Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #1
Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
I'm reasonably confident that if we have movement that it will be from the Big 12. Sure there are concerns in the PAC but not enough to affect the conference as a whole. I doubt USC goes independent and I don't see anyone leaving the PAC for the Big 12. Maybe someday they look at a scheduling agreement with the Big 10 again but that's about it.

The Big 12 will have to decide first of all if they wish to stay together. If they don't then I feel confident that the SEC has the best shot at landing Oklahoma.

Why? We offer enough money that money won't be a deciding factor against us. They have a much more compatible sports fit with the SEC than they could have with the PAC or the Big 10. And we offer more reasonable travel within the division closest to them. And in the end their fans love sports. If the deciding factor is whether we would take OSU then at least we have the leeway to do it whether we want to or not. Nobody else really offers that package of benefits.

What about Texas? It doesn't matter what they do. If they want in we would probably take them. If they don't we have a top brand and all the penetration in Texas markets that we need between Oklahoma, Texas A&M, L.S.U. and Arkansas.

What if the Big 12 sticks it out? Then neither Texas or Oklahoma is headed anywhere let alone the B1G. So their ability to tip the payouts in favor of the Big 10 is removed as a risk and the SEC just plays the waiting game. And who knows what schools might want to move in the 2030's.

So if nothing happens I like the SEC's position moving forward. If we land OU then no other conference can catch us. And I like our chances of getting OU if there is movement.

So don't be fooled by B1G twitteratti, by the advent of the ACCN, or any other distractions. It will all boil down to revenue, geography, playing within the strongest recruting market, and having the best sports fit.

The rest is just to fill the off season times and start conversations.

And for the record, I still don't rule out a preemptive move by the network to try to sew that property up before it is up for open bid.
02-16-2018 04:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
Being that we've been talking a lot about TCU lately, I have a thought...

The other day I theorized that a league taking TCU might actually destabilize the Big 12 in its current state. There's no way they could replace that sort of value despite the fact they wouldn't be losing OU or UT in that particular moment. Perhaps the goal would be to force OU or UT to make a decision sooner than later...

To piggyback on that, I think TCU would be an interesting move to essentially checkmate whatever inroads any other league made into the region.

What about this?

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and Kansas

Let's say Texas wants something different. That's fine. Anyone else would take them, but it would essentially take adding both Texas and Texas Tech to approach the sort of market penetration we would have.

Texas A&M gives us the 2nd most popular brand in the state and good solid numbers across the board. The combo of LSU, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State gives us a host of eyeballs in the state despite none of them being in TX.

If you add TCU though then you guarantee the domination of the largest 2 media markets in the state. You also get regular games located in or very close to the 2 largest talent centers in the state. It also keeps us from having to add a 3rd TX school while giving us the freedom to move on a school like Kansas that adds some ancillary value in addition to a new state.

It makes me think that if Texas and Oklahoma don't come as a pair that perhaps our best move is to take the 4 I just mentioned. TCU should be willing to come without strings and I can't imagine they wouldn't gravitate to the security of the SEC over the familiarity of Austin. Whereas Texas probably requires Tech as a tag along and they don't really add value. But even more than that, there's the political angle. We'd never quite be sure whether or not UT is looking out for itself and itself alone. The question with UT is as always...how well do they play with others?

Unless we really feared UT heading to the Big Ten or something like that then I'm not sure we have much to lose.

Perhaps ESPN could talk the ACC into taking a combo like this...Texas, Baylor, Houston, and SMU. The travel wouldn't be too bad if you exclude Texas Tech. Notre Dame can remain a partial for the time being. Both leagues would be well off like that and wouldn't have to do very much they aren't comfortable with.

Schools like Texas Tech, Iowa State, Kansas State, and West Virginia could anchor a new American perhaps along with BYU.

Assuming ESPN has time to wait until the GOR approaches expiration then they have more freedom to play around with the membership and won't have to worry so much about placing a certain number.

It's true that we don't need TCU to get good penetration in Texas, but technically we don't need UT either. I think it's an interesting value proposition.
02-16-2018 09:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
(02-16-2018 09:44 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Being that we've been talking a lot about TCU lately, I have a thought...

