-
Finish your profile right here and directions for adding your Profile Picture (which appears when you post) is right here.
Wrathis
-
Posts
366 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Events
Posts posted by Wrathis
-
-
I can't help but laugh at the idea that this thread was brought to us by babyjesus
In other news, I feel like this Yahoo article sums it up nicely...
College sports leaders have always been hypocrites. With Pac-12 flailing in wind, it's clear everything is up for grabs
SPORTS.YAHOO.COM
After whining and crying for help when athletes sought to capitalize on the free market via transferring and NIL deals, college athletics' brass is now doing the same thing — except with whole schools...-
1
-
2
-
-
On 8/2/2023 at 2:31 PM, Jon Joseph said:
And if it is 4 schools and not just Oregon and UW in the mix, this would do much to abate travel; especially, for non-revenue sports.
Jon, almost like you spoke it into existence.
On 8/2/2023 at 2:31 PM, Jon Joseph said:If you have the faith that I have in the Oregon brand, why the concern about being able to market the brand to a far greater audience without being restricted by limited cable broadcast agreements?
Even on this wonderful forum, I've read numerous comments from fans that are more worried about non-fans being able to see the product than they are about spending $10 (presumably) themselves for a PAC subscription and having to swap apps.
On 8/2/2023 at 2:31 PM, Jon Joseph said:As to what would be acceptable in a revenue share from the B1G? I defer to the people instrumental in the operation of the Athletic Department but in my FWIW opinion, $40M a year with 6 teams on the west coast would warrant a move to a conference that will be one of two standing at the end of the day.
Thanks for providing an answer, here's hoping if this newest rumor turns out to be true, that we are offered such a generous share.
-
2
-
-
On 8/2/2023 at 12:29 PM, cartm25 said:
Based on prior posts, I would believe that you and I see differently on this issue . . . BUT
There's nothing I disagree with in your post.
I'm not in the "doomed or dead on arrival" group. But I'm also not in the "streaming is revolutionary and visionary" group that believes this gives the Pac-12 some advantage over other conferences that the other conferences will have to catch up to.
From all indications, all other major conferences will make more money and have greater national exposure than the Pac-12 over the course of the new contracts.
Add to that, the other conferences are partnered with massive companies that have streaming capabilities, and can switch over at their leisure when it makes the most sense.
I've been streaming since 2015. I don't fear streaming, but I struggle to see the ADVANTAGE the Pac-12 has over other conferences that have access to the exact same benefits, all while they enjoy more money and national exposure than the Pac-12 over the next 5-10 years.
I found a bit of humor yesterday: Those that argue streaming will give the Pac-12 an advantage other conferences will have to catch up to, also lauded how the proposed piece of the Apple deal that provides bonus payouts to the Pac-12 if certain subscription milestones will enable . . . wait for it . . . the Pac-12 to "CATCH UP" to the Big 12.
If the deal "as rumored" (I understand this could change) is accurate, then the Pac-12 will, quite literally, be playing catch up to all the other conferences.
I hear you, I really do. Now tell me, what other avenue are you wanting to pursue? A B1G invite? So far we don't have one that any of us are aware of. How much of a reduced share are you willing to take, will it offset our travel costs (and toll on the athletes) and does playing there increase our odds at making the playoff? Is the goal money at any expense or is it making the playoff (and the payday that comes with that) and a chance at a Championship?
Would you prefer we grovel at the feet of the B12 while leaving the PAC to die? I figure we'd have a good shot at winning the B12 and making the playoff from there, of course that depends on whether the B12 chooses to send the invite. It wasn't that long ago we thumbed our noses at that conference and I'd be willing to bet they remember that...
Also remember being tied to ESPN or Fox comes with the caveat that they didn't want us, or at least they don't seem to want us now. We aren't calling the shots, we're sitting outside on our hands hoping for the best instead of looking at who does want us and how to make that work in our favor.
We ARE a national brand, in the furthest corner from where the media lives and operates, 4 hours behind the rest of the country. We claim to have a national following but can't even count on our own fans to spend the ($10?) money it takes to support that brand. What does that tell you? Instead we're worried about how many people can see what some of us aren't apparently even willing to pay to watch.
So what DO we have? We have a conference we have to rebuild. We have to find some more Utah-like teams willing to make the investment and move the needle. I believe SDSU and SMU do that. We have an up and coming global company willing to take the risk and share in the profits based on how many like the product...and you know, based on what I've seen it's probably a losing bet b/c everyone is scared to death they'll have to temporarily flip apps and pay per month what a cup of coffee at Starbucks costs...Good riddance.
