Sacramento St tickets trading for $9

AZDuck

Pac will *never* take Baylor

dnc

AZDuck said:

Pac will *never* take Baylor

It would be so very Pac12 to be the ones to turn down a great deal for themselves on ideological grounds.

sarktastic

*sizzle

sarktastic

Quite honestly, we were lucky to schedule Sacramento State when we did. Now it seems, everybody is trying to land them on their schedule, which proves we were a little bit ahead of the rest of the conference in game schedule management

ArtBriles

AZDuck said:

Pac will *never* take Baylor

WDWYA

AZDuck

dnc said:

AZDuck said:

Pac will *never* take Baylor

It would be so very Pac12 to be the ones to turn down a great deal for themselves on ideological grounds.

Any conference realignment that includes Baylor is not a great deal. Texas already delivers everything Central Texas has to offer.

Baylor is still a small, fairly shitty church school. Under the hypothetical that we're not discussing, the Pac is already taking one of those in TCU, which at least is in the D/FW metro area.

Also, Texas and Oklahoma will never split up again.

These are things I know from having grown up in Texas.

/texassuperiorityguy

greenblood

ApostleofGrief said:

topdawgnc said:

ApostleofGrief said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

ApostleofGrief said:

DerekJohnson said:

I would love to know if this was completely Woodward's doing or if Sark was the one pushing for it.

quite possibly both of them. It seems like if you are going to book a I-AA, book a good one, not a mediocre one, and make it your first game to get warmed up on. I guess you could make the case that they have won PAC-12 games. But, they should concentrate on I-AA teams with a strong tradition and line them up first for warm ups.

Disagree completely.

If you're going to book a scrimmage, pick Idaho State.

there is no point at all in playing Idaho st. You might as well line up tackling dummies and have a game. But you should book a contender from the lower conference. I think you assholes think it's a disgrace to play I-AA, but if you followed more of college football as a whole it is common to play out of levels to be a pussy and not face anyone of consequence.

well, all I can say is that last year's game with a I-AA WAS THE ONLY GAME WITH ANY MOTHERFUCKING COMPETITION. The problem is scheduling SHITTY PUSSY TEAMS. If you schedule a contender I-AA team with a history you will likely get a good football game.

If you schedule any 1-AA team, it better be bad one. If you beat a good one like Eastern Washington you'll get the same credit as beating Savannah St. And if you lose, you might as well have lost to Savannah St. We all know that there are many 1-AA schools that would beat San Jose St and SMU 9 out of 10 times, but you still get more credit beating San Jose St. and SMU.

greenblood

ApostleofGrief said:

topdawgnc said:

ApostleofGrief said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

ApostleofGrief said:

DerekJohnson said:

I would love to know if this was completely Woodward's doing or if Sark was the one pushing for it.

quite possibly both of them. It seems like if you are going to book a I-AA, book a good one, not a mediocre one, and make it your first game to get warmed up on. I guess you could make the case that they have won PAC-12 games. But, they should concentrate on I-AA teams with a strong tradition and line them up first for warm ups.

Disagree completely.

If you're going to book a scrimmage, pick Idaho State.

there is no point at all in playing Idaho st. You might as well line up tackling dummies and have a game. But you should book a contender from the lower conference. I think you assholes think it's a disgrace to play I-AA, but if you followed more of college football as a whole it is common to play out of levels to be a pussy and not face anyone of consequence.

well, all I can say is that last year's game with a I-AA WAS THE ONLY GAME WITH ANY MOTHERFUCKING COMPETITION. The problem is scheduling SHITTY PUSSY TEAMS. If you schedule a contender I-AA team with a history you will likely get a good football game.

You might have a good game, but a close win over any 1-AA team hurts you with the selection committee. It's not just the playoff, it hurts when the committee picks the other major bowl games. Schedule FBS schools or if you do schedule a 1-AA team you better make damn sure it's a team that will allow you to play your 4th-5th string and walkons at the start of the fourth quarter.

BallSacked

dnc said:

AZDuck said:

Pac will *never* take Baylor

It would be so very Pac12 to be the ones to turn down a great deal for themselves on ideological grounds.

I think it would be a bad business decision. Will adding the Waco/Baylor Market increase or dilute the pac12s TV money? My guess is dilute.

TierbsHsotBoobs

BallSacked said:

dnc said:

AZDuck said:

Pac will *never* take Baylor

It would be so very Pac12 to be the ones to turn down a great deal for themselves on ideological grounds.

I think it would be a bad business decision. Will adding the Waco/Baylor Market increase or dilute the pac12s TV money? My guess is the latter.

Hi. Adding the Waco market is worth it if you also get the Houston, Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio markets.

It's even better if you can somehow dump the Seattle/Spokane/Pullman/Portland/Eugene markets along the way.