The other day I theorized that a league taking TCU might actually destabilize the Big 12 in its current state. There's no way they could replace that sort of value despite the fact they wouldn't be losing OU or UT in that particular moment. Perhaps the goal would be to force OU or UT to make a decision sooner than later...

To piggyback on that, I think TCU would be an interesting move to essentially checkmate whatever inroads any other league made into the region.

What about this?

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and Kansas

Let's say Texas wants something different. That's fine. Anyone else would take them, but it would essentially take adding both Texas and Texas Tech to approach the sort of market penetration we would have.

Texas A&M gives us the 2nd most popular brand in the state and good solid numbers across the board. The combo of LSU, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State gives us a host of eyeballs in the state despite none of them being in TX.

If you add TCU though then you guarantee the domination of the largest 2 media markets in the state. You also get regular games located in or very close to the 2 largest talent centers in the state. It also keeps us from having to add a 3rd TX school while giving us the freedom to move on a school like Kansas that adds some ancillary value in addition to a new state.

It makes me think that if Texas and Oklahoma don't come as a pair that perhaps our best move is to take the 4 I just mentioned. TCU should be willing to come without strings and I can't imagine they wouldn't gravitate to the security of the SEC over the familiarity of Austin. Whereas Texas probably requires Tech as a tag along and they don't really add value. But even more than that, there's the political angle. We'd never quite be sure whether or not UT is looking out for itself and itself alone. The question with UT is as always...how well do they play with others?

Unless we really feared UT heading to the Big Ten or something like that then I'm not sure we have much to lose.

Perhaps ESPN could talk the ACC into taking a combo like this...Texas, Baylor, Houston, and SMU. The travel wouldn't be too bad if you exclude Texas Tech. Notre Dame can remain a partial for the time being. Both leagues would be well off like that and wouldn't have to do very much they aren't comfortable with.

Schools like Texas Tech, Iowa State, Kansas State, and West Virginia could anchor a new American perhaps along with BYU.

Assuming ESPN has time to wait until the GOR approaches expiration then they have more freedom to play around with the membership and won't have to worry so much about placing a certain number.

It's true that we don't need TCU to get good penetration in Texas, but technically we don't need UT either. I think it's an interesting value proposition.

Totally locking down DFW with a 2nd Texas school is not without merit. When you posit that by taking them you could destabilize OU and UT you could, but only if T.C.U. is excused from the GOR. Until then that move wouldn't be practical. After the expiration T.C.U. may or may not be needed.

That said, and while I like the concept and see a positive upside there is another rub. Oklahoma didn't like it when T.C.U. was added to the Big 12. They recruit DFW well and felt that elevating the Frogs specifically hurt them. So if they are coming to the SEC and see our brand as a huge advantage in DFW, they might strongly object to the addition of T.C.U..

But what I like about the concept is that it really cuts Texas off at the knees within their own state. Houston is already a tough sell for the Horns. Between A&M and L.S.U. Houston is an SEC town. Although Orgeron didn't press his advantage there this year and the Horns made inroads.

So if you had to the pair of Oklahoma schools and T.C.U. to go along with Arkansas and A&M DFW would definitely become an SEC town as well. That's a lot of pressure on Texas, a lot!
02-16-2018 09:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #4
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
I like OU and OSU to take us to 16. KU (AAU) is a nice pickup for BB and their FB program would probably improve in the SEC if we go for more members. I cannot decide on the fourth new member. Not sold on TCU yet. I love Iowa State but that is probably a geographical reach. Maybe chain migration works here. 03-lmfao They are solid as a rock with a great fan base and AAU membership.
(This post was last modified: 02-17-2018 12:49 AM by USAFMEDIC.)
02-17-2018 12:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Soobahk40050 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,555
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 103
I Root For: Tennessee
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
The path of least resistance is OK/State and stop. However, since these are 100 year moves, the question is what we can share from the ACC later. If we could get Clemson/UNC/VT/etc, you save spots. If not, Kansas/Iowa State/TCU/Texas/Tech become much more viable.
02-17-2018 09:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
(02-17-2018 09:23 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  The path of least resistance is OK/State and stop. However, since these are 100 year moves, the question is what we can share from the ACC later. If we could get Clemson/UNC/VT/etc, you save spots. If not, Kansas/Iowa State/TCU/Texas/Tech become much more viable.
That's the 64 million dollar question isn't it? It's why I favor going to no more than 18 out of the Big 12. That leaves a crucial 6 slots left to cover future ACC defections.