-
On 8/2/2023 at 10:51 AM, cartm25 said:
Again, the American and Sun Belt conferences have been streaming on ESPN+ for years, so not sure how the Pac-12 is leading anything.
Also, the B1G and SEC are partnered with some of the worlds richest and most successful companies in Fox and ESPN/Disney, respectively . . . oh, and they both have streaming capabilities.
Where is the overwhelming advantage the Pac-12 has over other conferences when said conferences have similar relationships with powerful companies that have streaming capabilities . . . and could switch over seamlessly when most advantageous?
Here's the timeline as I recall it:
- Pac-12, B1G, and ACC all make an alliance and we are assured that realignment among the three conferences are not part of discussions.
- The Pac-12 ensures that all teams are united and looking forward to making a new deal.
- USC / UCLA leave the conference.
- Oregon wishes to join the B1G and/or are offended that they weren't invited.
- Negotiating period begins and we were all ecstatic that we can finally dump Larry's leftovers and, instead, be all over linear TV (ESPN, Fox, NBC, CBS, etc.) without exclusions like Direct TV, etc. I'm happy to be proved wrong, but at the outset, I don't recall anyone yelling, "No to ESPN, Fox, NBC, and CBS. Let's go for all streaming on Amazon or Apple!"
- Months and months go by and still no media deal . . . now the rumors of streaming partners having minimal number of games start.
- Many more months go by and still no media deal, and rumors indicate ESPN/Fox are not big players . . . rumors of streaming partners having a substantial number of games.
- Rumors of Colorado leaving for the B12--derided as untrue (by GK himself) and fearmongering--come to fruition. Colorado leaves the Pac-12.
- Rumors of AZ, ASU, and Utah potentially leaving for the B12.
- Reports of agreement with Apple being the primary carrier of games.
If you're trying to convince me that where the Pac-12 is now was the part of the ORIGINAL (i.e., from the beginning), revolutionary, visionary plan all along . . . well I don't believe that.
The Pac-12 is NOT in a better position now than back in May of 2022 before USC/UCLA left for the B1G.
There's intentional innovation for innovation's sake (e.g., Apple inventing the iPhone), and there's innovation because you're forced into it. Both can be positive, but to me, it's clear that the Pac-12 is going the streaming route because their preferred options are no longer there.
Like going backpacking in deep wilderness and forgetting the tent. Yep, now you're forced to get innovative. You'll survive, but it doesn't mean you're better off than the alternative of having a tent.
I don't think the argument being made is that we're better off now, I think it's that maybe the sky isn't falling and we aren't doomed or dead on arrival. There can be positives that come out of this fiasco that Leisure Suit Larry
and the inept presidents put us in. From what I've seen the B1G or B12 aren't (or haven't) sent us an invite and even if they do, we'll still have all the travel issues etc that we've outlined USC/UCLA will have. And for what it's
worth as someone that has done civilian SERE training and is ex-military, keeping a clear head and positive mental attitude while being stuck in the deep wilderness is as or even more important for survival than almost
anything else...
-
1
-
3
-
-
I'm 100% with you on this Jon, as I usually am with your posts. However, the gloom and doom, the sky is falling posts I'm seeing all over are really starting to wear on me. I want the PAC to survive, I'm a traditionalist at heart.
Traditional in that I want the PAC to continue and thrive, but aware enough to know the landscape is shifting away from TV's with antennas, then away from cable, then away from satelite and now to streaming. It pays to be at
the forefront of these things rather than lagging at the end. Sure, the first contract may be weak...but by the time we're ready to get the next contract done, the rest of the landscape will be working on catching up.
Despite Finebaum and the rest of the SEC/ESPN loudmouths broadcasting our demise with every useless breath they take (bc it's in their best interest), we're still recruiting at an incredibly high level. We still signed our coach
to a top 15ish deal, and he agreed to an almost unprecedented buyout. We're still going to put an elite product on the field, and with our season only 30 days away, if you can't be excited about that then there really may be no
hope left for you...
-
1
-
2
-
-
On 8/1/2023 at 10:01 PM, 2002duck said:
I've said it here a dozen times. Going with Apple TV is a worst case scenario. Normal people across the country don't have Apple TV because it has very little to offer, and those people are surely not paying for the PAC 12 package.
We'll be extremely lucky to get even half of Oregon fans to sign up for Apple TV. And Apple is adding viewership metrics to payouts??? No way Jose. Zero point zero chance of even approaching those metrics.
