Big XII Expansion

Discuss anything else athletic or non-athletic related that doesn't belong on the main Tulane athletics forum.
anEngineer
High Tide
Posts: 308
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:26 pm
Status: Offline

Wed Oct 19, 2016 1:46 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
anEngineer wrote:I am talking intra-conference competitiveness. There is no consistent Ohio State-Purdue or Oklahoma-Kansas situation in the AAC. That's part of what makes the SEC and ACC fun to watch; anyone is capable of beating anyone else. Some teams might have up or down years but there is no dominance by 1 or 2 teams every year. If the AAC can maintain that element and add P5 wins (to get into the P5-heavy polls), it becomes an attractive product.
To be fair, that's because AAC doesn't have a team that's even remotely consistently the caliber of Ohio State or Oklahoma. Also, the Big 12 seems to be more equal than pretty much any other conference - it had different champ or co-champ every year for 2011-2015 (5 seasons) with a strong possibility of a new champ this year and it doesn't seem like any other conference can claim that level of parity. On the SEC, it seems like Alabama almost consistently dominates the conference - from 2011-2015, only 2 teams other than Alabama won the SEC, and one of the years that Alabama didn't win the SEC champ, it won the national title against the SEC champ (2011 was the Alabama non-SEC champ v. LSU SEC champ national champ game year). The ACC has similar issues with Clemson and FSU - they are the only ACC champs over the 2011-2015 period.
I'm not talking about who wins the conference. I'm talking game to game. That's all the networks care about is people watching games. They really could not care less who wins the conference so long as people know they are going to see a competitive game where either team stands a decent chance to win. The AAC delivers that. The SEC and ACC deliver that. Clemson and Fl St have won but it hasn't been easy. Alabama has steam rolled but you still feel like their opponent is capable of beating them, so you watch (for a while). The rest of the SEC is usually a good game.


Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:02 pm

I see. I agree that that's important, but the focus needs to be on OOC games first so that the initial interest in the conference is there. Last season and this season are like night and day for the AAC due to the many (and early) OOC losses.
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 7548
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:19 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote:I see. I agree that that's important, but the focus needs to be on OOC games first so that the initial interest in the conference is there. Last season and this season are like night and day for the AAC due to the many (and early) OOC losses.
Schedule the Purdue's, Indiana's, Illinois, Wake's, Kansas' Virginias Mississippi State, Vandy's of the the damn PEE 5 World

I have to withdrawn consideration of the AAC Commish job... I will be employed as the Assistant Coach in charge of Players, Redshirts jumping up and down,m waving towels on the sidelines during kickoffs
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 8:23 am

golfnut69 wrote:
Aberzombie1892 wrote:I see. I agree that that's important, but the focus needs to be on OOC games first so that the initial interest in the conference is there. Last season and this season are like night and day for the AAC due to the many (and early) OOC losses.
Schedule the Purdue's, Indiana's, Illinois, Wake's, Kansas' Virginias Mississippi State, Vandy's of the the damn PEE 5 World
This could be part of the solution - the AAC should consider not scheduling P5 programs that regularly contend for their conference title. It's true that Houston won against a Big 12 contender this season, but SMU lost to two Big 12 contenders, Tulsa lost to a Big 10 contender, UCF lost to a Big 10 contender, FSU lost to a ACC contender, and Memphis lost to SEC contender, and, had the AAC scheduled more middling P5 teams instead of those contenders (not bottom feeders - teams like MS State or Arizona), they likely would have won more of those games and this AAC season would look very different right now. Having good AAC teams undefeated OOC with wins over middling P5s (and sometimes even lower end P5s) reflects better on the conference than AAC teams not undefeated OOC with only OOC losses to elite P5s. Last season, the AAC won a lot of games OOC, but the fact that very few of those wins were against P5 title contenders didn't prevent 4 teams from spending time in the top 25.
Jaxwave
Surge
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 8:14 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 8:46 am

The problem with scheduling is that the middle and bottom P5s are discouraged by their conferences of scheduling the upper G5 teams in order to keep them down. Sort of like Ole Miss and Miss St. dropping USM to keep them down and it worked.
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 5955
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 8:54 am