When you crunch the numbers you can arrange a 4 division set up of 6 schools per division and still play everyone else every 4 years with an 11 game schedule if you limit the conference size to 24.

So let's hypothetically say we offer Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and Texas wants in as well but only if Texas Tech is in the mix. That means the SEC can put Arkansas and Missouri with those four and form a 6 school division. The West remains the same without Arkansas and the East remains the same without Missouri.

Then if the ACC suffered losses to the Big 10 or the economic situation was such that there were schools that desired the SEC we can set up an entire division of 6 of the best ACC schools without interfering with the traditional rivalries of the other 3 divisions.
02-17-2018 11:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #7
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
(02-16-2018 04:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I'm reasonably confident that if we have movement that it will be from the Big 12. Sure there are concerns in the PAC but not enough to affect the conference as a whole. I doubt USC goes independent and I don't see anyone leaving the PAC for the Big 12. Maybe someday they look at a scheduling agreement with the Big 10 again but that's about it.

Concur. While the PAC might have issues, moving to the B12 isn't a solution for any school.

Quote:The Big 12 will have to decide first of all if they wish to stay together. If they don't then I feel confident that the SEC has the best shot at landing Oklahoma.

If they can get some kind of guarantee to stay at the current rates then I think the conference will soldier on. If they get an indication that the B12 will suffer a market correction, the UTX and OU will head for the exits.

Quote:Why? We offer enough money that money won't be a deciding factor against us. They have a much more compatible sports fit with the SEC than they could have with the PAC or the Big 10. And we offer more reasonable travel within the division closest to them. And in the end their fans love sports. If the deciding factor is whether we would take OSU then at least we have the leeway to do it whether we want to or not. Nobody else really offers that package of benefits.

What about Texas? It doesn't matter what they do. If they want in we would probably take them. If they don't we have a top brand and all the penetration in Texas markets that we need between Oklahoma, Texas A&M, L.S.U. and Arkansas.


Agreed. There isn't any conference that needs a school from the B12. Even the Sooners and Longhorns are both nice to have additions. Save for Baylor and K-State, the remaining 10 schools would at worst be neutral additions to the SEC. That's a nice 'problem' to have.

The one question I have is if the B12 hangs around and going divisionless isn't an option, would the SEC entertain adding a couple of G5 schools to balance the schedule? No, ESPN wouldn't pay for them but with the CBS contract coming up would that present a possible negotiating opportunity?
02-17-2018 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
(02-17-2018 03:12 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(02-16-2018 04:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I'm reasonably confident that if we have movement that it will be from the Big 12. Sure there are concerns in the PAC but not enough to affect the conference as a whole. I doubt USC goes independent and I don't see anyone leaving the PAC for the Big 12. Maybe someday they look at a scheduling agreement with the Big 10 again but that's about it.

Concur. While the PAC might have issues, moving to the B12 isn't a solution for any school.

Quote:The Big 12 will have to decide first of all if they wish to stay together. If they don't then I feel confident that the SEC has the best shot at landing Oklahoma.

If they can get some kind of guarantee to stay at the current rates then I think the conference will soldier on. If they get an indication that the B12 will suffer a market correction, the UTX and OU will head for the exits.

Quote:Why? We offer enough money that money won't be a deciding factor against us. They have a much more compatible sports fit with the SEC than they could have with the PAC or the Big 10. And we offer more reasonable travel within the division closest to them. And in the end their fans love sports. If the deciding factor is whether we would take OSU then at least we have the leeway to do it whether we want to or not. Nobody else really offers that package of benefits.

What about Texas? It doesn't matter what they do. If they want in we would probably take them. If they don't we have a top brand and all the penetration in Texas markets that we need between Oklahoma, Texas A&M, L.S.U. and Arkansas.


Agreed. There isn't any conference that needs a school from the B12. Even the Sooners and Longhorns are both nice to have additions. Save for Baylor and K-State, the remaining 10 schools would at worst be neutral additions to the SEC. That's a nice 'problem' to have.

The one question I have is if the B12 hangs around and going divisionless isn't an option, would the SEC entertain adding a couple of G5 schools to balance the schedule? No, ESPN wouldn't pay for them but with the CBS contract coming up would that present a possible negotiating opportunity?