If the PAC is to be the guinea pig for streaming, then they need to be propped up like most beta tests or venture capital business runs: give us tons of cash with no expectations on viewership numbers for our agreement to be the guinea pig.
Personally, I will not be paying for Apple TV. I'll do whatever it takes to get a sign on from someone else out of spite. I already have all the other streaming services. I refuse to pay for Apple. If I won't sign up for it, what does that tell you about other people that are nowhere near as big of a fan of the Ducks as I am?
Personally I pay for AppleTv and am willing to pay a subscription fee for all the PAC content. What I wasn’t willing to do was go to Dish just for the Network. I refuse to pay for or support Disney or ESPN. If I wouldn’t pay for them, what does that tell you about other people that are nowhere as big of a fan of the Ducks as I am?
-
1
-
-
I may be in the minority here, but I think this is the way. I don't even have conventional (linear) TV any more as my new TV came loaded with all the apps etc and auto-connected to my wi-fi. I already have PrimeVideo, AppleTV, Netflix etc, so if I have to pay $10/month for all the PAC games, that's perfect for me.
That being said, I'm not quite a dinosaur but I'm no spring chicken either. If people my age (and younger) are operating in a similar fashion, I think this is a good move and a headed in the right direction...
*and for what it's worth, I don't pay for ESPN+ LOL*
-
2
-
-
On 7/31/2023 at 8:58 PM, HappyToBeADuck said:
It's amazing to me how far down the rabbit hole we as fans can go. Especially on rumors.......
If you want more negative then dont read this post. You will be disappointed. I respect your feelings and posts. Its good therapy to get it off your chest. We all need it.
Here's my rumor for the Forum and it has as much validity as anyone elses. Its positive so proceed with caution.....
The combined deal of Tier 1 and Tier 2 rights will come in between $28 and $34 million per year. With a 3% to 5% annual escalator.
Tier 1 will be a streaming company. The goal for the streamer is to bring in new subscribers. The PAC should be rewarded annually for the number of subscribers brought in over a baseline.
The PAC should receive a % of any advertising dollars that the streamer may eventually use. I have no problem with commercials as long as the entertainers are rewarded. And commercial times outs are no longer than 2 minutes. And no more than 1 forced TV time out per half.
SPOILER ALERT: ESPN will be part of the package. They are a sports broadcaster and the PAC 9 has quality sports programming. I decided to take a breath and consider that ESPN would rather have OSU vs WSU on PAC After Dark than BSU vs USU. Its good business, very profitable and ESPN will not vacate a broadcasting staple. Besides they getting it for cheap
ESPN will be at the table. Their offer of $9 million per school a year is way better than the $3 million per year each school received from the P-12 Network.
PAC After Dark has worked out well for ESPN and the cash strapped company needs high value programming.
The streamer will share/sell or simulcast the PAC'S high profile games. CBS has interest in broadcasting those games on National linear TV.
All the PAC remaining 8 schools (ungrateful UA can get the hec out) need to do is keep investing and growing the product. Strive to send 2 of the 4 top 25 schools to the CFP.
Then invite 2 quality schools that want to invest and grow their brands. You know Utah, UA and ASU were begging the PAC for invites to the big table. Utah grew their brand. You can decide about the Arizona schools.
I am looking forward to seeing this unfold
Based on something akin to what's above, I think this could work. You bring in SDSU, SMU and UNLV at a reduced share (but still an increase over the $4M or whatever the MWC is paying them), and incentivize their performance by increasing their share from any full share school that they outperform. I think by using an incentivized unequal revenue sharing system, you can still give the new schools a raise AND incentivize them and the full share schools to punch above their weight. You also get to pioneer the streaming side of things, especially if you can get them to incentivize a payout system based on viewership numbers. There should be negotiating power in the fact that you're volunteering to be the first major streaming-based conference, so get them to pay a cut based on viewership/new subscriptions. There's a way to make this work, it's just going to take some good negotiating and creative thinking...
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 7/31/2023 at 5:04 PM, Duckman1 said:
It’s being reported 200 million per year Apple only, if this is true…very sad
I've heard this as well...although I've heard a million different things lately. It wouldn't be so bad if it were $20M but with unequal revenue share...or $20M base plus a performance based modifier depending on how many households actually stream the game.
