Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

hook me

Full Members
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by hook me

  1. Or the B1G/SEC could just poach KU & AZ for more money and tell the rest of the Big 12 to fuck off. Seems like that'd work if that's the route they wanted to go, but I'd be surprised if that's what they were thinking.
  2. The best part of your argument is the idea that your standards are any different than our standards. You look at us as arrogant assholes who are ruining the sport because we want to play people who matter while your own suggestion is itself an expression of which schools you believe "matter" enough to get into the club. We have more "history" with Rice & SMU than we do OSU, TTU, or UH yet they're not included because.... why? Well ,they suck for one but I know that's not how you would choose opponents given your strict geographical/historical preferences, so why aren't they included? Maybe they just slipped your mind since you weren't digging through all the records & it was just a suggestion, I'll let it slide. Funny how TCU is playing really close to home in the fucking Mountain division. Real "regional". It's also amazing how your team somehow gets in even though they have extensive history with all of about 7 schools & a losing record against almost every school they've faced 10+ times with the only notable exception being KSU. Not sure what makes ISU worth including over Rice or SMU. Why would anyone want you in their conference other than to be the easy win & rest week they need? What exactly does your football program bring to the table? You should be real, real careful about drawing lines around who's in & who's not since I don't think anyone in the entire country would even notice if you're not one of the schools that make the cut. Now, before you get all huffy, let that settle & realize that few people (maybe none actually) here are interested in a 16 team league which you must admit you pulled straight out of your strawmans ass. You and your Cyclones can still play close to (but no longer against) the big boys, still get paid very well (for now), still have a shot at the playoffs (an even better shot with UT & OU gone), & can still participate in Farmageddon. We want, generally, what you want, which is to be able to play meaningful games against teams that we care to play. The difference between us & you is that you're happy as hell to play the KU, OSU, KSU, TTU, etc. of the world & consider those games meaningful because that's the level of your football program (and that's being VERY generous to you so you're welcome). We're not interested in that - at least not as the only kind of teams we're playing - because our football program (even with a few trips through the desert of mediocrity) is not on the same level as those types of schools. We want to play more of the OU, Bama, LSU, UGA, & UF of the world. We're also going to a conference that reinstates 2 of our older rivalries that contain much more animosity for large portions of the fan base than the likes of TCU, TTU, OSU, BU, UH, or anyone not named OU & are mostly closer to home than the likes of Kansas, Cincy, & WVU. Your way of "almost everyone gets included" is littered with problems, some of which have been mentioned & some should be so obvious as to not need mentioning & would lead to schools breaking away at the first opportunity. I'd rather have 2 leagues with relegation/promotion of a portion of teams than what you suggested (and I'm not exactly keen on that for the record). Don't act like you can stick USC back with the likes of the PAC 12 & expect them to be happy when they literally just chose to travel 1/2 way across the country to get the hell away from them & find teams worth a shit. USC vs SDSU at midnight, who wouldn't want to watch that shit? Air Force vs. CSU would be must watch. It's a "good idea" for schools like yours. Our school isn't like yours, so it sounds like nails on a chalk board to most of us.
  3. People will convince themselves they'll use it for other shows only to spend $10/month (or whatever it is) for nothing. Kinda like my 5 year old gym membership...
  4. While that's true, there are some that get a LOT closer than others to at least breaking even, or have some other positive reason for adding. NCST/Va Tech don't make any sense on any level for the SEC or B1G. They make a lot of sense for the Big 12 or a reformatted ACC. The Rutgers move was a money grab by the B1G & rutgers & has worked out well for them while being a complete waste of money for the networks. That worked 10 years ago, but with all the belt-tightening going on at Disney I seriously doubt they're going to pony up the money for those two. On top of that, the SEC doesn't seem too keen on adding schools like NCST & Va Tech considering they wouldn't even take OU without UT coming along as well & it seems entirely unlikely that they would watch UNC, UVA, & ND run to the B1G & follow that up with little brothers that no one cares about.
  5. The SEC adding Va Tech/NCST on their own seems as silly as the Big 12 adding UNLV or SDSU. They offer nothing & dilute the payout to other schools. Just because the states are large doesn't mean it makes sense to add them. ND, FSU, Clemson, UNC, UVA, UO, UW, Miami. That's it. That's the list & honestly only 4 of them make sense for the SEC since ND is B1G in ACC clothing. FSU/Miami, Clemson, UVA, UNC. I'd think the SEC would throw the kitchen sink to get UNC (add Duke/NCST if needed) in order to get another BB blue blood & keep them away from the B1G. If you can get UNC without a tag-a-long you can still pursue UVA, Clemson, & 1 of FSU/Miami. If they come with baggage (which I would bet they do & ESPN/SEC would probably prefer Duke to NCST) then someone gets kicked off that list & my guess is UVA has a spot if they want it, so it's possible the SEC doesn't end up with Clemson or a FL school unless UVA decides to split from UNC. I don't really know how close those 2 are or what their decision makers would prefer. It seems like sports enthusiasts want them in the SEC & academic people want them in the B1G. The good news is the B1G seems to be settled where they're at until something happens with the PAC so now would be the time for Sankey to set the dominoes to get UNC in the boat at the first opportunity.