CBS doesn't buy the whole SEC. They buy the top choice for a predetermined number of games. When we renew if CBS wins the bid, they will be paying us a flat fee for the same number of games but the dollar amount will be a lot higher than it was 20 years ago. If we added a true rates driver like Oklahoma or Texas they probably would give us an offer more generous than for the current product because the weekly number of quality games to select from would be higher and we would definitely be playing extra conference games with expansion.

None of that is true for a G5 addition. In fact it might concern CBS if the OOC scheduling lined up with unfavorable games for the G5 additions.

So no, there will be zero network perks given for considering a G5, and the SEC isn't going to cheapen its own image by going in that direction anyway.
02-17-2018 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
(02-16-2018 09:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-16-2018 09:44 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Being that we've been talking a lot about TCU lately, I have a thought...

The other day I theorized that a league taking TCU might actually destabilize the Big 12 in its current state. There's no way they could replace that sort of value despite the fact they wouldn't be losing OU or UT in that particular moment. Perhaps the goal would be to force OU or UT to make a decision sooner than later...

To piggyback on that, I think TCU would be an interesting move to essentially checkmate whatever inroads any other league made into the region.

What about this?

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and Kansas

Let's say Texas wants something different. That's fine. Anyone else would take them, but it would essentially take adding both Texas and Texas Tech to approach the sort of market penetration we would have.

Texas A&M gives us the 2nd most popular brand in the state and good solid numbers across the board. The combo of LSU, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State gives us a host of eyeballs in the state despite none of them being in TX.

If you add TCU though then you guarantee the domination of the largest 2 media markets in the state. You also get regular games located in or very close to the 2 largest talent centers in the state. It also keeps us from having to add a 3rd TX school while giving us the freedom to move on a school like Kansas that adds some ancillary value in addition to a new state.

It makes me think that if Texas and Oklahoma don't come as a pair that perhaps our best move is to take the 4 I just mentioned. TCU should be willing to come without strings and I can't imagine they wouldn't gravitate to the security of the SEC over the familiarity of Austin. Whereas Texas probably requires Tech as a tag along and they don't really add value. But even more than that, there's the political angle. We'd never quite be sure whether or not UT is looking out for itself and itself alone. The question with UT is as always...how well do they play with others?

Unless we really feared UT heading to the Big Ten or something like that then I'm not sure we have much to lose.

Perhaps ESPN could talk the ACC into taking a combo like this...Texas, Baylor, Houston, and SMU. The travel wouldn't be too bad if you exclude Texas Tech. Notre Dame can remain a partial for the time being. Both leagues would be well off like that and wouldn't have to do very much they aren't comfortable with.

Schools like Texas Tech, Iowa State, Kansas State, and West Virginia could anchor a new American perhaps along with BYU.

Assuming ESPN has time to wait until the GOR approaches expiration then they have more freedom to play around with the membership and won't have to worry so much about placing a certain number.

It's true that we don't need TCU to get good penetration in Texas, but technically we don't need UT either. I think it's an interesting value proposition.

Totally locking down DFW with a 2nd Texas school is not without merit. When you posit that by taking them you could destabilize OU and UT you could, but only if T.C.U. is excused from the GOR. Until then that move wouldn't be practical. After the expiration T.C.U. may or may not be needed.

That said, and while I like the concept and see a positive upside there is another rub. Oklahoma didn't like it when T.C.U. was added to the Big 12. They recruit DFW well and felt that elevating the Frogs specifically hurt them. So if they are coming to the SEC and see our brand as a huge advantage in DFW, they might strongly object to the addition of T.C.U..

But what I like about the concept is that it really cuts Texas off at the knees within their own state. Houston is already a tough sell for the Horns. Between A&M and L.S.U. Houston is an SEC town. Although Orgeron didn't press his advantage there this year and the Horns made inroads.

So if you had to the pair of Oklahoma schools and T.C.U. to go along with Arkansas and A&M DFW would definitely become an SEC town as well. That's a lot of pressure on Texas, a lot!

Part of what I like about TCU's positioning is that the very threat of adding them has to force Texas to look at things differently.

Texas is the biggest fish left, sure, but TCU being in another league along with Oklahoma and the SEC powers could pose a serious threat to their competitive ability. UT would likely move off to another league, but they would essentially be surrounded.