-
1
-
-
On 7/31/2023 at 9:52 AM, Jon Joseph said:
One thing for certain, I pray that the powers-that-be in Eugene will not schedule any one-off games versus the LA schools. Do nothing to alleviate the travel headaches these 2 illegitimate offspring will encounter.
We are 100% of the same mind on this. I'm a spiteful, vengeful soul and if I'm the PAC, I would do absolutely NOTHING to make their life any easier. Hell, I'd be tempted to grab SDSU, SJSU, Fresno etc and make them members just so those schools can't find a team in California to play...
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 7/30/2023 at 5:07 PM, Charles Fischer said:
I look at the facts, and spin positive from them.
Here's my answer to that; if we survive as a conference (and I still suspect that we will), we'll have a whole new nest of rivalries and I don't just mean new ones within conference. Call me sophomoric, but if I'm a remaining PAC member and play a team that has defected (looking at you USC, UCLA and Colorado), I'm running the score up as high as possible! What's the downside in doing so? "Here you go B12/B1G, take the Buffs/Bruins who went 1-8 in conference this year with an average margin of loss of 38 points and keep them." Good riddance...
-
On 7/27/2023 at 10:01 AM, lownslowav8r said:
I still largely lay this whole fiasco at the feet of Leisure Suit Larry and his fiancé, Carol Folt. From what I understand she almost single-handedly shut down the prospect of expansion from her lofty throne in LA, all while knowing full well they were bolting for whiter, snowier pastures...
-
1
-
3
-
-
I can see a situation where Colorado would leave if dollars are dictated by success and investment. They haven’t been relevant since coming here, and $31.7 guaranteed is a heck of a lot better than a lesser amount based on their historical performance…
-
First, it's Big Game Boomer and he's constantly churning out lists full of hot takes and mistakes. It's essentially click-driven drivel. However, if the metric being used is NFL success, he may have an argument. Essentially they've put McCaffrey, Gerhart, Bryce Love, Stepfan Taylor and Tyler Gaffney in, while we've put Royce, LaMike, Kenjon, J-Stew, DAT, Blount, J-Johnson in about the same time frame.
I think McCaffery is the standard bearer for them, but on sheer numbers we have them beat.
-
1
-
-
On 7/25/2023 at 5:50 PM, Augduck said:
Actually they ruled it cardiac arrest. There is a difference:
A heart attack is when one of the coronary arteries becomes blocked. The heart muscle is robbed of its vital blood supply and, if left untreated, will begin to die because it is not getting enough oxygen. A cardiac arrest is when a person's heart stops pumping blood around their body and they stop breathing normally.
What would cause cardiac arrest in a young, healthy top tier athlete? I feel like this is becoming more common, but then again maybe it's due to the information age and all news being global in an instant?
-
On 7/24/2023 at 3:26 PM, cartm25 said:
How does not being an AAU Member impact a university's academic qualifications?
I'm intrigued by UNLV as well; would be an intriguing addition.
I must say, I'm confused how to apply the "market size" and "viewership" standards. When USC and UCLA joined the B1G, we on the OBDF argued it should have been Oregon to go with USC and not UCLA. Opponents said, "Oregon has a much smaller 'market size' than UCLA and wouldn't make sense from a "media/business" standpoint." In response, and rightfully so, everyone on the OBDF, nearly in unison, pointed to how our viewership numbers were better than both USC and UCLA; basically, the OBDF used all other arguments in defense of Oregon.
Now when I use similar arguments in favor of BSU that were used in favor of Oregon, there is an appeal to "market size" to oppose the idea.
I'll take a school that has a higher % viewership relative to market size (not just higher %, but higher raw numbers) over apathetic markets.
This is very well thought out and I appreciate you bringing it up. I for one prefer SDSU to BSU, mostly bc I believe they have a higher ceiling. Although Albertons Stadium has a slightly larger capacity when compared to Snapdragon, San Diego is a destination location while Boise really isn't. Both are small (by comparison), but for now they can do the job.
As many have pointed out, the academics are more in line though. Finally (and maybe most importantly), SDSU is in fertile recruiting grounds. Granted, we pulled Sadiq from there and Gatlin Bair is making waves as well, but BSU just doesn't check as many boxes as Southern California does.
When it comes to UNLV vs SMU, it's kind of a toss-up for me. Personally, I live in Texas and would LOVE to see SMU in. If nothing else, it would give more access to recruiting down here and I know multiple SMU grads that are frothing at the mouth to join the PAC and to become relevant again. However, UNLV I believe is a T1 research facility, and a better geographical fit. Recruiting is sufficient in the area and it also is a destination location. Both make sense to me...
