Wilner's article. The essence of the article is talent acquisition in the NIL era. Below are some excerpts:

"As it wades across the most turbulent era in the history of college athletics, the Pac-12 is drifting ever closer to an existential crisis.
It has nothing to do with conference realignment — with poaching by the Big Ten or SEC — and everything to do with talent acquisition.
Because after eight months of NIL, the so-called donor collectives (or consortiums) have emerged as the prime movers in the marketplace — the fundamental drivers of recruiting."

"Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?"
“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

How do they work? Typically, a group of donors or local business leaders will pool their resources and offer compensation to players for promotional opportunities that take little effort but pay well.
For example, the ‘Horns With a Heart’ program reportedly will pay each Texas offensive lineman $50,000 to support charitable causes. The founders are UT alumni and supporters.

"And to be clear: Some donor collectives are entirely legitimate, offering local business opportunities that clear a high ethical threshold.
Other collectives are merely fronts for pay-for-play.
Guess which are more popular with recruits?
“The Pac-12 has always thought it’s above that stuff, that it doesn’t need to step down into the dirt,” a conference source said. “You know, ‘We’re the Conference of Champions’ stuff.”
Some presidents and chancellors “feel like there are other uses for donor money” and “are ambivalent” about plunging into the world of donor collectives, another source said."

Like so much else these days, stepping down into the dirt is now legal, and mandating pay for play is likely to become law. Ivory tower or not, is this an issue upon which you fall on your sword? IMO, such posturing has now crossed the line into delusional self promoting pretentiousness, a commonly fatal disease of academics.

I agree. This is just a process that some of the schools need to go through. Change is not always easy. They will get there eventually.

100% agree and my longtime irritation scab with my own conference has been picked.

Wanting to hold the moral high ground on not paying players should have died nearly 30 years ago. Yet some of our presidents hold onto these vestiges of amateurism as if their lives depended on it. In 20 years from now fans will look back at this moment in history and ask why? Why wouldn't you want to pay athletes? Our Universities will not have an answer. I will give you the answer, Fear. Fear of doing what they always thought they were better than.

They thought they were above that mud so much they haven't won a basketball championship in 25 years and their last football champion was sanctioned by the gutless NCAA for the Reggie Bush scandal and they lost one of their titles. Meanwhile in the SEC Cam Newtons dad was getting paid 10's of thousands of dollars for Cam to attend, Auburn won a national championship, and when the NCAA came sniffing Auburn told them to kick rocks. That statement is Tongue in cheek but you see my point. The PAC has always been so above board with everything that they are sinking their own ship.

Money brings athletes, athletes bring championships, championships bring TV money, TV money and exposure brings more athletes and the cycle starts over. The SEC figured this out a hell of a long time ago and look how they're benefiting.

Where has this attitude gotten the PAC? no championships and less money and on the cusp of being left behind like the ACC and the Big XII remainders. No offense but we have USC... And Oregon... and UCLA... and Washington.... yet we languish in some type of moral purgatory.

Who has won? The PAC didn't... the NCAA didn't... SEC the networks did, and if you don't believe me please explain why we are about to have Pay for Play?

There is still a chance for the schools in the PAC, jump in the mud with both feet, hell higher some ex-SEC recruiters and presidents as consultants. Think outside of the box and for Christ sake don't screw this up.

(04-07-2022 07:30 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 05:40 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 05:20 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 04:17 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 12:00 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  Gaucho, Do you subscribe to Jon Wilner’s Mercury News?

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/
I have access to Wilner's article. The essence of the article is talent acquisition in the NIL era. Below are some excerpts:

"As it wades across the most turbulent era in the history of college athletics, the Pac-12 is drifting ever closer to an existential crisis.
It has nothing to do with conference realignment — with poaching by the Big Ten or SEC — and everything to do with talent acquisition.
Because after eight months of NIL, the so-called donor collectives (or consortiums) have emerged as the prime movers in the marketplace — the fundamental drivers of recruiting."

"Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?"
“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

How do they work? Typically, a group of donors or local business leaders will pool their resources and offer compensation to players for promotional opportunities that take little effort but pay well.
For example, the ‘Horns With a Heart’ program reportedly will pay each Texas offensive lineman $50,000 to support charitable causes. The founders are UT alumni and supporters.

