A new and better FBS thread

From John Canzano..

This guy is a Pac 10 centered guy but he is fairly tapped into the western college sports landscape.

Here is an excerpt about the MW


A few thoughts for your Sunday:

• Mountain West Conference Commissioner Gloria Nevarez told me on Saturday that her conference is exploring a number of expansion scenarios.

“The Mountain West has been meeting regularly to survey the landscape and explore expansion options,” she said.

• MWC member San Diego State already sort of has one foot out the door. The Aztecs held a public celebration for their men’s Final Four basketball season at Snapdragon Stadium on Saturday. Fun was had by all. University President Adela de la Torre used the occasion to drop a hint: “Who knows? Maybe in the near future we will be somewhere else.”

• Fresno State’s President has had regular contact with the Big 12 Commissioner Brett Yormark over the last five months, campus sources tell me. Boise State could also be an eventual Big 12 target, although I’m told there hasn’t been frequent and regular contact. There were also some recent murmurs about possible Big 12 interest in UNLV, but based on my conversations I don’t think it’s particularly serious.

• Feels like the Big 12 will wait to see what happens with the Pac-12’s media rights deal before doing anything itself. That’s what I would do, at least.

• Anyone else think Big 12 Commissioner Brett Yormark is eventually going to want something to show for all the bluster and talk?

• As I reported earlier this week, the Pac-12 isn’t expected to finalize its media deal this month. It could be May or even June before there’s a resolution.

• Pass the beer nuts.

• Who should the Mountain West Conference be exploring as potential expansion targets? My mind immediately went to a handful of California-based Big Sky Conference members such as UC Davis, Cal Poly and Sacramento State. But I’m told by an industry insider that those options won’t easily fly.

• There could be firm opposition from San Jose State, Nevada and Fresno State, who all regularly recruit California, per the source. Also, there’s a sizeable investment required to make the jump up.

• The same insider waved off current Big Sky member Montana as a possible Mountain West Conference target. He said: “Montana and Montana State will stay together.”

• I reached out to Big Sky Conference commissioner Tom Wistrcill on Sunday. There’s a domino-effect in play here. Wistrcill told me: “We’re always monitoring the changing landscape of college athletics. Our President’s Council discusses various schools and potential movements at every meeting. You have to be ready for anything.”

• It’s possible that the Mountain West Conference could lose San Diego State to the Pac-12/Big 12 and decide to stay at 10 full-time members (11 in football as Hawaii is football-only). But the ultimate play for the MWC may be in Texas (i.e. Sam Houston, UTEP, UTSA, etc.).

• Keep in mind, Nevarez — the MWC commissioner — used to be the commissioner of the West Coast Conference. She’d welcome Gonzaga with open arms if it ever decided it wanted to join the Mountain West.

Is the PAC just dragging their feet out of spite or are they coming to the conclusion that they're going to get raided immediately after what apparently is not a very good deal? Cripes they've been at this forever now.

Interesting points about the recruiting in Cali. Would the MW schools rather gain 170 FBS scholarships in their backyard that they now need to compete against or try to fend off a few more scholarships from out of state institutions. Out of state institutions also open up new recruiting grounds that aren't currently tapped. Then you have the non-Cali schools who with all of the recent political stuff may be wanting to hedge their conference away from being Cali-heavy.

I've heard that the MW has reached out to NDSU as part of the due diligence. Honestly I expected them to and I don't think it means anything other than the new commissioner is doing her job. It's a shame about the Montana thing. Us and Montana (or even Montana State) would've been great additions to the conference in terms of the whole package. From top to bottom the presidents, faculty, students, fans and community would be completely on board and understand the importance. While we wouldn't replace the loss of SDSU, really could've helped stop the bleeding. If the state of Montana could support two FBS teams (I personally have no idea), I think it would be great for the MW. Meanwhile, I would probably go lie down in front of traffic. Which brings me to my next point...

Anything below SMU and a conference isn't really getting anything out of "being in Texas". UTEP, Sam Houston, Texas State, UTSA, etc. are all nothing-burgers to people here. Unless they beat an SEC or B12 school, then everyone laughs at the P5 school. All have virtually no brand recognition in their own state. I don't think moving to the MW changes that in the least bit. Have fun training your cameramen to never zoom out or pan up, lest you want people seeing completely empty stands.