That being said, there's also rumor of no expansion whatsoever...and I hope that doesn't end up being the case. Personally I believe we either expand or become absorbed. With the ACC, B1G, B12 and SEC all being 14-15 teams, us staying at 10 seems dangerous. Realistically I'd like to see us follow suit by bringing in SDSU, UNLV, SMU, BSU and maybe Fresno State if for no other reason than b/c I want to see the PAC survive. College football was much more appealing to me b/c it was tradition rich and filled with hungry athletes willing to put it on the line to make the NFL. Now you can get rich playing college ball and media is killing the tradition. Here's to our thriving and surviving into the next decade...cheers!
-
1
-
-
On 7/20/2023 at 8:54 PM, SoGaDawg said:
Thanks, I really enjoy this forum and the Ducks are my #2 or my West Coast team.
I know my Dawgs certainly have a good shot at a 3-peat but I’m not counting on it. We have had arguably the best team the last 2 seasons winning back to back, but we absolutely had the ball bounce our way a few times both seasons like most NC teams do. GA will be very good and the schedule is dare I say favorable, but we will know more of the chances come November.
Yeah, I wasn’t heartbroken to see Alan Judd fired. I don’t know the truth of the facts but UGA responded very strongly and a few days later he was fired. His wording seemed at best inflammatory and apparently he embellished the facts in a negative way towards UGA and players and recruits. Oh well, you make your bed and such. He isn’t a learning young journalist so I have little sympathy for him.
You and @Log Haulinmake me feel better about the Ducks. Thanks for the response from both of you. I was very confident in Nix and the rest of the skill players, but hearing good things about the defense is awesome. It’s not surprising in the least. Lanning is a great defensive coach. If that offense performs like I think and also has a good defense that might be the difference.
I would be ecstatic if the Ducks and Dawgs played for the NC. Of course I want the 3-peat, but history tells me that is unlikely but possible. But if we lost to the Ducks it would at least be bitter sweet for me. I don’t want to lose to tOSU, LSU, Mich, or Bama. Good Gosh forbid losing to TN or USC.
SoGaDawg, good to see you again! I'll toss my opinion out here, but please understand I'm a DUCKS fan through and through. What I'm about to say may get me axed from not only the forum, but from college football fandom in general. That being said, here we go...
Simply stated, the PAC will score TONS of points this year. The 2 teams best equipped to do so are Troy and that team up north
(and we're right there in the thick of it). Williams and Penix Jr. both are proven commodities and have an elite group of receivers to throw to. I'm of the opinion that the PAC will be the most entertaining conference to watch this season!!! Both QB's are highly accurate with rocket arms who will throw for 350+ yards per game. You can bet that the ball will be flying out West this year!
The real story though will be defense, and more importantly, who can consistently get after the QB. There aren't many DB's who can cover Rice, Singer, M. Williams (USC) or Odunze, Polk or McMillan (Fuskies) for long...which makes the EDGE pivotal this season. That being said, Bralen Trice (Fuskies) is going to wreck games and his play may be enough to get Washington in the playoff...and there's almost no way USC can repeat their turnover margin from last season.
Both teams will be good on the offensive line and Washington will be very good on defense, while USC will have to answer some questions in that area. However, they'll probably score enough points that it won't matter too much. All of that being said, those are probably the two playing for the PAC Championship...However, Utah is always a tough out and Oregon State will shock some people this season. The PAC probably has more parity this season than any other conference in football and no one is getting out of this thing alive. There are 5 legitimate teams who can walk away a winner in Vegas, and UCLA and Arizona are coming up extremely quickly!
So the moral of the story is this: I think the Fuskies are the most complete team this season (but they lack depth) and USC is the most offensively talented. Our Ducks are extremely talented on both sides and will be in every game this year, but our outcome will depend on how well we gel together. Oregon State is dangerous but their ceiling is limited by the play of DJ Uiagalelei. If he's good, they'll be very good. Utah isn't near as talented, but they're always well coached and play well as a unit. We've recruited very well the last several years, so I think moving forward that the PAC will still run through Eugene, but there's no telling who's winning the conference this season...however it's gonna be a hell of a lot of fun to watch!!!
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
Let's not act like Deion is Bear Bryant or Gunnery Sergeant Hartman here. The player got embarrassed and the rest of the team got put on notice that violation of rules will get you removed from the team, possibly in public. I don't buy that you can't build a team this way, I saw it work time and again in the military. Deion's old school, he wants his team to be built old school, and he wants them to play like an old school team.
