re: What’s funny is, your conference wanted US.

quote:

---

ESPN hypes up the teams that are good. I guess in the early 2000's ESPN hated Texas and Oklahoma?

---

Not entirely relevant because the SEC wasn't in business with ESPN back then. When Texas or Oklahoma lost games in the 2000s, we were actually punished for it in the polls. That's not a reality any of you have known for quite some time.

quote:

---

The SEC got the attention it gets(and continues to get) because of the success it's had.

---

Chicken vs. Egg. The SEC gets the attention it gets because of ESPN and Nick Saban. The rest of the conference benefitted from some wonky transitive property, as if being in the vicinity of Alabama's greatness somehow made the rest of the conference great. That message filters down to the kids and suddenly the perception is reality.

quote:

---

And yet you sit here with a straight face and act other teams are getting undue hype for recruiting?

---

No, I didn't actually say that. I said ESPN pimps the SEC based almost entirely on the success of one team. Bully for the others that have popped up and won a title, but they got there on the winds of a media propaganda machine that kept SEC teams at or near the top of the polls whether they won or lost. LSU loses to Auburn? We'll just drop LSU two spots because they lost to another SEC team, and we'll move Auburn up eight spots because they beat an SEC team. It's media-driven incest.

quote:

---

And honestly, it's extra fricking laughable coming from a Texas fan. Is there ANY team that has been over-rated more often than Texas over the past 20 years?

---

Probably not, but you should ask yourself why that is? Why would the media hype us up like that? Before you try to answer, go look up some antonyms for that "irrelevant" tag you guys like to throw around.

quote:

---

You think Texas has been getting it's arse kicked by teams like Kansas because you didn't recruit good enough?

---

Yes, along with a full decade of non-stop coaching instability. I don't think it, I know it. If you actually looked at those classes and saw how they turned out rather than looking at stars or recruiting rankings you'd know it, too. And for the record, we're 8-2 in the last 10 against Kansas. By your standard, Texas A&M is kicking your arse (and that might actually be a reality you're looking at in the NIL era).

quote:

---

Once again, I'm not saying Texas is worthless.

---

Eh, you kinda did, but it brought a chuckle so thanks. In the meantime, loathe as you might be to admit it, Texas and Oklahoma are helping you stave off an assault from the Big10. You don't have to say thank you, but you could at least dial back the naked disrespect a notch or two. Outside of my complete and utter disdain for aggy, and though I will return fire when fired upon, I've always tried to be respectful toward the rest of you.

quote:

---

Not entirely relevant because the SEC was wasn't in business with ESPN back then. When Texas or Oklahoma lost games in the 2000s, we were actually punished for it in the polls. That's not a reality any of you have known for quite some time.

---

What? ESPN has been working with all conferences since the 90s.

quote:

---

Chicken vs. Egg. The SEC gets the attention it gets because of ESPN and Nick Saban. The rest of the conference benefitted from some wonky transitive property, as if being in the vicinity of Alabama's greatness somehow made the rest of the conference great. That message filters down to the kids and suddenly the perception is reality.

---

Again, what? LSU won 2 titles in the 2000's, and that alone tied the SEC with the Big12. On top of that, Florida won 2 titles in that time period as well. Alabama was a little late to the party and only had 1 NC in that decade, and it was rounded out by a national championship by Auburn in 2010.

The SEC won 60% of the national championships in the 2000s and only 10% of that was Alabama.

How long have you even been watching the sport?

quote:

---

No, I didn't actually say that. I said ESPN pimps the SEC based almost entirely on the success of one team. Bully for the others that have popped up and won a title, but they got there on the winds of a media propaganda machine that kept SEC teams at or near the top of the polls whether they won or lost. LSU loses to Auburn? We'll just drop LSU two spots because they lost to another SEC team, and we'll move Auburn up eight spots because they beat an SEC team. It's media-driven incest.

---

This has been proven to be bullshite. Someone did a study trying to prove this and accidentally proved the opposite was true. SEC teams were rewarded less for wins and punished more for losses.

This is just shite losers like yourself have made up to cope with the reality.

quote:

---

Probably not, but you should ask yourself why that is? Why would the media hype us up like that? Before you try to answer, go look up some antonyms for that "irrelevant" tag you guys like to throw around.

---

Because your fanbase is dumb enough to believe and buy magazines and shite as a result.

quote:

---

Yes, along with a full decade of non-stop coaching instability. I don't think it, I know it. If you actually looked at those classes and saw how they turned out rather than looking at stars or recruiting rankings you'd know it, too. And for the record, we're 8-2 in the last 10 against Kansas. By your standard, Texas A&M is kicking your arse (and that might actually be a reality you're looking at in the NIL era).

---

Did Texas go on to play for the national championship after losing to Kansas?

quote:

---

Eh, you kinda did, but it brought a chuckle so thanks. In the meantime, loathe as you might be to admit it, Texas and Oklahoma are helping you stave off an assault from the Big10. You don't have to say thank you, but you could at least dial back the naked disrespect a notch or two. Outside of my complete and utter disdain for aggy, I've always tried to be respectful toward the rest of you.