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
golfnut69 wrote:
Aberzombie1892 wrote:I see. I agree that that's important, but the focus needs to be on OOC games first so that the initial interest in the conference is there. Last season and this season are like night and day for the AAC due to the many (and early) OOC losses.
Schedule the Purdue's, Indiana's, Illinois, Wake's, Kansas' Virginias Mississippi State, Vandy's of the the damn PEE 5 World
This could be part of the solution - the AAC should consider not scheduling P5 programs that regularly contend for their conference title. It's true that Houston won against a Big 12 contender this season, but SMU lost to two Big 12 contenders, Tulsa lost to a Big 10 contender, UCF lost to a Big 10 contender, FSU lost to a ACC contender, and Memphis lost to SEC contender, and, had the AAC scheduled more middling P5 teams instead of those contenders (not bottom feeders - teams like MS State or Arizona), they likely would have won more of those games and this AAC season would look very different right now. Having good AAC teams undefeated OOC with wins over middling P5s (and sometimes even lower end P5s) reflects better on the conference than AAC teams not undefeated OOC with only OOC losses to elite P5s. Last season, the AAC won a lot of games OOC, but the fact that very few of those wins were against P5 title contenders didn't prevent 4 teams from spending time in the top 25.
This is NOT a viable solution. As a conference our OOC schedule would be recognized as weak. Remember in 1998 why we didn't get a better bowl or even BCS bowl despite being one of two teams to finish the season undefeated? Games against these teams would not draw TV, and the strategy would be exposed for the farce you're trying to perpetrate. And what's worse is that if we "only" went .500 or worse against these teams, the media could make it look like we're closer to the rest of the G5 than we are to the P5's.
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 11928
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:13 am

What D said. That is a terrible idea. Just like we hate the dumbing down of our schedules by RD this is no different and won't fool anyone.
Find A Way!
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6417
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:25 am

How is that dumbing down? He's not saying don't play an Oklahoma or Ohio State once in awhile, he's talking more about replacing Southern, UMass, and UL-Lafayette with Purdue, Illinois and Arizona for example. You can't say playing those three would be perceived as weaker than the trio of Southern, UMass and UL-L? The casual fan is much more likely to go see a game between Tulane and Purdue, or Tulane and Arizona than they would be to go see Tulane vs Maine, UMass or UAB. I know I surely would. Everyone talks about branding, the P5 "brand". That's all the casual fan sees. So when they see Tulane against the Illinois and Purdues of the world, the perception is better than when they see Maine, UTEP or Marshall on the schedule, which is why CUSA was killing us.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 5955
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 10:16 am

RobertM320 wrote:How is that dumbing down? He's not saying don't play an Oklahoma or Ohio State once in awhile, he's talking more about replacing Southern, UMass, and UL-Lafayette with Purdue, Illinois and Arizona for example. You can't say playing those three would be perceived as weaker than the trio of Southern, UMass and UL-L? The casual fan is much more likely to go see a game between Tulane and Purdue, or Tulane and Arizona than they would be to go see Tulane vs Maine, UMass or UAB. I know I surely would. Everyone talks about branding, the P5 "brand". That's all the casual fan sees. So when they see Tulane against the Illinois and Purdues of the world, the perception is better than when they see Maine, UTEP or Marshall on the schedule, which is why CUSA was killing us.
Robert, what you post is vastly different from the suggestion Aberzombie made. What was posted that I responded to was
the AAC should consider not scheduling P5 programs that regularly contend for their conference title.
That would be dumbing down our schedule as a conference. You're suggestion makes all the sense in the world, if I understand correctly. You're saying continue to play the true "Power" teams but eliminate the games against teams nobody cares about replacing them with lower tier P5's. Again, I think it's a very good suggestion, may cost us one or two wins/year for the shorter term, but is MUCH different that what Aberzombie proposes.