"And to be clear: Some donor collectives are entirely legitimate, offering local business opportunities that clear a high ethical threshold.
Other collectives are merely fronts for pay-for-play.
Guess which are more popular with recruits?
“The Pac-12 has always thought it’s above that stuff, that it doesn’t need to step down into the dirt,” a conference source said. “You know, ‘We’re the Conference of Champions’ stuff.”
Some presidents and chancellors “feel like there are other uses for donor money” and “are ambivalent” about plunging into the world of donor collectives, another source said."

Like so much else these days, stepping down into the dirt is now legal, and mandating pay for play is likely to become law. Ivory tower or not, is this an issue upon which you fall on your sword? IMO, such posturing has now crossed the line into delusional self promoting pretentiousness, a commonly fatal disease of academics.

I agree. This is just a process that some of the schools need to go through. Change is not always easy. They will get there eventually.

100% agree and my longtime irritation scab with my own conference has been picked.

Wanting to hold the moral high ground on not paying players should have died nearly 30 years ago. Yet some of our presidents hold onto these vestiges of amateurism as if their lives depended on it. In 20 years from now fans will look back at this moment in history and ask why? Why wouldn't you want to pay athletes? Our Universities will not have an answer. I will give you the answer, Fear. Fear of doing what they always thought they were better than.

They thought they were above that mud so much they haven't won a basketball championship in 25 years and their last football champion was sanctioned by the gutless NCAA for the Reggie Bush scandal and they lost one of their titles. Meanwhile in the SEC Cam Newtons dad was getting paid 10's of thousands of dollars for Cam to attend, Auburn won a national championship, and when the NCAA came sniffing Auburn told them to kick rocks. That statement is Tongue in cheek but you see my point. The PAC has always been so above board with everything that they are sinking their own ship.

Money brings athletes, athletes bring championships, championships bring TV money, TV money and exposure brings more athletes and the cycle starts over. The SEC figured this out a hell of a long time ago and look how they're benefiting.

Where has this attitude gotten the PAC? no championships and less money and on the cusp of being left behind like the ACC and the Big XII remainders. No offense but we have USC... And Oregon... and UCLA... and Washington.... yet we languish in some type of moral purgatory.

Who has won? The PAC didn't... the NCAA didn't... SEC the networks did, and if you don't believe me please explain why we are about to have Pay for Play?

There is still a chance for the schools in the PAC, jump in the mud with both feet, hell higher some ex-SEC recruiters and presidents as consultants. Think outside of the box and for Christ sake don't screw this up.

Wrong on two counts with regard to Auburn. Dan Mullen thought he had Newton sewed up after Cam left Florida to head to Blynn as Mullen was making plans to leave Florida for Miss State. When Mullen was scrutinized Daddy Newton tried to shop Cam again as he already had done so at State. How dumb was Cam's pater familias? He got a former Tide running back who was working in getting players agents to hook him up. That player still had ties to the Bama staff who used him to claim Auburn had paid, when they had not. Bama tried to put investigations on Miss State and Auburn. Auburn hired a former FBI/HSA person to check it out. Nada! Then Cam came at no money to stay clean. Mullen dropped all pursuit and was cleared as well.

The whole issue was Daddy Newton and the former Tide RB, whose name I know. Was Cam clean? Not the way his Daddy was handling things. He was after Scrutiny.

As to the NCAA once the independent investigation was finished they shut up. Why? Emmert likely wrote the book on how to hide payouts when He and Saban were at LSU together. I'd say Saban learned 99% of his tricks while at LSU. And their system was subpoena proof. You get a law grad from your school who is now serving in the state legislature. He gets a distant relative of the family or a wife or girlfriends family a solid state job. Then they kickback to the athlete or their family for years and get a state retirement for their trouble. The NCAA can't subpoena State Representatives for athletic matters.

This works in any state where the majority of that state's legislature were graduates of the same State Flagship law school. Which is why Auburn brought in independent investigation with Federal law ties. Once that happened the cockroaches all ran under the closest appliance.

BTW: Reason # 1392 the NCAA needs to die. UNC can offer bogus courses assigned to absentee professors, bill them through the bursar's office, pay for them partially with Federal Student Loans and other such aid, all in an effort to keep athletes eligible, blend in a few common students for cover, and when caught, the NCAA which needs its basketball ratings kings for tourney bucks, says it isn't their jurisdiction. Piss on the NCAA, especially Emmert. Hypocrisy is off the charts!