---

Again, stave off what assault from the Big10? Where is it? It's all shite you've made up in your head.

quote:

---

Georgia owns the Big 10. Ask Perdue, Ohio st, Wisconsin and now Michigan

---

But Michigan St and Nebraska have had some success vs UGA. Same with Penn St. OSU only played UGA once and lost by 7 in a bowl game. Not bad though. Here’s a link for the Big Ten vs other conferences since 1998. They are dead even at .500- the SEC has a decided edge head to head vs the Big Ten, which is to be expected. Some good games over the years. Much better to play the tougher competition of the SEC than say, the Big XII or the PAC. Bu there are good teams in each of those conferences. Obviously the depth is where the SEC has a big advantage. LINK

This was Sankeys idea. The fans definitely do not want you in the conference. frick off and die.

quote:

---

ESPN has been working with all conferences since the 90s.

---

Working with <> owning 80% of a single conference's network. They had a vested interest in your success and acted accordingly.

quote:

---

Someone did a study

---

Well, it's late and I had no idea that Someone did a study. I'm too tired to impeach the work of mighty Someone.

quote:

---

Again, stave off what assault from the Big10? Where is it? It's all shite you've made up in your head.

---

It's in their media markets. There's are larger than yours. It's in broadcast revenue. They were out-earning you before they added USC and UCLA. They're talking shite about passing a portion of those broadcast revenues directly to players, AND we're at the dawn of an entirely new era of college football with NIL. In short: Money. Money is not "shite I've made up in my head." Money is real. Money is weaponry, and right now they have a larger stockpile than you. I can't believe you don't see that, but it doesn't matter if you don't. Sankey does, and while you may hate the idea of Texas and OU in the SEC, I guarantee you it's a better scenario for you than Texas and OU in the Big10. You're welcome.

quote:

---

losers like yourself

---

Whoa! Look who's fussy! Have a nap or something you cranky old bastard!

I'd wish you good luck, but you don't need it. Alabama's gonna be on top forever and ever and there's no way that's changing.

quote:

---

This NIL ruling will fall just like the bylaws and rules that preceded it.

---

What exactly do you mean by this? Short of another challenge going all the way through the supreme court, how will it fall?

quote:

---

I also love how a school that just through 4 million at Ewers still believes they haven't been cheating for decades.

---

Well, firstly, it's "threw." And secondly, I've never seen any real corroboration of that number beyond aggy fever dreams. And if we did throw $4 million at him it was through (<-- proper usage) a legit NIL deal.

You can believe what you want, but Texas boosters never evolved past the old-school $100 handshake form of cheating. We have never had an organized bag game and we still don't to this day.

quote:

---

Working with <> owning 80% of a single conference's network. They had a vested interest in your success and acted accordingly.

---

They hype whoever is good. It's always been that way, it probably always will be. They didn't start hyping Alabama until Alabama had a bunch of success.

If the hype came before the success, Texas wouldn't suck.

quote:

---

Well, it's late and I had no idea that Someone did a study. I'm too tired to impeach the work of mighty Someone.

---

It was Yahoo who did it. But since you are making the argument in the other direction, do you have anything remotely factual to back it up? Obviously you do not.

quote:

---

It's in their media markets. There's are larger than yours. It's in broadcast revenue. They were out-earning you before they added USC and UCLA.

---

Not really. You are talking about 1 part of the revenue source. You also don't seem to understand that the numbers given are total.

$100 million divided among 10 teams = $10 million for each team.

$120 million divided among 12 teams = $10 million for each team.

$200 million divided among 20 teams = $10 million for each team.

It doesn't matter if you are increasing the amount of teams for a bigger check when you have to split the difference. Only a dumbass looks at the $100 and $200 million dollar number as being significant.

quote:

---

AND we're at the dawn of an entirely new era of college football with NIL. In short: Money. Money is not "shite I've made up in my head." Money is real. Money is weaponry, and right now they have a larger stockpile than you. I can't believe you don't see that, but it doesn't matter if you don't. Sankey does, and while you may hate the idea of Texas and OU in the SEC, I guarantee you it's a better scenario for you than Texas and OU in the Big10. You're welcome.

---

It is shite you've made up. And you must not understand shite about NIL to think it's even possible. You are talking about having the schools pay the players, and if the schools are paying the players...it's going to be the same amount for everyone. However, that has absolutely nothing to do with NIL. NIL deals are made between the players and OUTSIDE entities.

So if you don't even understand what NIL is, why the frick am I supposed to believe everything you've said based on that misunderstanding is anything other than shite you've made up?

quote:

---

I'd wish you good luck, but you don't need it. Alabama's gonna be on top forever and ever and there's no way that's changing.

---

I've been watching college football for over 40 years. I'm well aware of how things change.

It has absolutely nothing to do with you making shite up. Nor is having more money somehow going to guarantee Alabama stays on top.

It's no wonder Texas can't get shite going, you guys don't have the first clue about what's important.