As a conference, we need to continue to play the top "Power" teams and pull off the occasional upset AND beat up on the lower tier "P5" teams. If we could do that for a couple of years running, we'd improve our branding to the point where we generate more media $$ and get closer to "P6".
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 10:44 am

Jaxwave wrote:The problem with scheduling is that the middle and bottom P5s are discouraged by their conferences of scheduling the upper G5 teams in order to keep them down. Sort of like Ole Miss and Miss St. dropping USM to keep them down and it worked.
That's true in some cases, but dropping USM had more to do with legitimizing USM - like LSU and Tulane. There was no benefit for Ole Miss or MS State to play USM while there would be a huge benefit to USM playing them if USM ever happens to win. It doesn't seem like a lot of the mid level P5s have too much issue scheduling AAC teams with Maryland, Virginia Tech, Penn State, NC State, BYU (it counts as P5), Louisville (historically mid level) etc. on the AAC schedules this year, and, in the near future, Syracuse, Virginia, and possibly even Purdue - depending on who they hire - would likely move into the mid level category. That's just this year and that's still omitting teams like South Carolina and Kansas.
DfromCT wrote:This is NOT a viable solution. As a conference our OOC schedule would be recognized as weak. Remember in 1998 why we didn't get a better bowl or even BCS bowl despite being one of two teams to finish the season undefeated? Games against these teams would not draw TV, and the strategy would be exposed for the farce you're trying to perpetrate. And what's worse is that if we "only" went .500 or worse against these teams, the media could make it look like we're closer to the rest of the G5 than we are to the P5's.
1. 1998 Tulane team - While Tulane should've gotten the bid due to being undefeated, but the 1998 regular season schedule was 2015 Sunbelt bad. Tulane played 3 teams with even or better records - two 7-5s and a 6-6. Everyone else - all 8 other teams - had losing records. The AACs conference schedule alone - every year since its inception - is exponentially better than the entire 1998 Tulane regular season schedule and its not close.

2. Scheduling - No one is saying that they should schedule weak teams - they should just consider avoiding elite ones more often. If Memphis was sitting at 6-0 with a win over Miami instead of a loss to Ole Miss, if USF was sitting at 6-0 with a win over NC State or Georgia Tech instead of a loss to FSU, and if Tulsa was sitting at 5-1 with a win over Iowa or Minnesota instead of a loss to Ohio State, there is a realistic chance the AAC would have 5 teams ranked right now (probably 4, but 5 would be possible). There is no farce - no one is going to balk at wins over Miami, NC State, Georgia Tech, Iowa, or Minnesota (all teams with winning records), and wins over those teams are worth far more than losses to Ole Miss, Ohio State, and FSU. In theory, yes, losing to mid level P5 teams could be an issue, but, at some point, the AAC teams have to prove themselves, and diving headfirst against mid level P5s with a good chance of victory is more valuable than diving headfirst against elite teams with a low chance of victory - especially when the AAC is competing against other G5s for one New Years Six slot.

The AAC as it stands will likely have 3 teams ranked at most during any given week for the rest of the regular season - Navy/Memphis, Houston and USF (3/4 lost OOC with the final 1/4 having a good shot at losing) - but it could easily fall to two (USF, Memphis and Navy all play each other and Tulsa/Tulane/UCF could perform some upsets) when it could have had 4-5 ranked even this week, and 4-5 teams being ranked right now instead of 2 would have provided extraordinary benefits to the conference - viewership, relevance, articles, conversations, attendance, etc.

I suppose the disagreement here is that, in my opinion, scheduling an elite team 6 times and losing 5 of those times is worth less than scheduling a mid level P5 6 times and losing 1-3 of those times, especially since winning any of those games in either scenario would significantly increase the chances of being ranked during a season. Boise and WMU rode that latter path this year, and it seems to be working out well for them.
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6417
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 11:10 am

Speaking of Boise, I guess we should be pulling for BYU tonight?
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 5955
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:07 pm

'Zombie, you sure tee'd it up for Will G in the Nola.com chat. Right or wrong, his response backed my scheduling point of view more than yours. It seemed like you were hoping he'd mirror your post, but instead he talked about the strength of the conference being on display with the tough P5 games scheduled. Frankly, I think he's overlooking the blowouts and focusing on the one win UH had over OU.
In my opinion, the AAC has had a good amount of big games this season and still is another one later in the year when Houston plays Louisville. I think there's no doubt the AAC is one of the best conferences in the nation this season and the way they've played against some of the top teams in the nation is a big reason why teams like Houston, USF and Navy are held in such high regard
And as the season plays out, the OU win is looking less and less meaningful for UH.
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
Ruski
Surge
Posts: 766
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 4:58 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:28 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Jaxwave wrote:The problem with scheduling is that the middle and bottom P5s are discouraged by their conferences of scheduling the upper G5 teams in order to keep them down. Sort of like Ole Miss and Miss St. dropping USM to keep them down and it worked.
That's true in some cases, but dropping USM had more to do with legitimizing USM - like LSU and Tulane. There was no benefit for Ole Miss or MS State to play USM while there would be a huge benefit to USM playing them if USM ever happens to win. It doesn't seem like a lot of the mid level P5s have too much issue scheduling AAC teams with Maryland, Virginia Tech, Penn State, NC State, BYU (it counts as P5), Louisville (historically mid level) etc. on the AAC schedules this year, and, in the near future, Syracuse, Virginia, and possibly even Purdue - depending on who they hire - would likely move into the mid level category. That's just this year and that's still omitting teams like South Carolina and Kansas.