(04-07-2022 07:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 07:30 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 05:40 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 05:20 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 04:17 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/06/a...ing-trail/
I have access to Wilner's article. The essence of the article is talent acquisition in the NIL era. Below are some excerpts:

"As it wades across the most turbulent era in the history of college athletics, the Pac-12 is drifting ever closer to an existential crisis.
It has nothing to do with conference realignment — with poaching by the Big Ten or SEC — and everything to do with talent acquisition.
Because after eight months of NIL, the so-called donor collectives (or consortiums) have emerged as the prime movers in the marketplace — the fundamental drivers of recruiting."

"Should the schools become immersed in aspects of NIL that contradict the spirit of amateurism still alive in Ivory Towers across the conference?"
“Some schools want to pursue football and basketball at the highest level,’’ a source said. “Other schools think that approach is destructive.”

How do they work? Typically, a group of donors or local business leaders will pool their resources and offer compensation to players for promotional opportunities that take little effort but pay well.
For example, the ‘Horns With a Heart’ program reportedly will pay each Texas offensive lineman $50,000 to support charitable causes. The founders are UT alumni and supporters.

"And to be clear: Some donor collectives are entirely legitimate, offering local business opportunities that clear a high ethical threshold.
Other collectives are merely fronts for pay-for-play.
Guess which are more popular with recruits?
“The Pac-12 has always thought it’s above that stuff, that it doesn’t need to step down into the dirt,” a conference source said. “You know, ‘We’re the Conference of Champions’ stuff.”
Some presidents and chancellors “feel like there are other uses for donor money” and “are ambivalent” about plunging into the world of donor collectives, another source said."

Like so much else these days, stepping down into the dirt is now legal, and mandating pay for play is likely to become law. Ivory tower or not, is this an issue upon which you fall on your sword? IMO, such posturing has now crossed the line into delusional self promoting pretentiousness, a commonly fatal disease of academics.

I agree. This is just a process that some of the schools need to go through. Change is not always easy. They will get there eventually.

100% agree and my longtime irritation scab with my own conference has been picked.

Wanting to hold the moral high ground on not paying players should have died nearly 30 years ago. Yet some of our presidents hold onto these vestiges of amateurism as if their lives depended on it. In 20 years from now fans will look back at this moment in history and ask why? Why wouldn't you want to pay athletes? Our Universities will not have an answer. I will give you the answer, Fear. Fear of doing what they always thought they were better than.

They thought they were above that mud so much they haven't won a basketball championship in 25 years and their last football champion was sanctioned by the gutless NCAA for the Reggie Bush scandal and they lost one of their titles. Meanwhile in the SEC Cam Newtons dad was getting paid 10's of thousands of dollars for Cam to attend, Auburn won a national championship, and when the NCAA came sniffing Auburn told them to kick rocks. That statement is Tongue in cheek but you see my point. The PAC has always been so above board with everything that they are sinking their own ship.

Money brings athletes, athletes bring championships, championships bring TV money, TV money and exposure brings more athletes and the cycle starts over. The SEC figured this out a hell of a long time ago and look how they're benefiting.

Where has this attitude gotten the PAC? no championships and less money and on the cusp of being left behind like the ACC and the Big XII remainders. No offense but we have USC... And Oregon... and UCLA... and Washington.... yet we languish in some type of moral purgatory.

Who has won? The PAC didn't... the NCAA didn't... SEC the networks did, and if you don't believe me please explain why we are about to have Pay for Play?

There is still a chance for the schools in the PAC, jump in the mud with both feet, hell higher some ex-SEC recruiters and presidents as consultants. Think outside of the box and for Christ sake don't screw this up.

Wrong on two counts with regard to Auburn. Dan Mullen thought he had Newton sewed up after Cam left Florida to head to Blynn as Mullen was making plans to leave Florida for Miss State. When Mullen was scrutinized Daddy Newton tried to shop Cam again as he already had done so at State. How dumb was Cam's pater familias? He got a former Tide running back who was working in getting players agents to hook him up. That player still had ties to the Bama staff who used him to claim Auburn had paid, when they had not. Bama tried to put investigations on Miss State and Auburn. Auburn hired a former FBI/HSA person to check it out. Nada! Then Cam came at no money to stay clean. Mullen dropped all pursuit and was cleared as well.