For that reason alone the brand hit to the MW would be monumental. Better to pick up schools that care and have room to grow in my obviously biased opinion.

The MW is a basketball conference that plays football. The "brand" doesn't really exist. I am pretty sure SDSU will be gone soon..I am not as convinced others will, but maybe..

I wouldn't mind a conference with 9 members. I am not keen on seeing it spread out all over..The next media deal will likely be smaller and streaming. No sense trying to chase the dollars.

I talked to this guy tonight online. he didn't know about NDSU & mountain west being a possible connection because he's a pac 10 guy he said. he said he's gonna ask his contacts. so let's gooo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

The MW is a basketball conference that plays football. The "brand" doesn't really exist. I am pretty sure SDSU will be gone soon..I am not as convinced others will, but maybe..

I wouldn't mind a conference with 9 members. I am not keen on seeing it spread out all over..The next media deal will likely be smaller and streaming. No sense trying to chase the dollars.

---

You say that, but then why look at UTEP, UTSA, Sammy, etc.? Surely it's not for their basketball teams. And if it's for the population piece, there could be a billion people in Texas and still no one would watch Sam Houston State basketball. B10 learned that lesson the hard way with Rutgers and Maryland. Even then, it's all streaming - not like you're getting more casual eyeballs on games or anything.

If I were in your shoes, I'd agree with you. Only add if absolutely necessary. Losing your best peers and replacing them with worse ones is an unenviable situation. It's what we're going through with FCS as a whole and why there are more NDSU fans than ever wanting out of it.

For me, I get to hope that the MW gets gutted enough to force them to expand, while not getting gutted too much so that the conference retains its quality and reputation. Will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. Fun times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

You say that, but then why look at UTEP, UTSA, Sammy, etc.? Surely it's not for their basketball teams. And if it's for the population piece, there could be a billion people in Texas and still no one would watch Sam Houston State basketball. B10 learned that lesson the hard way with Rutgers and Maryland. Even then, it's all streaming - not like you're getting more casual eyeballs on games or anything.

If I were in your shoes, I'd agree with you. Only add if absolutely necessary. Losing your best peers and replacing them with worse ones is an unenviable situation. It's what we're going through with FCS as a whole and why there are more NDSU fans than ever wanting out of it.

For me, I get to hope that the MW gets gutted enough to force them to expand, while not getting gutted too much so that the conference retains its quality and reputation. Will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. Fun times.

---

Rutgers and Maryland want to get a bunch of Rutgers and Maryland fans to watch the B1G. It was to give them a compelling reason to get the B1G network into NYC, Baltimore and DC. With the growth of streaming that's less critical. That math also becomes less relevant with G5 conferences. A school like NDSU will do well in that conversation due to the number of eyeballs their contracts will bring. But huge money but better than most possible schools.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

It will be interesting to see how far the viewership models evolve. The giant cable packages with hundreds of channels are probably on the way out but I don’t think we’re going to end up with a fully a la carte model either. Hard to say at this point what ends up getting packaged together and where but kit does seem like it’s going to be more about engagement and not just market size.

I don't know that the MW is looking toward Texas at all..They could have had every one of the Texas schools that are headed to the AAC and chose not to. One thing that is hanging out there is the huge exit fees MW schools would have to pay to leave the conference. 32 million with one year's notice, 16 million with 2 years notice..If 3 or 4 schools leave that will provide a nice windfall to the remaining schools. That would give them some breathing room to decide if they really want to expand for football at all..

If 4 schools leave, the MW would have to add 1 to get an 8 game conference schedule. It wouldn't matter much at all who that might be..Nobody would be a game changer..Just a schedule filler.

If less than 4 leave it makes little to no sense to add anyone..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

I don't know that the MW is looking toward Texas at all..They could have had every one of the Texas schools that are headed to the AAC and chose not to. One thing that is hanging out there is the huge exit fees MW schools would have to pay to leave the conference. 32 million with one year's notice, 16 million with 2 years notice..If 3 or 4 schools leave that will provide a nice windfall to the remaining schools. That would give them some breathing room to decide if they really want to expand for football at all..