2. Scheduling - No one is saying that they should schedule weak teams - they should just consider avoiding elite ones more often. If Memphis was sitting at 6-0 with a win over Miami instead of a loss to Ole Miss, if USF was sitting at 6-0 with a win over NC State or Georgia Tech instead of a loss to FSU, and if Tulsa was sitting at 5-1 with a win over Iowa or Minnesota instead of a loss to Ohio State, there is a realistic chance the AAC would have 5 teams ranked right now (probably 4, but 5 would be possible). There is no farce - no one is going to balk at wins over Miami, NC State, Georgia Tech, Iowa, or Minnesota (all teams with winning records), and wins over those teams are worth far more than losses to Ole Miss, Ohio State, and FSU. In theory, yes, losing to mid level P5 teams could be an issue, but, at some point, the AAC teams have to prove themselves, and diving headfirst against mid level P5s with a good chance of victory is more valuable than diving headfirst against elite teams with a low chance of victory - especially when the AAC is competing against other G5s for one New Years Six slot.
2 problems with this. First, AAC teams did in fact play the types of school you are talking about. East Carolina beat NC state, did you forget that? The AAC OOC this season in this category: Louisville(Houston), Notre Dame(Navy), Baylor+TCU(SMU), Wake Forest(Tulane), Kansas+Ole Miss(Memphis), Syracuse(USF), Penn State(Temple), Maryland (UCF), Virginia+Syracuse+Boston College (UCONN), NC State+South Carolina+Virginia Tech, Purdue+BYU(Cincinnati). There's 18 games there.

Now against the big, top schools you have Oklahoma(Houston), Florida State(USF), Michigan(UCF), and Ohio State (Tulsa). That's 4 games.

That's a pretty ideal ratio to me. Houston, USF, and UCF expect themselves to be at the top of the AAC in contention for the top 25 each year, so it makes sense that they'll schedule a game to take a shot against premier competition. Tulsa scheduled Ohio State back in 2012 when they were bowling every year and playing very difficult OOC schedules to make up for running through CUSA.

You can look at the Louisville, Virginia Tech, Ole Miss Games as top tier but I disagree. Those teams could be very mediocre or even terrible any given year and these games are scheduled years ahead. And in the opposite direction SMU should be much better most years and the Baylor/TCU games should be much more competitive.

I think this type of schedule is ideal. AAC simply needs to win more. So far the conference is 6-9 with games left against Notre Dame, BC, and BYU. 5 of those losses the AAC absolutely must win; Wake, PSU, Maryland, Syracuse, and South Carolina. Flip those 5 games and we end up 13-5 and everyone is happy, no scheduling complaints. Just need to win!

That being said this shows how poor Tulane's scheduling has been. Only Temple is remotely close (Penn State, Army, Stony Brook, Charlotte).
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 2:31 pm

Ruski wrote: 2 problems with this. First, AAC teams did in fact play the types of school you are talking about. East Carolina beat NC state, did you forget that? The AAC OOC this season in this category: Louisville(Houston), Notre Dame(Navy), Baylor+TCU(SMU), Wake Forest(Tulane), Kansas+Ole Miss(Memphis), Syracuse(USF), Penn State(Temple), Maryland (UCF), Virginia+Syracuse+Boston College (UCONN), NC State+South Carolina+Virginia Tech, Purdue+BYU(Cincinnati). There's 18 games there.

Now against the big, top schools you have Oklahoma(Houston), Florida State(USF), Michigan(UCF), and Ohio State (Tulsa). That's 4 games.