The whole issue was Daddy Newton and the former Tide RB, whose name I know. Was Cam clean? Not the way his Daddy was handling things. He was after Scrutiny.

As to the NCAA once the independent investigation was finished they shut up. Why? Emmert likely wrote the book on how to hide payouts when He and Saban were at LSU together. I'd say Saban learned 99% of his tricks while at LSU. And their system was subpoena proof. You get a law grad from your school who is now serving in the state legislature. He gets a distant relative of the family or a wife or girlfriends family a solid state job. Then they kickback to the athlete or their family for years and get a state retirement for their trouble. The NCAA can't subpoena State Representatives for athletic matters.

This works in any state where the majority of that state's legislature were graduates of the same State Flagship law school. Which is why Auburn brought in independent investigation with Federal law ties. Once that happened the cockroaches all ran under the closest appliance.

BTW: Reason # 1392 the NCAA needs to die. UNC can offer bogus courses assigned to absentee professors, bill them through the bursar's office, pay for them partially with Federal Student Loans and other such aid, all in an effort to keep athletes eligible, blend in a few common students for cover, and when caught, the NCAA which needs its basketball ratings kings for tourney bucks, says it isn't their jurisdiction. Piss on the NCAA, especially Emmert. Hypocrisy is off the charts!

Thank you for the clarification on the Auburn situation. Agreed on Emmert, he's the equivalent of the captain of the Titanic.

(04-07-2022 09:56 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 07:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 07:30 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 05:40 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 05:20 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Like so much else these days, stepping down into the dirt is now legal, and mandating pay for play is likely to become law. Ivory tower or not, is this an issue upon which you fall on your sword? IMO, such posturing has now crossed the line into delusional self promoting pretentiousness, a commonly fatal disease of academics.

I agree. This is just a process that some of the schools need to go through. Change is not always easy. They will get there eventually.

100% agree and my longtime irritation scab with my own conference has been picked.

Wanting to hold the moral high ground on not paying players should have died nearly 30 years ago. Yet some of our presidents hold onto these vestiges of amateurism as if their lives depended on it. In 20 years from now fans will look back at this moment in history and ask why? Why wouldn't you want to pay athletes? Our Universities will not have an answer. I will give you the answer, Fear. Fear of doing what they always thought they were better than.

They thought they were above that mud so much they haven't won a basketball championship in 25 years and their last football champion was sanctioned by the gutless NCAA for the Reggie Bush scandal and they lost one of their titles. Meanwhile in the SEC Cam Newtons dad was getting paid 10's of thousands of dollars for Cam to attend, Auburn won a national championship, and when the NCAA came sniffing Auburn told them to kick rocks. That statement is Tongue in cheek but you see my point. The PAC has always been so above board with everything that they are sinking their own ship.

Money brings athletes, athletes bring championships, championships bring TV money, TV money and exposure brings more athletes and the cycle starts over. The SEC figured this out a hell of a long time ago and look how they're benefiting.

Where has this attitude gotten the PAC? no championships and less money and on the cusp of being left behind like the ACC and the Big XII remainders. No offense but we have USC... And Oregon... and UCLA... and Washington.... yet we languish in some type of moral purgatory.

Who has won? The PAC didn't... the NCAA didn't... SEC the networks did, and if you don't believe me please explain why we are about to have Pay for Play?

There is still a chance for the schools in the PAC, jump in the mud with both feet, hell higher some ex-SEC recruiters and presidents as consultants. Think outside of the box and for Christ sake don't screw this up.

Wrong on two counts with regard to Auburn. Dan Mullen thought he had Newton sewed up after Cam left Florida to head to Blynn as Mullen was making plans to leave Florida for Miss State. When Mullen was scrutinized Daddy Newton tried to shop Cam again as he already had done so at State. How dumb was Cam's pater familias? He got a former Tide running back who was working in getting players agents to hook him up. That player still had ties to the Bama staff who used him to claim Auburn had paid, when they had not. Bama tried to put investigations on Miss State and Auburn. Auburn hired a former FBI/HSA person to check it out. Nada! Then Cam came at no money to stay clean. Mullen dropped all pursuit and was cleared as well.

The whole issue was Daddy Newton and the former Tide RB, whose name I know. Was Cam clean? Not the way his Daddy was handling things. He was after Scrutiny.