If 4 schools leave, the MW would have to add 1 to get an 8 game conference schedule. It wouldn't matter much at all who that might be..Nobody would be a game changer..Just a schedule filler.

If less than 4 leave it makes little to no sense to add anyone..

---

Isn’t the MW at 11 football members? So they’d need 9 members to have an 8 game schedule?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndyBison

Rutgers and Maryland want to get a bunch of Rutgers and Maryland fans to watch the B1G. It was to give them a compelling reason to get the B1G network into NYC, Baltimore and DC. With the growth of streaming that's less critical. That math also becomes less relevant with G5 conferences. A school like NDSU will do well in that conversation due to the number of eyeballs their contracts will bring. But huge money but better than most possible schools.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

The additions of Maryland and Rutgers have been an unmitigated disaster for the B10. Of course those schools wanted in, light years ahead of each of where they were before.

It will be interesting to see how the cord-cutting/streaming continues to shake out. Seems like everything is slowly moving forward to it still, but one cannot discount the fact that these companies love bundling junk and making people pay for stuff they don’t want.

I think G5 will be relegated to the streaming platforms and off-Saturday games if they want to be on standard cable TV. These P5 media deals are so large the networks can’t afford to have anything else playing on saturdays

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Isn’t the MW at 11 football members? So they’d need 9 members to have an 8 game schedule?

---

Currently at 12 football members, 11 for the other sports.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

The additions of Maryland and Rutgers have been an unmitigated disaster for the B10. Of course those schools wanted in, light years ahead of each of where they were before.

It will be interesting to see how the cord-cutting/streaming continues to shake out. Seems like everything is slowly moving forward to it still, but one cannot discount the fact that these companies love bundling junk and making people pay for stuff they don’t want. Give it a cycle or two and they’ll do what the soccer leagues do: majority of games on one network, subscription service for some more games, then another network for the major competitions. If you want to see all games you gotta have like three different services. Different flavors of the same crap.

---

I don't see where the Big 10 has suffered any unmitigated disasters..That is a wildly successful conference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

I don't see where the Big 10 has suffered any unmitigated disasters..That is a wildly successful conference.

---

The unmitigated disaster were the words of an SI writer. The B10’s success has exactly 0 to do with the membership of those schools and the success itself is in spite of them being in the conference.

Every school in the conference would be richer without them. I once read an SI article where the conference commissioner publicly admitted that it was a mistake when directly asked about the decision to add them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

The unmitigated disaster were the words of an SI writer. The B10’s success has exactly 0 to do with the membership of those schools and the success itself is in spite of them being in the conference.

Every school in the conference would be richer without them. I once read an SI article where the conference commissioner publicly admitted that it was a mistake when directly asked about the decision to add them.

---

I don't see where it has hurt all that much..But it matters not..

The comings and goings of the big boy conferences is light years away from the MW..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

I don't see where it has hurt all that much..But it matters not..

The comings and goings of the big boy conferences is light years away from the MW..

---

I agree. Maryland won a bowl game last year against a ranked team. Rutgers was very competitive in the men's B1G and handed #1 Purdue their first loss of the season. Maryland made the tournament as an 8 seed and won their first game. The Maryland women's team was a 2 seed and made the Elite 8 this year. I'm not sure and the other sports, but a good friend has a daughter who chose Rutgers over several B1G schools for track and field. Far from an embarrassment. And good academic schools as well.

I prefer the traditional conferences but that's the old fashioned me. This large conferences take away from what made college sports exciting. For that reason I don't like Rutgers, Maryland, Nebraska, UCLA or USC in the B1G. But that ship has sailed.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndyBison

I agree. Maryland won a bowl game last year against a ranked team. Rutgers was very competitive in the men's B1G and handed #1 Purdue their first loss of the season. Maryland made the tournament as an 8 seed and won their first game. The Maryland women's team was a 2 seed and made the Elite 8 this year. I'm not sure and the other sports, but a good friend has a daughter who chose Rutgers over several B1G schools for track and field. Far from an embarrassment. And good academic schools as well.


Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

Is that what NDSU92 was saying though? I thought he was talking more about the extra teams diluting the TV revenue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gully

Is that what NDSU92 was saying though? I thought he was talking more about the extra teams diluting the TV revenue.

---

My guess is the tv people encouraged the addition of those two schools. There are a lot of potential viewers on the Eastern seaboard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

My guess is the tv people encouraged the addition of those two schools. There are a lot of potential viewers on the Eastern seaboard.

---

Yes and yes. The additions were made to “break into those markets”. Since Maryland and Rutgers don’t have much penetration into those markets, it never panned out as they’d hoped. It was a huge risk and it didn’t work out. If they could go back they’d do it differently but they are now stuck with those teams, probably forever.

The B10 has placed some other pretty big bets recently however, and those have or are projected to pan out very nicely. They are in the drivers seat as the premier conference for the north and west portions of the country. None of that has anything to do with Rutgers and Maryland though.

Streaming for games is already a factor NDSU does really well in that aspect.
getting on Broadcast TV will become more important too as most people will still watch local channels FREE then supplement hulu/prime streams.

NDSU with Broadcast TV/streaming now is very effective & MWC / AAC would be wise to have them on board

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Yes and yes. The additions were made to “break into those markets”. Since Maryland and Rutgers don’t have much penetration into those markets, it never panned out as they’d hoped. It was a huge risk and it didn’t work out. If they could go back they’d do it differently but they are now stuck with those teams, probably forever.

The B10 has placed some other pretty big bets recently however, and those have or are projected to pan out very nicely. They are in the drivers seat as the premier conference for the north and west portions of the country. None of that has anything to do with Rutgers and Maryland though.

---

I don’t think that the problem with Maryland is that they lack market penetration. They’re a great basketball school with a strong fan base in a major metropolitan area. The problem is their football program is not good. If it were down to them or the Gophers if you threw out the historical conference associations you’d take Maryland. The Rutgers thing I didn’t understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Yes and yes. The additions were made to “break into those markets”. Since Maryland and Rutgers don’t have much penetration into those markets, it never panned out as they’d hoped. It was a huge risk and it didn’t work out. If they could go back they’d do it differently but they are now stuck with those teams, probably forever.

The B10 has placed some other pretty big bets recently however, and those have or are projected to pan out very nicely. They are in the drivers seat as the premier conference for the north and west portions of the country. None of that has anything to do with Rutgers and Maryland though.

---

I agree..Rutgers and Maryland did not make the B10 better, but they didn't hurt all that much either.

They wanted the LA market they got that. Neither school is as good as the top football schools. UCLA helps with basketball but the key is "potential" tv viewers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bisonaudit

I don’t think that the problem with Maryland is that they lack market penetration. They’re a great basketball school with a strong fan base in a major metropolitan area. The problem is their football program is not good. If it were down to them or the Gophers if you threw out the historical conference associations you’d take Maryland. The Rutgers thing I didn’t understand.

---

Never in a million years would the B10 pick Maryland over Minnesota though. All of the cohesiveness, stability and familiarity that comes with historical affiliation is the backbone of athletic conferences.

I’m not too familiar with the B10 east, but to my knowledge there is 0 excitement for schools in playing Maryland almost a decade after they’ve been in the conference. They were a square peg in a round hole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

I agree..Rutgers and Maryland did not make the B10 better, but they didn't hurt all that much either.

They wanted the LA market they got that. Neither school is as good as the top football schools. UCLA helps with basketball but the key is "potential" tv viewers.

---

I guess that’s my point. Look at the move they made with USC/UCLA and compare it with Rutgers/Maryland.

Massive fan bases in multiple sports, grows them into additional time-zones, broadens the allure of nationally televised games. On top of all of that, brand recognition. UCLA and USC have been irrelevant in football for a decade and I’ll still tune in and watch them play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

I guess that’s my point. Look at the move they made with USC/UCLA and compare it with Rutgers/Maryland.

Massive fan bases in multiple sports, grows them into additional time-zones, broadens the allure of nationally televised games. On top of all of that, brand recognition. UCLA and USC have been irrelevant in football for a decade and I’ll still tune in and watch them play.

---

Off topic a bit but still kind of cool.