I don't want to get into what I think the softening of society has done, but in the business of college football where everyone is a prima-donna and Colorado was the laughing stock of the NCAAF last year, he's got a herculean effort in front of him to make them into a respectable football team...and if that means some feelings get hurt along the way, so be it.
-
PSU, Hawaii are sacrificial lambs. I expect Tech to be a 10 point game that takes more than it should to win but will really help solidify our group of players into a TEAM.
At Palo Alto and Tempe is typically tougher than it should be, but I expect to win those games. Cal should be easy, but we always find a way for that game to be closer than it should be. I expect we win big at home.
On the road against the pups and Utes will prove tricky and I'd be happy if we split this with the win being over the mutts. If it's the other way around, I'm disgusted but we're still alive.
That leaves us with the Buffs, 'Cougs, Beavs and Prophylactics. We need to win 3 of those 4, and a sweep would be perfect. We're lucky enough this season to get the 'Cougs at home, so hopefully that minimizes the drama
that typically happens in the Palouse. I expect the Buffs to have some tricks up their sleeve, but we handle business. Playing Troy at home will be a sordid affair with Playoff implications, and Lanning vs Riley and Kingsbury
may prove too much on our developing defense. I hate to pick it, but I think they catch us on their way out the door. Lanning will have to get the boys motivated, but I think he does the job and we handle the Beavs 2 weeks
to put us at 10-2 for the year and playing the Irish or Nittany Lions in a NY6 bowl. It's not the dream season, but it's a good one to build on and keeps the momentum moving in the right direction...
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 7/12/2023 at 9:51 PM, Charles Fischer said:
We are supposed to wear black for the USC game; perhaps a throw-back to the Halloween game?
Now I can get behind this 100%! These might have been my favorite of all time!!!
-
1
-
-
On 7/10/2023 at 12:17 PM, cartm25 said:
I realize these highlights may not indicate future success, but he sure does pass the "eye test"; long throws, touch throws, anticipation throws, under pressure, etc. I'm still a bit disheartened that he spurned the Ducks . . . he looks like the real deal:
I'm still heart broken at the loss of Moore! To date I've made one campaign contribution in my life, and one NIL donation (Moore's HS team was taking donations for new jerseys and the like) and both left me feeling like a putz. That being said, I was confident then that he was the real deal and he's gonna have to completely flop to convince me otherwise...but the idea of him coming back into the flock so to speak would really make me excited! Here's hoping!!!
-
3
-
-
The PAC is completely loaded at QB this year! If proffering out my opinion, it's hard to bet against Williams. What I saw of him last year was impressive, and Penix just led the nation in passing. The X-factor for Nix (and to a lesser degree Rising) is their mobility and ability to run the football. In the end I'm taking Caleb to repeat bc they've added in Singer, so he'll have plenty of people to throw to. That's the other thing, the talent at receiver for these QB's! Williams has Mario Williams and Singer (with Branch waiting to be the next man up), Penix has McMillan, Odunze and Polk while Franklin and Johnson will be blazing the trail for Nix.
With all that superstar talent it's easy to forget about DeLaura down in the desert throwing bombs to Cowing and MacMillan or Shedeur Sanders dropping dimes to Hunter and possibly McClain! I mean, what does it say when DJU, Cam Ward and DeLaura are the 2nd tier QB's in a conference?! Dollar for dollar I expect the PAC to be the most exciting conference in football this year and it should really be something for GK to build and capitalize on!
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 7/7/2023 at 12:10 PM, Jon Joseph said:
BTW, how would you like to be a pro golfer today who stayed 'loyal' when fellow pros who scored $100M + to abandon the PGA are now again your competitors? The PGA asked for help from Congress and heard crickets.
Those pro's who stayed are upset bc they missed out on a $100M payday, while the ones that moved to LIV took the risk of never playing in the PGA again and were paid handsomely for it. I'm mad b/c I had cash to spend on BTC when it was $400 and chose not to risk it, is it right that I get mad at those that did take that risk and made money hand over fist? Not at all. It's risk vs reward...
-
I was literally about to post about this change. Let's hope Lanning and Co can pull through in the end...
Big Ten To Add Four Pac-12 Schools?
in Our Beloved Ducks
Posted
Bottom line is that we're watching media companies trash 108 years of tradition to make a buck...and it just so happens that a room full of people who were supposed to be looking out for the universities made every horrible choice possible along the way. Almost sounds like collusion to me...