As to the NCAA once the independent investigation was finished they shut up. Why? Emmert likely wrote the book on how to hide payouts when He and Saban were at LSU together. I'd say Saban learned 99% of his tricks while at LSU. And their system was subpoena proof. You get a law grad from your school who is now serving in the state legislature. He gets a distant relative of the family or a wife or girlfriends family a solid state job. Then they kickback to the athlete or their family for years and get a state retirement for their trouble. The NCAA can't subpoena State Representatives for athletic matters.

This works in any state where the majority of that state's legislature were graduates of the same State Flagship law school. Which is why Auburn brought in independent investigation with Federal law ties. Once that happened the cockroaches all ran under the closest appliance.

BTW: Reason # 1392 the NCAA needs to die. UNC can offer bogus courses assigned to absentee professors, bill them through the bursar's office, pay for them partially with Federal Student Loans and other such aid, all in an effort to keep athletes eligible, blend in a few common students for cover, and when caught, the NCAA which needs its basketball ratings kings for tourney bucks, says it isn't their jurisdiction. Piss on the NCAA, especially Emmert. Hypocrisy is off the charts!

Thank you for the clarification on the Auburn situation. Agreed on Emmert, he's the equivalent of the captain of the Titanic.

Yes, but Cpt. Edward Smith didn't aim at the Iceberg. He ignored warnings and tried to set a crossing speed record. Emmert seems to charge full speed into every obstacle intentionally. Smith went down with the Ship. Emmert and staff will live off of the 2 billion in endowments in perpetuity.

And as to my Tigers, I'm not saying we have always been clean, we haven't, and I know it because I've caught 'em twice. I'm just saying where Newton was concerned we weren't dirty. In over a decade of following up on violations pertaining to recruiting in a 3 state area, out of the then SWC, Big 8, Big 10, ACC, and SEC schools recruiting in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina only Georgia Tech under Curry was clean. Note: Duke and Vandy didn't even try back then so yeah they were clean too.

(04-07-2022 09:35 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

The dude is right on the $€c, not the B1G.

(04-07-2022 10:57 PM)Rube Dali Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 09:35 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

The dude is right on the $€c, not the B1G.

The SEC has zero interest in USC, as in none. SEC Presidents want regional dominance. The SEC might stretch to Kansas. Look at a map. Kansas creates a new Northwest Corner. They are interested in North Carolina and Virginia, a new Northeast Corner. And they are interested in a 2nd Florida school.

Since ESPN is interested in owning rights to all schools of any significance below a line running from Virginia through Kentucky, through Missouri, and into Kansas and everything South into Texas and Florida you have the scope of SEC/ESPN aspirations.

With the AAC, ACC, & SEC all ESPN needs to do to accomplish this is to acquire all of the B12's rights, and make sure Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and perhaps Georgia Tech are taken care of within financial reason. I suspect some movement between ESPN families to accomplish this.

Perhaps ESPN would have interest in PAC schools heading to the Big 12, but I suspect they would prefer USC to go independent, pay USC a sum equal to an SEC payout and then control their schedule pitting them and BYU in the Big 12 against name brand schools ranging from OU and UT to ND, Clemson, FSU, and some SEC schools. It's the cheapest and easiest play.

(04-07-2022 11:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 10:57 PM)Rube Dali Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 09:35 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

The dude is right on the $€c, not the B1G.

The SEC has zero interest in USC, as in none. SEC Presidents want regional dominance. The SEC might stretch to Kansas. Look at a map. Kansas creates a new Northwest Corner. They are interested in North Carolina and Virginia, a new Northeast Corner. And they are interested in a 2nd Florida school.

Exactly and USC has zero interest in the SEC. People need to think about it. If Lincoln Riley wanted to be in the SEC, he could have stayed at Oklahoma or taken the LSU job. The Pac-12 has not underperformed, USC has underperformed. Mike Bohn is cleaning up the mess that Lynn Swann left him, Riley is cleaning up the mess that Clay Helton left, and George Kliavkoff is cleaning up the mess that Larry Scott left. You do not hear anything on the west coast about Pac-12 teams leaving. It is all coming from very questionable sources back east.

(04-06-2022 03:09 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  Instead of leaving the Pac-12, or the Big Ten raiding the Pac-12, or whatever....

They should just solve the problem that makes the Pac-12 want out in one simple move: A Big Ten/Pac-12 business operations merger. Be two conferences, but one business operation.

