Scarlet_Lutefisk's picture

Scarlet_Lutefisk


Member since 28 July 2013 | Blog

Favorites

  • NFL TEAM: Toledo Maroons
  • NHL TEAM: Cleveland Barons
  • NBA TEAM: Cincinnati Royals
  • MLB TEAM: Columbus Solons
  • SOCCER TEAM: Ohio Xoggz

Recent Activity

Comment 25 Jul 2016

You might want to take a look at the roster of the 1995 Huskers.

Home states for players who dressed:


New Jersey
8

California
7

Florida
5

Texas
5

Indiana 
2

Iowa
2

Kansas 
2

Missouri
4

Oklahoma 
2

Oregon
2

...

Nebraska
77

Nebraska always recruited nationally & have always recruited the coasts (especially California) hard. They had to for the type of players they weren't growing at home. Their fall from the pinnacle has nothing to do with no longer playing in Texas.

Comment 21 Jul 2016

Syracuse (of all not-NY market schools) is considered one of the big teams from the market. UConn and St. John's take up most of the rest of the space, maybe even more than Rutgers. If the Big 12 could make UConn a credible football school, then UConn can get quite a chunk of the market. 

The numbers we have available suggest otherwise. There are more PSU alums in NYC than there are from UConn.

There is also the glaring fact that if UConn were valuable as some people believe, then the ACC or B1G would already have snatched them up.

Minor indeed. If you're adding four schools, odds are that means you're making an investment in the future of the conference. Probably means a station is around the corner. 

The reason they are potentially adding four schools is because the current media contract will give a guaranteed payout for said number.

As long as the Longhorn Network exists the B12 is not getting a network and the LHN isn't going anywhere.

For years B12 insiders have pointed out that expansion criteria for the conference is very different than for the B1G or SEC, and a large reason for that is because it is unable to monetize markets in the same manner.

Comment 20 Jul 2016

I am well aware of the media implications.

My point is that UConn is not in the NYC TV market, nor does it have generate enough traction to serve as a media gateway in the city for a conference.

There is also the minor issue of the Big 12 not having a conference network, so the basic cable strategy that served the B1G so well in NY, MD & DC is completely irrelevant.

Comment 20 Jul 2016

Everytime I see this type of comment.. I ask ... How often does this happen.. From a domestic violence stand point what do you think the percentage is... 1% or less...

Multiple studies suggest that females are as likely or more likely to initiate violent confrontations in intimate relationships than males.

So no "1% or less" is nonsense. The reason that the violence against women is almost the sole focus in this country over "violence against a partner" is an issue that would violate the policies of the board.

Comment 20 Jul 2016

What other option do they have?

No team from the B1G, Pac, SEC or ACC is coming to save them. Yet that is a dismal selection but it is the best of what's available.

Comment 19 Jul 2016

I've never understood the need that people have to try & shoehorn college conferences into a perfectly symmetrical alignment. That has never been true in the past and there is no reason to believe it ever will be.

In 1991 The Big 10, Pac 10 & SEC each had 10 members. The Big 8, ACC & Big East all had 8 while the SWC had 9.

In 1993 The Big 10 had 11 members, the SEC had 12, the ACC had 9 & the SWC had 8 (the Pac, Big 8 & BIg East stayed pat).

I'm less concerned about trying to force schools into a perfect 4x16 grid than I am understanding what is important to the University Presidents making the decisions about what schools they associate with via athletic conferences.

I tend to believe that the Pac 12 will be content to stay at 12 members until strong peer institutions become available (like Texas and Oklahoma if/when the Big 12 finally implodes).

Comment 17 Jul 2016

2.) The stuff the little medic guys spray on the fake injuries while the guy with the fake injury is rolling around on the ground being fake injured.

Comment 15 Jul 2016

In today's reality I agree that Baylor & BYU are not exactly whetting the appetite of PAC 12 President's / AD's & the commish. But, as I mentioned, this was put together roughly a year ago when Baylor & TCU where the "flavor of the month" and frankly, in order for this model system to work everyone has to go somewhere.

BYU & Baylor could combine to win the next 10 national championships and they still would never get an invite by the PAC.

Academic freedom is a huge issue to the powers that be at Stanford, UCLA, Berkeley, Oregon etc. Private religious schools under de facto control of churches are never getting through the door. 

Comment 14 Jul 2016

If you want to have a better understanding of the reality of the situation you need to look at how much money Athletic Departments have to work with. Luckily that information is easily available. So let's see the amount the respective ADs for each school generated over the last few years:

2014-2015
Purdue    $74,420,334.00    
Rutgers    $70,558,935.00    

13-14
Purdue $71,372,206.00
Rutgers $76,656,339.00

12-13
Purdue $72,379,392.00
Rutgers $78,989,475.00

11-12
Purdue $70,624,394.00
Rutgers $64,038,720.00

10-11
Purdue $66,202,493.00
Rutgers $60,190,100.00

5 Year Avg
Purdue $70,999,763.80
Rutgers $70,086,713.80

The Rutgers Athletic Deparment has abeen working with an available budget that is on average within one million dollars of than Purdue's (and in two of the years actually had a higher budget than Purdue). That means that the Scarlet Knights athletic programs are not at a financial disadvantage to those of the Boilermakers.

Now, why is a "member of the richest conference in college football" bringing in so little more than poor Rutgers?

This is why....

Annual athletic department subsidies:

14-15
Purdue $0.00
Rutgers $23,803,903.00

13-14
Purdue $0.00
Rutgers $36,340,665.00

12-13
Purdue $0.00
Rutgers $46,996,697.00

11-12
Purdue $0.00
Rutgers $27,900,000.00 (rounded)

10-11
Purdue $0.00
Rutgers $28,500,000.00 (rounded)

5 Year Avg
Purdue $0.00
Rutgers $32,708,253.00

Over the past 5 years almost half of the money received by the Rutgers Athletic Department came from the University itself. Purdue athletics are one of the few nationally that are fully self supporting. 

When Rutgers becomes fully vested financially in the BTN & other media contracts they aren't going to leap forward & be financially competitive with the top dogs in the conference in spending, they're going to be using that money to cover the $30 Million tab that the University has been covering each year. The bottom line? Their AD budget isn't going to change much.

Now please tell me again which Athletic Department is doing a better job. 

Comment 13 Jul 2016

A number of those moves just are not realistic.

The SEC is not going to take Oklahoma State sans the Sooners (and probably wouldn't take them period). Nor would they be interested in another Texas school not named UT.

Baylor, BYU & TCU are absolute non-starters for the Pac. 

Comment 06 Jul 2016

You could live in San Diego! 

A buddy of mine's sister and her two friends came out to visit when we lived out there. Went to pick them up at the San Diego airport. They were excited and talking non-stop. After we were headed north on 5 for a bit I noticed they had gotten quiet. Looked back and saw all three wide eyed with terror at everyone (including us) whipping back and forth across lanes at 75+ MPH. I'd gotten so used to it I no longer noticed.