That's a pretty ideal ratio to me. Houston, USF, and UCF expect themselves to be at the top of the AAC in contention for the top 25 each year, so it makes sense that they'll schedule a game to take a shot against premier competition. Tulsa scheduled Ohio State back in 2012 when they were bowling every year and playing very difficult OOC schedules to make up for running through CUSA.

You can look at the Louisville, Virginia Tech, Ole Miss Games as top tier but I disagree. Those teams could be very mediocre or even terrible any given year and these games are scheduled years ahead. And in the opposite direction SMU should be much better most years and the Baylor/TCU games should be much more competitive.

I think this type of schedule is ideal. AAC simply needs to win more. So far the conference is 6-9 with games left against Notre Dame, BC, and BYU. 5 of those losses the AAC absolutely must win; Wake, PSU, Maryland, Syracuse, and South Carolina. Flip those 5 games and we end up 13-5 and everyone is happy, no scheduling complaints. Just need to win!

That being said this shows how poor Tulane's scheduling has been. Only Temple is remotely close (Penn State, Army, Stony Brook, Charlotte).
My overarching point is that the AAC doesn't have to play those teams to reach its goals, which are implicitly (1) the New Years Six slot, (2) have as many teams ranked for as long as possible, (3) be the first G5 in the playoff and (4) be treated as a Power conference. In order to achieve those goals, the AAC doesn't have to play blue blood P5 teams - or modern P5 powers (i.e. Ole Miss/Baylor) - in the regular season. As mentioned earlier, if a team plays 6 times against a blue blood/modern power but only wins 1/6 times, it may not be worth as much as if a team plays 6 times against a mid level P5 and wins 3-6 of those times. In the blue blood/modern power scenario, the AAC team would have a great season the 1/6 time that it wins the game, but the other 5/6 times could prevent that team from being ranked at all. In contrast, assuming that in the mid level scenario, the AAC team wins 4/6 times, the AAC team would be able to have a great season 4 of those times would would only have to suffer losses 2/6 seasons. Boise State and WMU are great examples of this working out - they each played mid level (or worse) P5s, won all of their games, and would likely still be ranked with 1 loss at this point. It's true that, in the AAC, a lot of AAC teams would beat up each other by the end of the season, but, during about week 6 through week 9-10, all of the no loss and one loss AAC teams w/mid level P5 win(s) would likely be ranked and would receive the benefits from being ranked.

This scheduling philosophy would help out the better AAC teams in the conference more so than the average or below teams, as the average or below teams would still accumulate losses anyway while the better teams would have fewer OOC losses. In theory, one could argue that good teams should schedule harder and less good teams shouldn't, but, because it's impossible to know in advance who has a good team and who has a bad team, it's better for everyone to at least consider it. For this season, had good AAC teams with OOC losses scheduled differently, Tulsa would have one loss, Memphis would have no loss, and USF would have no loss, and they would likely all be in the top 25 depending on which P5 they had on their schedule instead, and, given their performances so far this season, there is a high probability that they have the ability to defeat the vast majority of P5 teams. As for the average and below AAC teams, even if they win all of their OOC games, they are going to suffer multiple losses in conference because there are several conference teams better than them in their division. Cincinnati is a great example of that since it's undefeated right now OOC, but it's being pushed around in conference (it's OOC schedule is disappointing so far but BYU remains). Further, having AAC teams undefeated OOC with a decent P5 win but then suffer a lot of in conference losses reflects very well on the AAC as it would imply that lower end AAC teams are better than the mid level P5s that they defeated, and, because good AAC teams defeated those lower end AAC teams, the good AAC teams must be really good.

The TLDR version is that (1) the AAC is not in a position for its good teams to consistently challenge the best teams in the nation, (2) wins over mid level P5s are worth far more to the AAC than a loss to an elite P5, and (3) an AAC team undefeated OOC w/P5 win(s) that suffers multiple conference losses reflects very well on the strength of the conference.
DfromCT wrote:'Zombie, you sure tee'd it up for Will G in the Nola.com chat. Right or wrong, his response backed my scheduling point of view more than yours. It seemed like you were hoping he'd mirror your post, but instead he talked about the strength of the conference being on display with the tough P5 games scheduled. Frankly, I think he's overlooking the blowouts and focusing on the one win UH had over OU.
In my opinion, the AAC has had a good amount of big games this season and still is another one later in the year when Houston plays Louisville. I think there's no doubt the AAC is one of the best conferences in the nation this season and the way they've played against some of the top teams in the nation is a big reason why teams like Houston, USF and Navy are held in such high regard
And as the season plays out, the OU win is looking less and less meaningful for UH.
Yeah. As grateful as I am that he does the chats, I'm starting to think that he really doesn't spend too much time thinking about Tulane or the AAC beyond the 10,000 foot level. It's good that the AAC is willing to schedule stronger, but that benefits no one in the AAC if the AAC loses to those elite teams, and, if the data indicates that the AAC is very unlikely to win those games and if the AAC can achieve its goals without doing that, there doesn't seem to be a need to do it. The AAC can challenge elite P5s in bowl season if it comes to it.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 11928
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:39 pm