The Memorial Coliseum opened in 1923. USC played a school that no longer plays football in the first game. To celebrate the 100 year anniversary, USC will be playing the school that played the second game: The University of Nevada.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

I guess that’s my point. Look at the move they made with USC/UCLA and compare it with Rutgers/Maryland.

Massive fan bases in multiple sports, grows them into additional time-zones, broadens the allure of nationally televised games. On top of all of that, brand recognition. UCLA and USC have been irrelevant in football for a decade and I’ll still tune in and watch them play.

---

Before Rutgers and Maryland were in the B1G, local cable companies in NYC, DC, and Baltimore did not carry the network. Adding those 2 schools are a ton of rights revenue in 3 major markets. B1G schools have decent alumni presence in those markets as well. I doubt they have any regrets making that move.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Yes and yes. The additions were made to “break into those markets”. Since Maryland and Rutgers don’t have much penetration into those markets, it never panned out as they’d hoped. It was a huge risk and it didn’t work out. If they could go back they’d do it differently but they are now stuck with those teams, probably forever.

The B10 has placed some other pretty big bets recently however, and those have or are projected to pan out very nicely. They are in the drivers seat as the premier conference for the north and west portions of the country. None of that has anything to do with Rutgers and Maryland though.

---

What exactly was it that didn't work out?
It was never about the athletic abilities of the schools and no one really pretended it was (though Maryland basketball is a solid brand). Both are excellent academic and research universities which is a huge deal in the B1G. Both allowed them to expand into new TV markets, immediately adding about 8 million subscribers to the B1G Network. Considering the monthly fee is right around $0.50/month (if not higher on the east coast), that was nearly $50 million/year just in B1G Network subscriber fees annually.

Based on how the pocketbooks of the member schools have faired, I'm not sure what they would do differently. I'm in no way attributing all of this growth to the addition of two new schools, but to pretend it wasn't a factor in the increase of the value of the media payouts is flat-out wrong.
-The B1G media payouts were $26 million in 2013.
-In 2017, they signed a football only contract $31.4 million per school.
-By 2018, the full share payout was $52 million had doubled to $52 million and continues to exceed that.
-On top of that, Rutgers and Maryland didn't even get full shares until 2020/21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc123

What exactly was it that didn't work out?
It was never about the athletic abilities of the schools and no one really pretended it was (though Maryland basketball is a solid brand). Both are excellent academic and research universities which is a huge deal in the B1G. Both allowed them to expand into new TV markets, immediately adding about 8 million subscribers to the B1G Network. Considering the monthly fee is right around $0.50/month (if not higher on the east coast), that was nearly $50 million/year just in B1G Network subscriber fees annually.

Based on how the pocketbooks of the member schools have faired, I'm not sure what they would do differently. I'm in no way attributing all of this growth to the addition of two new schools, but to pretend it wasn't a factor in the increase of the value of the media payouts is flat-out wrong.
-The B1G media payouts were $26 million in 2013.
-In 2017, they signed a football only contract $31.4 million per school.
-By 2018, the full share payout was $52 million had doubled to $52 million and continues to exceed that.
-On top of that, Rutgers and Maryland didn't even get full shares until 2020/21

---

Ask the conference commissioner. Who, when asked, said that mistakes were made and they may have gotten a little too optimistic about what it would do for the conference.

It would take $1M and a professional services agreement for me (or anyone) to take the time to divvy up what part of the increase came from where. TV payouts for all sports at all levels have been growing on an order at least comparable to what you listed.

By your own math they’re losing out then. $50M increase total divided by two schools compared to a $52M payout per school.

$50M in, $104M paid out.

When I hear BIG and mistakes were made I just assume they’re talking about Nebraska.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bisonaudit

When I hear BIG and mistakes were made I just assume they’re talking about Nebraska.

---

Me too. All the cons of MD/RU without the TV subscriptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NDSU92

Ask the conference commissioner. Who, when asked, said that mistakes were made and they may have gotten a little too optimistic about what it would do for the conference.

It would take $1M and a professional services agreement for me (or anyone) to take the time to divvy up what part of the increase came from where. TV payouts for all sports at all levels have been growing on an order at least comparable to what you listed.

