Where did pony94 go?

(07-03-2014 11:19 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:13 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:04 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:55 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  "funky schedules" like Texas playing thanksgiving at home every year?

Keep moving the goalposts if you want, it doesn't make you right.

Since the time A&M left the Longhorns are the only ones who WANT to host a Thanksgiving game. Everyone else is either OU (who's best game for the spot they'd rather keep on champ week) or would have concerns about thanksgiving killing turnout.

It works for both sides:
UT keeps their traditional thanksgiving game and the visiting team (rotates to whoever is scheduled to play in Austin anyway) gets a game with a lot of attention compared to another time slot. The remaining games that week get better Saturday windows instead of Bevo's game pushing them into a lesser window.

There really isn't a downside there.

call it what you want. but going back to my original comment. blaming me for questioning any b12 schedule that favors Texas is like blaming anyone who questions the NSA.

to say that Texas shouldn't get the benefit of a doubt when it comes to this stuff based on their past track record is the god honest truth to anyone who is not a total texas/b12 homer

So you have no logical argument to make so you attack the allegiance of who you are talking to? Says a lot.

What "track record" are you citing?

A league network was shot down before they went it alone and the revenue splits on tv money prior to 2011 was always voting in step with CU, OU, NU, and A&M.

i am just gonna go with homer if you choose to claim that the b12 has never had issues with texas getting/demanding special treatment pre or post 2010.

I just can't argue with that kind of stupid. Id rather have a factual no-nonsense debate and that has 0% chance of happening with you taking that stance.

So rather than offer one example you turn to insults.

So much for you wanting a debate!

You call me a homer but all you do is prove yourself a hater.

(07-03-2014 11:23 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:19 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:13 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:04 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:55 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  Keep moving the goalposts if you want, it doesn't make you right.

Since the time A&M left the Longhorns are the only ones who WANT to host a Thanksgiving game. Everyone else is either OU (who's best game for the spot they'd rather keep on champ week) or would have concerns about thanksgiving killing turnout.

It works for both sides:
UT keeps their traditional thanksgiving game and the visiting team (rotates to whoever is scheduled to play in Austin anyway) gets a game with a lot of attention compared to another time slot. The remaining games that week get better Saturday windows instead of Bevo's game pushing them into a lesser window.

There really isn't a downside there.

call it what you want. but going back to my original comment. blaming me for questioning any b12 schedule that favors Texas is like blaming anyone who questions the NSA.

to say that Texas shouldn't get the benefit of a doubt when it comes to this stuff based on their past track record is the god honest truth to anyone who is not a total texas/b12 homer

So you have no logical argument to make so you attack the allegiance of who you are talking to? Says a lot.

What "track record" are you citing?

A league network was shot down before they went it alone and the revenue splits on tv money prior to 2011 was always voting in step with CU, OU, NU, and A&M.

i am just gonna go with homer if you choose to claim that the b12 has never had issues with texas getting/demanding special treatment pre or post 2010.

I just can't argue with that kind of stupid. Id rather have a factual no-nonsense debate and that has 0% chance of happening with you taking that stance.

So rather than offer one example you turn to insults.

So much for you wanting a debate!

You call me a homer but all you do is prove yourself a hater.

I am not turning to insults. I just opt to not follow you into such a stupid argument. every once in awhile you run into a homer that is so blind by his homerism that you will get nowhere with him in a discussion.

this is clearly one of those times.

(07-03-2014 11:27 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:23 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:19 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:13 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:04 PM)john01992 Wrote:  call it what you want. but going back to my original comment. blaming me for questioning any b12 schedule that favors Texas is like blaming anyone who questions the NSA.

to say that Texas shouldn't get the benefit of a doubt when it comes to this stuff based on their past track record is the god honest truth to anyone who is not a total texas/b12 homer

So you have no logical argument to make so you attack the allegiance of who you are talking to? Says a lot.

What "track record" are you citing?

A league network was shot down before they went it alone and the revenue splits on tv money prior to 2011 was always voting in step with CU, OU, NU, and A&M.

i am just gonna go with homer if you choose to claim that the b12 has never had issues with texas getting/demanding special treatment pre or post 2010.