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Find A Way!
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 17575
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:16 am

Houston board of regents chairman Tilman Fertitta calls Big 12 expansion "one of the greatest shams in college period"
Angry they stole Herman.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... tom-herman
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
User avatar
ajcalhoun
Swell
Posts: 1841
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:42 pm
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:56 am

tpstulane wrote:Houston board of regents chairman Tilman Fertitta calls Big 12 expansion "one of the greatest shams in college period"
It really was a chickenshit move by the conference.
Welcome to gotula.net, where it's never too late to mention Tanner Lee, Andy Cannizaro, Lindsey Scott Jr., Rich Rodriguez, David Pierce, or, of course, Scott Cowen. You see, no horse here is so dead that it cannot be beaten just a little bit more.
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 7548
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:13 am

I understand the Big 12 title gamed will be call 'The Big Deja-Vu' and that a likeness of Yogi Berra will be used as a logo advertising the game
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
JerseyWave
Riptide
Posts: 3823
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:09 pm
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:15 am

The Big 12's future is cloudy. I still think Texas and Oklahoma will eventually move on and leave the others behind. They are the P5 conference being left out of the final four again. If the AAC stays together, the conference should continue to get stronger. Houston will make a good hire and Herman better win soon or he will be out in three years.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 11928
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:31 am

tpstulane wrote:Houston board of regents chairman Tilman Fertitta calls Big 12 expansion "one of the greatest shams in college period"
Angry they stole Herman.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... tom-herman
Reading that let's you know that Briles is definitely in the mix. I wonder if Lane Kiffin is in the mix.
Find A Way!
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 17575
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:33 am

winwave wrote:
tpstulane wrote:Houston board of regents chairman Tilman Fertitta calls Big 12 expansion "one of the greatest shams in college period"
Angry they stole Herman.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... tom-herman
Reading that let's you know that Briles is definitely in the mix. I wonder if Lane Kiffin is in the mix.
Yep. I would think Briles. Kiffin's been HC 3 times already and hasn't done nothing. I don't see Houston giving him a 4th shot.
(You'll love his 76 yard FG attempt)
https://www.google.com/amp/www.sbnation ... ent=safari
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6417
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:11 am

tpstulane wrote:Houston board of regents chairman Tilman Fertitta calls Big 12 expansion "one of the greatest shams in college period"
Angry they stole Herman.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... tom-herman
And Fritz is playing the game. He's offered two of Houston's commits already.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
Ruski
Surge
Posts: 766
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 4:58 pm
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:40 am

RobertM320 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:Houston board of regents chairman Tilman Fertitta calls Big 12 expansion "one of the greatest shams in college period"
Angry they stole Herman.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... tom-herman
And Fritz is playing the game. He's offered two of Houston's commits already.
Which ones?
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 7548
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:43 am

Ruski wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:Houston board of regents chairman Tilman Fertitta calls Big 12 expansion "one of the greatest shams in college period"
Angry they stole Herman.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... tom-herman
And Fritz is playing the game. He's offered two of Houston's commits already.
Which ones?
but, will there be hugs and kisses ?
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6417
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:32 pm

Ruski wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:Houston board of regents chairman Tilman Fertitta calls Big 12 expansion "one of the greatest shams in college period"
Angry they stole Herman.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... tom-herman
And Fritz is playing the game. He's offered two of Houston's commits already.
Which ones?

That's four so far.... And there's not really anyone at Houston to try and keep them committed. Most of the staff joined Herman at UT immediately. They won't even be coaching the bowl game. Games going to be coached by a few stragglers and some graduate assistants. Cougars got royally screwed.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
Post Reply