  6. I think it's UM & OSU being a bunch of bitches. Time zones are a bullshit excuse unless you're talking about WC teams traveling to EC schools & playing early games. Other than that, 18-22 y/o athletes are perfectly capable of traveling just like USC & UCLA will be doing.
  7. You know that based on personal research & experience or did your wife inform you?
  8. Well, he does have a history with taint tickling...
  9. Cincy & UH made much more sense for the Big 12 at the time, & even now, than SDSU. Even if you were to argue they're similar or even equals, UH & Cincy were added at a time when the Big 12 was falling to pieces. The stability they brought (along with BYU & UCF) allowed the conference to stick together & negotiate another TV deal. By the time that new TV deal was struck the Big 12 had solidified itself as the #3 P5 conference in terms of TV revenue thanks to the USCLA exit & the century-long ACC TV deal. There's no need for SDSU, their TV market means jack shit since there's no Big 12 network, the state of CA has shown time & time again how little it cares about college athletics outside of a good USC football team, they offer nothing in terms of intriguing matchups, they would dilute the TV revenue for each Big 12 school since there's no pro rata clause for G5 schools that I'm aware of, & UA, CU, & ASU (if they all come) + BYU would be plenty of members to have a late window game each week for ESPN if they require it (which I'm sure they will). SDSU, Fresno St., Boise St., UNLV are prime for Pac membership if the other rats start jumping ship but that's about it.
  10. Big 12 fans wouldn't really want SDSU & UNLV would they? I mean, I understand the road trips would be fun, but they are a giant shart in terms of everything else. Pray for UO/UW or hold your water for the ACC meltdown before adding more G5 schools.
  11. If we're scheduling top-tier opponents in a 4-team playoff why the hell would we decide to not schedule them in a 12-team playoff? 11-2 Big 12 champion UT with a loss at Bama & a conference loss somewhere still gets in the 4-team playoff. 9-3 UT with a loss at OSU & 2 conference losses probably gets in on most years depending on how exactly everything shakes out. No FCS teams because fuck that. Only Big 12 teams that'll come to daddy & not require a return trip because fuck that (and fuck playing a Big 12 team in general for several years anyways but eventually playing TCU, OSU, & BYU as a one off in an interesting neutral site or only at home may be okay). Really last years schedule is optimal & you just have to figure out how to schedule the weak OOC home schedule with the strong conference home schedule (a&m, LSU, Bama, etc.) when we play the away leg of the home & home.
  12. How is 2-7-7 easier? As @TKthunder2 pointed out above it makes scheduling more complicated because it doesn't come out even TEXAS: a&m, OU Year 1: Arky, LSU, Bama, Auburn, MSU, OM, Mizzou Year 2: UK, Vandy, UF, TN, UGA, SC.... and....? You have an empty spot that you have to fill with one of the teams you played in year 1. Is it an impossible solution? No. Is it an added headache that is completely unnecessary? Absolutely. With the 3-6-6 you're already playing every team every other year just like the 2-7-7, you're protecting more rivalries than the 2-7-7, and it makes it easier to balance the schedule, & it comes out perfectly even unlike the 2-7-7. I don't see a world where the 2-7-7 makes sense in a 16 team conference. 1-7-7 which they won't do because it's only 8 conference games, or 3-6-6.
  13. If the SEC is serious about protecting their rivalries they're going to have the 3-6-6. You're going to choose between the Iron Bowl & Bama/TN? I don't think so. RRS or UT/a&M? UGA/FL or UGA/Auburn? Why would you choose to destroy rivalries within your own conference when there's no need to? Very Big 12ish. It just doesn't make sense & like you said, 2-7-7, while helping but not completely solving the rivalry problem, doesn't make sense from a general scheduling standpoint. There's too much money to not go to 9 conference games & there's not a better way to do 9 conference games than 3-6-6 to protect rivalries & have a somewhat balanced schedule. The expanded CFP helps assuage worries about missing the playoffs because of a tough schedule, you still have 2 patsy OOC games you can split up to help break up the schedule, & you can charge much more for home tickets because you're seeing every team from the SEC much more often & UT/OU have been added to that mix.