In other words: The Big Ten/Pac-12 Network.

That's why the Pac-12 members are unhappy. The TV dollars just aren't there for them with Pac-12 Network because it can barely get any carriage anywhere but the seven states they exist in.

Interesting idea, but I think the three non-AAU schools (AZ state, OR state, and WA state) are likely left behind in that scenario.

That would make 23 members, so move colorado, and add kansas, and this easily becomes three 8-member conferences.

And this still leaves room to later go to three 10s, by adding the three to six from ACC, as well as other possibles like MO. Split like this, IA state might even have a chance. lol

(04-12-2022 01:49 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(04-06-2022 03:09 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  Instead of leaving the Pac-12, or the Big Ten raiding the Pac-12, or whatever....

They should just solve the problem that makes the Pac-12 want out in one simple move: A Big Ten/Pac-12 business operations merger. Be two conferences, but one business operation.

In other words: The Big Ten/Pac-12 Network.

That's why the Pac-12 members are unhappy. The TV dollars just aren't there for them with Pac-12 Network because it can barely get any carriage anywhere but the seven states they exist in.

Interesting idea, but I think the three non-AAU schools (AZ state, OR state, and WA state) are likely left behind in that scenario.

That would make 23 members, so move colorado, and add kansas, and this easily becomes three 8-member conferences.

And this still leaves room to later go to three 10s, by adding the three to six from ACC, as well as other possibles like MO. Split like this, IA state might even have a chance. lol

At 30 members it just becomes the BigTen(s).

The separate divisions/conferences break out pretty easily:

East: UMD, RU, PSU, OSU, IU, PU, UM, MSU.
Midwest: IL, NW, WI, MN, IO, Neb, KU, CU.
West: UW, UO, Cal, Furd, USC, UCLA, AZ, UU.

(04-12-2022 11:43 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(04-12-2022 01:49 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(04-06-2022 03:09 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  Instead of leaving the Pac-12, or the Big Ten raiding the Pac-12, or whatever....

They should just solve the problem that makes the Pac-12 want out in one simple move: A Big Ten/Pac-12 business operations merger. Be two conferences, but one business operation.

In other words: The Big Ten/Pac-12 Network.

That's why the Pac-12 members are unhappy. The TV dollars just aren't there for them with Pac-12 Network because it can barely get any carriage anywhere but the seven states they exist in.

Interesting idea, but I think the three non-AAU schools (AZ state, OR state, and WA state) are likely left behind in that scenario.

That would make 23 members, so move colorado, and add kansas, and this easily becomes three 8-member conferences.

And this still leaves room to later go to three 10s, by adding the three to six from ACC, as well as other possibles like MO. Split like this, IA state might even have a chance. lol

At 30 members it just becomes the BigTen(s).

The separate divisions/conferences break out pretty easily:

East: UMD, RU, PSU, OSU, IU, PU, UM, MSU.
Midwest: IL, NW, WI, MN, IO, Neb, KU, CU.
West: UW, UO, Cal, Furd, USC, UCLA, AZ, UU.

Yes, those are exactly where I saw the 24 too.

to go to 30, one could add from the ACC: VA, NC state, Duke; possibly GA tech; possibly Pitt and/or Syracuse. And, as I mentioned, possibly MO, or even IA state.

I don't think TAMU or FL will leave the SEC (rivalries, etc), and I really don't think Vanderbilt leaves, though I spose they could.

To add 4 from ACC, add them to East, then move the IN teams to the Midwest, and CO to the West. That's 10/9/9 = 28. Just need 2 more from the above for 30. Thus making 3 "Big 10" divisions/conferences which each could be split into 5 team pods.

And if the ACC does not break up (No guarantee that NC etal want to leave their own conference), I think the 24 listed above looks pretty stable, and something the B10 could be quite happy with.

I think the PAC once the AAU schools are gone, would likely quite readily grab all those other schools people talk about - Boise state, Hawaii, SD state, UNLV, etc. (Maybe BYU, or even Gonzaga.) And then people could argue whether the new AAU or the new PAC would be the P6 conference : )

(04-12-2022 12:19 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I think the PAC once the AAU schools are gone, would likely quite readily grab all those other schools people talk about - Boise state, Hawaii, SD state, UNLV, etc. (Maybe even Gonzaga.) And then people could argue whether the new AAU or the new PAC would be the P6 conference : )