By your own math they’re losing out then. $50M increase total divided by two schools compared to a $52M payout per school.

$50M in, $104M paid out.

---

The $50M I estimated was strictly in B1G subscription fees. And only counts what they estimated was immediately added.
That ignores literally everything else. Including that per school payouts has doubled since then. How are the other conferences doing in comparison?
I'd love to see where the conference commissioner, on record, said that letting those two schools in was a mistake.

I do't know but it is possible those two schools paid hefty entrance fees..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc123

The $50M I estimated was strictly in B1G subscription fees. And only counts what they estimated was immediately added.
That ignores literally everything else. Including that per school payouts has doubled since then. How are the other conferences doing in comparison?
I'd love to see where the conference commissioner, on record, said that letting those two schools in was a mistake.

---

Again, you're just throwing numbers out there. What percent of B10 subscription fees that you made up are actually getting passed back to the schools? Does the network not have their own overhead? Do they just magically appear on everyone's cable programming without any expenses or fees?

Someone would have to do a financial audit to find out the actual number. I'm pretty confident that adding Rutgers and Maryland didn't increase net profit $100M/year for the conference. If it did, Rutgers and Maryland should go Indy immediately...

Colorado State Blogger ready for NDSU!

THE Ram U
@CSURamT
·
Apr 10
Spoken about this before at length. MWC has put itself in a position where it has no great expansion options. Missed out on Rice, UTSA, North Texas, etc. So UTEP, Louisiana-Lafayette, Texas State, NIU are some of the options. I'd take a flyer on NDSU if I'm the MWC.

Additionally if you pair NDSU in there, it is less of an island. I think due to lack of good FB options, MWC needs to take a chance that NDSU will be as successful in the move up to FBS as Boise, Liberty, App St, etc., have all been because now u are competing for CFP autobid.

^^^^ that's NDSU's selling point for FBS... it HELPS a conference for the CFP Autobid!

make it happen already

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El_Chapo

Colorado State Blogger ready for NDSU!

THE Ram U
@CSURamT
·
Apr 10
Spoken about this before at length. MWC has put itself in a position where it has no great expansion options. Missed out on Rice, UTSA, North Texas, etc. So UTEP, Louisiana-Lafayette, Texas State, NIU are some of the options. I'd take a flyer on NDSU if I'm the MWC.

Additionally if you pair NDSU in there, it is less of an island. I think due to lack of good FB options, MWC needs to take a chance that NDSU will be as successful in the move up to FBS as Boise, Liberty, App St, etc., have all been because now u are competing for CFP autobid.

^^^^ that's NDSU's selling point for FBS... it HELPS a conference for the CFP Autobid!

make it happen already

---

Who does this guy suggest as someone to pair NDSU with so they won't be on an island ?

sounds like Northern Illinois... maybe they are sick of the MAC who knows... its Twitter!! you can be anything on there!! haha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El_Chapo

sounds like Northern Illinois... maybe they are sick of the MAC who knows... its Twitter!! you can be anything on there!! haha

---

You don't even have to be a blogger for people to call you one! Being a fan is good enough if it makes a narrative sound better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWC

Who does this guy suggest as someone to pair NDSU with so they won't be on an island ?

---

Little brother could come.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kevin

Little brother could come.

---

The bunnies have a way to go financially - if I'm not mistaken - but I believe they ultimately will come along
I would certainly want them to, eventually
I don't think they'd be able to stand not being up there with us ...

Unrelated, but why are 100 people an hour or whatever looking at this thread? Isn't it full of repetitive garbage?

Every thread on every message board gets repetitive and full of garbage eventually. The Pac 10/Big 12 dick measuring should be wrapping up soon. The fallout will trickle down to the G5's and I guess, at some point, down to FCS. Maybe, that provides a spark. Maybe it ends this thread completely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoRepsTheLurker

The bunnies have a way to go financially - if I'm not mistaken - but I believe they ultimately will come along
I would certainly want them to, eventually
I don't think they'd be able to stand not being up there with us ...

Unrelated, but why are 100 people an hour or whatever looking at this thread? Isn't it full of repetitive garbage?

---

If they’d stop bribing refs they’d have more money for a jump.