I just can't argue with that kind of stupid. Id rather have a factual no-nonsense debate and that has 0% chance of happening with you taking that stance.

So rather than offer one example you turn to insults.

So much for you wanting a debate!

You call me a homer but all you do is prove yourself a hater.

I am not turning to insults. I just opt to not follow you into such a stupid argument. every once in awhile you run into a homer that is so blind by his homerism that you will get nowhere with him in a discussion.

this is clearly one of those times.

It's great you can admit that about your lack of rationality.

You still have yet to offer one example.

(07-03-2014 11:50 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:27 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:23 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:19 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:13 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  So you have no logical argument to make so you attack the allegiance of who you are talking to? Says a lot.

What "track record" are you citing?

A league network was shot down before they went it alone and the revenue splits on tv money prior to 2011 was always voting in step with CU, OU, NU, and A&M.

i am just gonna go with homer if you choose to claim that the b12 has never had issues with texas getting/demanding special treatment pre or post 2010.

I just can't argue with that kind of stupid. Id rather have a factual no-nonsense debate and that has 0% chance of happening with you taking that stance.

So rather than offer one example you turn to insults.

So much for you wanting a debate!

You call me a homer but all you do is prove yourself a hater.

I am not turning to insults. I just opt to not follow you into such a stupid argument. every once in awhile you run into a homer that is so blind by his homerism that you will get nowhere with him in a discussion.

this is clearly one of those times.

It's great you can admit that about your lack of rationality.

You still have yet to offer one example.

like I said, not getting dragged into such a stupid debate. if you seriously think the b12 has never had an issue with Texas getting favorable treatment or pissing off conference members I really don't know what to say......

(07-03-2014 11:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:50 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:27 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:23 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:19 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i am just gonna go with homer if you choose to claim that the b12 has never had issues with texas getting/demanding special treatment pre or post 2010.

I just can't argue with that kind of stupid. Id rather have a factual no-nonsense debate and that has 0% chance of happening with you taking that stance.

So rather than offer one example you turn to insults.

So much for you wanting a debate!

You call me a homer but all you do is prove yourself a hater.

I am not turning to insults. I just opt to not follow you into such a stupid argument. every once in awhile you run into a homer that is so blind by his homerism that you will get nowhere with him in a discussion.

this is clearly one of those times.

It's great you can admit that about your lack of rationality.

You still have yet to offer one example.

like I said, not getting dragged into such a stupid debate. if you seriously think the b12 has never had an issue with Texas getting favorable treatment I really don't know what to say......

My point is that whatever favorable treatment they got was the same opportunity afforded to Nebraska, Colorado, A&M, and OU. NOT that it was them never getting benefits over and above the other remaining members. It was the large schools vs the small schools and each was pretty equal in the blame.

Revenue sharing favoritism on league contracts applied to each of those and they block voted to keep it as long as it lasted.

Making more on t3 tv than the others by pursuing their own deal? NU and OU had that. OU gets a better payout relative to others and NU was further along with their network when they left than UT was.

Other than those, which UT was far from alone on, where is the extensive track record? Any issue that sticks out?

I'd like to congratulate you John for threadjacking a discussion on the difficulties in scheduling into a personal diatribe on Texas. Any accommodation made for Texas' Thankgiving game was/is not an issue for other league members, so I fail to understand why it is for you. Tradition. Google that.

(07-04-2014 12:29 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  I'd like to congratulate you John for threadjacking a discussion on the difficulties in scheduling into a personal diatribe on Texas. Any accommodation made for Texas' Thankgiving game was/is not an issue for other league members, so I fail to understand why it is for you. Tradition. Google that.

I did and was not one bit surprised when it came up with this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRdfX7ut8gw

(07-03-2014 12:17 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  http://www.okstate.com/sports/m-footbl/s...14aae.html

It's pretty interesting. Some quotes that stick out:

Quote:In just the past two years, OSU's non-conference schedule has dropped from four opponents each year to three with the Big 12 Conference's decision to play nine league games annually instead of eight. As a result, Martin had to unload contracted non-conference matchups by cancelling games or by moving them to future dates.
"One of the series that was cancelled was a home-and-home with PURDUE," Martin said. "We tried multiple dates in multiple years, but the Big Ten was changing its league schedule as well. Both schools wanted to keep the contract, but we couldn't coordinate dates - even several years out."