  14. Your list needs some help. How do some teams play a team every year but the other team doesn't? In other words, MSU plays Bama every year but Bama doesn't have them? Same thing with LSU. OM has Arky but Arky doesn't have them, SC doesn't have Mizzou..
  15. Holy shit I just looked because I assumed the title of the thread just hasn't been changed & I'll be damned, he just skipped out on doing it this year. That guy just can't help but be a laughing stock.
  16. If you don't want to engage with any of the 10+ reasons people have given you as to why teams & fans would/should care then stop asking the damn question. "A player may get hurt". We could lose Ewers, Banks, Worthy, & Murphy in the Spring game but we're still playing it. We lost Neyor & Angilau in fall camp last year, should we not have fall camp to prevent injuries? We lost Ewers in Q1 vs. Bama & he missed the next 3 games - should he not have played? Should he not play @ Bama this year since we could go 12-1 & still make the playoffs? Also, your TCU example makes no sense because they actually tried to win the Big 12 & lost in a really good game. How does the narrative of their Championship Game loss change if they sat their star players for the Big 12 Championship? "They sat all their star players & forfeited the Big 12 championship just to get blown out by UGA?" Yeah, sounds smart. Also, it's fucking TCU & they were happy just to be there given their record from the year before. Your example of McCaffrey is equally stupid because that was a top 10 pick that decided to skip the fucking Sun Bowl not a coach benching players in the Conference Championship game. Stop the idiocy, have a nice weekend, & try again next week if you come up with something better than injuries in a violent sport, TCU, & CMC.
  17. Don't schools have a maximum number of official visits they're allowed to host? If that hasn't/doesn't change then this new rule will probably be beneficial for the top 10% of prospects who would have a roster spot reserved at any school no matter what so long as they're actually interested in that school. I'm sure staffs are smart enough to sniff out the ones that have no interest in actually going to that school & are just looking for money & a good time on their 10th visit.
  18. If you don't think football conference championship games matter then that's your shitty opinion to have, but don't act like it should be any sort of popular opinion. The hardware that goes in the trophy room that you get to show to recruits, the giant ring you get to wear into recruits houses right before the early signing period while other coaches are having to game plan along with recruit, the extra week of rest, the time afforded for players to not have to worry about game prep while taking finals, the guarantee of not having to play on the road or get a more difficult draw because you're seeded lower in the playoff, only having to win 3 playoff games instead of 4, the money paid in bonuses to the coaches for the the championship win & likely making it to the quarterfinals, and whatever else I missed that people can think of. Fans don't typically like watching teams tank on purpose, but when you tank in a conference championship game I couldn't imagine the outrage. And where exactly would it stop? You sit the QB because he's the star but what about the LT, WR, LB, CB? What's the locker room attitude when you work all year only for the coaches to decide that one individual (or 2 or 3) are too important to risk in the fucking conference championship game so everything they preached about being a team, sacrificing for the program, playing every game like it's the most important game ever, & everything else coaches say to motivate & create team chemistry & unity was just a bunch of bullshit? Edit: You probably wouldn't have a ring to wear into recruits house just the bragging rights, but you get the idea.
  19. Well I'd imagine no one will be happy if your star QB blows his knee out but if you're worried about injuries then you follow the wrong sport. That injury could happen during any play of any game or any rep of any practice before that. If he's hurt going into the game then I'd understand resting him, but if he's healthy then he plays just like he would against the cupcakes earlier in the season when you wouldn't have needed him to win.
  20. Only conference champions can get a bye week & there's no guarantee that the loser of the title game would be a 5-8 seed which play the first round game at home. Also, conference championships usually come with a nice bonus for the HC as well as recruiting usefulness and, as always, bragging rights.
  21. SDSU & CAL don't move the needle. They're leeches, even by Big 12 standards they're bleh. The UCF/UH/Cincy move were necessities to stabilize the conference but now that they're in somewhat of the drivers seat for the B1G & SEC sloppy-seconds they can be much MUCH more selective. Take UA & CU to start the dominoes & hope UO & UW come knocking. If not, there's no reason to panic & add as you're in prime position to reap some of the benefits of the ACC implosion in the near future. If Utah gets over itself and asks nicely then maybe you add them & ASU but Cal, Stanford, OSU, WSU, & any other Western school isn't worth it. Wait for Pitt, VA Tech, NCST, & maybe GT to become available, see if UCONN & gonzaga want to be added as basketball members & you've got yourself a damn good basketball conference with some of the biggest names out there to go along with an entertaining football conference.
  22. The asshole in me really wants the SEC to pass on FSU & UM sighting a "gentlemen's agreement" to not allow another FL school into the SEC.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.