The addition of Kansas, I think, would represent greater value than Texas Tech so that should help in bringing up the total value of a 4 school expansion to be in the same neighborhood with a move that included Texas and Texas Tech. I'm not sure the SEC would look at it this way, but I think it helps to have a backup option in the event Texas wants to be difficult.

I think ESPN would rather move Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas together so it's possible we get help from them to make this all work. If we could pull off Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Kansas as a foursome then I think that's the greatest value we could get.

Texas can save face by saying ESPN just wouldn't cooperate and being that the SEC already had a presence in TX, there just wasn't a lot of room available for a 3rd state school. In the end, Texas is better off anyway as they don't have all those in-state competitors. UT can schedule these other schools regularly out of conference anyway and that's probably more enticing to their fans than regular games against Rice and the like.

I think ESPN could build a much more attractive leftover league if they've got a heavy presence in TX and they wouldn't have to pay as much for it.

Let's say the ACC took TCU and West Virginia to increase their market footprint while also adding more competition in their upper quadrant. Notre Dame can remain partial for now and the ACC could always go to 18 should ND make it worth their while.

Then ESPN can go about rebuilding the American to be a better TV product. Maybe something like this...

West: San Diego State, BYU, Boise State, Colorado State, Texas Tech

Central: Baylor, SMU, Tulsa, Kansas State, Iowa State

South: Navy, Houston, Tulane, Memphis, Cincinnati

East: UCF, USF, East Carolina, Temple, UConn
02-17-2018 04:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #10
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
(02-17-2018 03:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  CBS doesn't buy the whole SEC. They buy the top choice for a predetermined number of games. When we renew if CBS wins the bid, they will be paying us a flat fee for the same number of games but the dollar amount will be a lot higher than it was 20 years ago. If we added a true rates driver like Oklahoma or Texas they probably would give us an offer more generous than for the current product because the weekly number of quality games to select from would be higher and we would definitely be playing extra conference games with expansion.

None of that is true for a G5 addition. In fact it might concern CBS if the OOC scheduling lined up with unfavorable games for the G5 additions.

So no, there will be zero network perks given for considering a G5, and the SEC isn't going to cheapen its own image by going in that direction anyway.

I know CBS just gets the first pick of games during the season with a couple of doubleheaders. I just figured as you said we'd add another conference game upon this renewal and that could cover the expansion.

And while G5 expansion isn't ideal, it didn't seem to hurt the ACC and B1G when those conferences added schools from the AAC.
02-17-2018 04:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
(02-17-2018 04:47 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(02-17-2018 03:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  CBS doesn't buy the whole SEC. They buy the top choice for a predetermined number of games. When we renew if CBS wins the bid, they will be paying us a flat fee for the same number of games but the dollar amount will be a lot higher than it was 20 years ago. If we added a true rates driver like Oklahoma or Texas they probably would give us an offer more generous than for the current product because the weekly number of quality games to select from would be higher and we would definitely be playing extra conference games with expansion.

None of that is true for a G5 addition. In fact it might concern CBS if the OOC scheduling lined up with unfavorable games for the G5 additions.

So no, there will be zero network perks given for considering a G5, and the SEC isn't going to cheapen its own image by going in that direction anyway.

I know CBS just gets the first pick of games during the season with a couple of doubleheaders. I just figured as you said we'd add another conference game upon this renewal and that could cover the expansion.

And while G5 expansion isn't ideal, it didn't seem to hurt the ACC and B1G when those conferences added schools from the AAC.

The point is that additions don't increase the CBS inventory it's x amount of games no matter who is playing. The addition of an Oklahoma multiplied by our # of brands might merit a boost because it increases the number of great games to choose from. But a G5 dilutes the number of quality games.
02-17-2018 05:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Things I'm Confident About As We Inch Closer To The Next Realignment Moves
I think the only potential advantage of adding a G5 would be to open up the contract for renegotiation...that is assuming the Big 12 sticks together and we can't expand from those options.

Even then, I don't think it would profitable because the Big 12 had the same opportunity and it just wasn't feasible despite their threshold being lower.

I wouldn't be opposed to G5 additions though if it were necessary to balance numbers for a broader move.
02-17-2018 05:52 PM
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.