Quote:But there are extenuating circumstances in Martin's case. He might be too nice. Several years ago, Oklahoma State was approached by fellow conference member TEXAS A&M, which needed a favor. The Aggies were about to sign a non-conference series with Arkansas to be played in AT&T Stadium in Arlington, but they needed OSU's help by moving a game, or two, or more.
In an effort to help out a fellow Big 12 member, OSU acquiesced and moved several games.

"I know we moved three to help them, and I think it may have affected two more games," Martin said.
As it turns out, Texas A&M left the Big 12 for the Southeastern Conference, and OSU got caught in a schedule squeeze for its troubles. Not only did OSU have to play at Texas two straight seasons, but the Cowboys had trouble filling an open date to start the 2012 season as an indirect result of the A&M-Arkansas series. After making contact with approximately 25 schools, OSU finally had a taker in SAVANNAH STATE.

Quote:As the facilities around Oklahoma State athletics have changed, so has the blueprint for football scheduling. During the years of Boone Pickens Stadium construction, OSU's home-field capacity shrunk to approximately 44,000.
With the loss of seating comes a drop in game-day revenue, which leads to smaller guarantees for the visitors. A guarantee is the amount of money a visiting team receives for making the trip and it is one of the tools used to balance a budget year. Quite simply, schools that pay smaller guarantees often have trouble attracting non-conference opponents who might be seeking a bigger check.

To help offset this particular scheduling dilemma, Martin began a 2-for-1 phase. Most teams outside of the "power conferences" have trouble landing marquee home opponents. OSU struck deals that resulted in smaller guarantees for opponents in exchange for a visit by OSU to their stadium -- the infamous 2-for-1. Oklahoma State played one game at TROY and Troy visited Stillwater twice, thus 2-for-1. As a result, OSU saved money with a smaller guarantee for the Trojans when they visited Stillwater, and Troy got the rare chance to host a Big 12 opponent.

There's more in there but it's just a glimpse into what AD's go through.

I don't feel sorry for them at all. Their problems would be solved if they were willing to play games on the road instead of insisting on 7-8 home games every year.

Quote:I don't feel sorry for them at all. Their problems would be solved if they were willing to play games on the road instead of insisting on 7-8 home games every year.

Sadly money is the reason for that. Teams usually make more paying somebody to come play at their place in return for no exchange game.

Its not like the AD's are trying to screw smaller schools over as some goal in and of itself.

(07-08-2014 10:30 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

Quote:I don't feel sorry for them at all. Their problems would be solved if they were willing to play games on the road instead of insisting on 7-8 home games every year.

Sadly money is the reason for that. Teams usually make more paying somebody to come play at their place in return for no exchange game.

Its not like the AD's are trying to screw smaller schools over as some goal in and of itself.

Exactly. I feel sure that if NIU or anybody else were to make it financially neutral Oklahoma State or whomever would be more apt to schedule 1 for 1's, but the idea that schools should lose money just to be fair is asinine. I don't see anything about NIU coming to Clinton, SC in a return game with Presbyterian.

I actually would commend OKST as their OOC slate has included the likes of Wazzu, MSST, UGA and 'Zona.

(07-08-2014 10:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 10:30 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

Quote:I don't feel sorry for them at all. Their problems would be solved if they were willing to play games on the road instead of insisting on 7-8 home games every year.

Sadly money is the reason for that. Teams usually make more paying somebody to come play at their place in return for no exchange game.

Its not like the AD's are trying to screw smaller schools over as some goal in and of itself.

Exactly. I feel sure that if NIU or anybody else were to make it financially neutral Oklahoma State or whomever would be more apt to schedule 1 for 1's, but the idea that schools should lose money just to be fair is asinine. I don't see anything about NIU coming to Clinton, SC in a return game with Presbyterian.

The point is that they can schedule plenty of schools. If they only make $1 million instead of $2 million by playing on the road, they can still make a go of it. No one is forcing them to do everything for the money. I mean, look at the facilities. They have plenty of money.

NIU did play Oklahoma State at home once, back in 1994. I don't know how they did it though. In NIU's case it's been partly the fault of our previous AD.