ChiefsPlanet
Page 569 of 612 « First 69469519559565566567568 569 570571572573579 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Other Sports Big 10 Report: Conference Realignment (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=227561)

Saul Good 09-05-2011 07:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saulbadguy (Post 7880925)
Pac-12/16 would suck as a fan. 9:00 PM games would be no fun.
It would be a huge advantage for the teams in the Central Time Zone. How would you like to have to play an 11:00 game two time zones to the East? It would be like playing at 9 in the morning.

I love betting against teams that have to travel 2+ time zones to the east for a noon or earlier game. It makes an enormous difference. Traveling west doesn't really have the opposite effect because staying up a little later is easier than playing when you aren't fully awake yet.

HolyHandgernade 09-05-2011 07:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saulbadguy (Post 7880934)
Perhaps the games between those schools, or home games, but what about games @USC, @UCLA, @UW..etc? Those will get priority.
It all depends on the setup. If its a Coastal/Inland setup, you probably only play 2 football games a year on the west coast and you probably try to schedule those for earlier start times.

Titty Meat 09-05-2011 07:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade (Post 7880932)
Also, there was this for those hoping to hold out for the B1G:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports...1469215.column
I think the Big 10 goes east next trying to pull the east coast market and then they'll have the dough to make a move towards Notre Dame by this time the mega conferences will be forming.

Mosbonian 09-05-2011 07:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eazyb81 (Post 7880773)
Here's the latest from Chip Brown at Rivals:

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1261031
This can't be right...none of those conferences really want Mizzou. And surely they don't need expansion. (sarcasm)

HolyHandgernade 09-05-2011 07:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mosbonian (Post 7880947)
This can't be right...none of those conferences really want Mizzou. And surely they don't need expansion. (sarcasm)
You're a little late.

BigRedChief 09-05-2011 07:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by frazod (Post 7880872)
This should be the one thing we can all agree on.
I think everyone can agree that the implusion of the Big 12 is due to Texas demanding that they get special treatment. A bigger piece of the pie than the other teams. They thought that was an unfair system. You could see it coming a mile away.

Mosbonian 09-05-2011 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade (Post 7880951)
You're a little late.
You mean the link to the article from the Tribune...the one where you missed the part where Delany hedged his bet with the comment about barring any significant changes?

Titty Meat 09-05-2011 08:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedChief (Post 7880954)
I think everyone can agree that the implusion of the Big 12 is due to Texas demanding that they get special treatment. A bigger piece of the pie than the other teams. They thought that was an unfair system. You could see it coming a mile away.
No a year ago it was because Nebraska couldn't beat Texas.

Mr. Laz 09-05-2011 08:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade (Post 7880808)
My priority:

1. KU is in an AQ Conference
2. KU remains connected with MU
3. KU has access to Texas recruiting
4. KU remains connected with KSU
My priority:

1. KU is in an AQ Conference
2. KU is in an AQ Conference
3. KU is in an AQ Conference
4. KU is in an AQ Conference

Saulbadguy 09-05-2011 08:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laz (Post 7880985)
My priority:

1. KU is in an AQ Conference
2. KU is in an AQ Conference
3. KU is in an AQ Conference
4. KU is in an AQ Conference
K-State, KU, MU have nothing to worry about, in that regard.

Baylor, ISU might need to be worried, a bit.

Saul Good 09-05-2011 08:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saulbadguy (Post 7880995)
K-State, KU, MU have nothing to worry about, in that regard.

Baylor, ISU might need to be worried, a bit.
Every one of those schools needs to worry. KSU could be ****ed. They are right there with ISU.

Saulbadguy 09-05-2011 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 7881017)
Every one of those schools needs to worry. KSU could be ****ed. They are right there with ISU.
They all "could be" ****ed - but I highly doubt it.

Frazod 09-05-2011 08:23 PM
Perhaps somebody who's got a lot of time on his hands could review this thread from beginning to end and give us an exact number of sure-bet stories leaked from absolutely credible sources by well respected members of the media that turned out to be 100% BULLSHIT. Must be hundreds of them.

Mosbonian 09-05-2011 08:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by frazod (Post 7881053)
Perhaps somebody who's got a lot of time on his hands could review this thread from beginning to end and give us an exact number of sure-bet stories leaked from absolutely credible sources by well respected members of the media that turned out to be 100% BULLSHIT. Must be hundreds of them.
I liked your take earlier....for all of us who are speculating, there is little that any of us truly know as a fact.

Saul Good 09-05-2011 08:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saulbadguy (Post 7881029)
They all "could be" ****ed - but I highly doubt it.
What do ISU, KSU, Tech, or Baylor bring to the table? I mean they are really only considered candidates to move because they are currently in a BCS conference. If they were all in CUSA, nobody would be mentioning them regarding re-alignment.

Are they really more attractive than some of the top mid-major programs?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:00 AM.
Page 569 of 612 « First 69469519559565566567568 569 570571572573579 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.