Just seems a little fishy that there weren't any blue bloods in on Green at the end. I'm guessing there was more going on behind the scenes.
Posted 17 April 2020, 5:17 p.m.
If Weis does at KU what he did at Notre Dame, we'll build a statue for him. Weis was the best coach they had from Lou Holtz to him. Why do you think they gave him a lifetime contract or whatever ridiculous amount of money that it was? While ND has some nice things to work with, they also have their limitations. Academics, not being able to recruit jucos, etc. Weis' offenses were always good, the defenses - not so much.
As far as Weis at KU, all you have to do is look at year one. No QB and no placekicker and he nearly wins 6 games. Yeah, the team was 1-11, but 1-11 teams typically get annihilated in every facet of the game. That wasn't the case with KU. That's how KU takes a Texas, an OSU (preseason favorite to win league), and Tech down to the last play of the game. At some point you have to start winning games, but step 1 is changing the culture. Mangino, for example, was 2-10 in year 1 with only 1 loss within a TD (compared to 5 last year). Year 2, KU goes bowling and finishes 6-7. KU will show significant improvement in year 2. If you were watching last year, you would have seen significant improvement (except on the scoreboard). Weis is changing the culture. There's a fine line between winning and losing, and when you change the culture, that's how you start turning those close games into wins.
Posted 25 July 2013, 8:52 p.m.
Nice revisionist history Tom. I'd expect as much from a CU fan, but not from a KU writer that was at the game. The KU comeback against CU didn't happen because CU was chucking the ball over the field. CU literally ran 4-6 plays between KU being down 28 and KU tying the game up. They turned the ball over and KU scored fast.
Posted 25 July 2013, 8:44 p.m.
NU and A&M didn't want equal distribution of money. That was Mizzou, CU, and others getting a lesser cut. Not everything was demanded by UT/OU.
Posted 17 July 2013, 8:08 p.m.
According to Marchiony on 810, KU doesn't get paid a penny more. This deal was about exposure. IMG already has KU's rights locked up and they made the decision with KU's consent. If you were getting the games on ESPN Gameplan, you'll still be able to do that. As of today, the primary people getting screwed are KU fans in KC on AT&T, Surewest, Dish, and DirecTV.
Posted 18 June 2013, 8:34 p.m.
It doesn't appear that regulation applies. See this article regarding Google's situation:
Posted 18 June 2013, 8:31 p.m.
The Hawks will be the surprise team in the Big 12 this year. They were just a few plays away from 6 wins last year. Heck, Heaps and any place kicker besides what we had probably would have gotten us to 4 or 5 wins. All the negative nancies will go into hiding when the Hawks come out and show everyone we have a legitimate football team again this fall. No reason this can't be a .500 football team or even better. We have 7 home games and the Hawks are always tough at home. We have winnable roadies at Rice and ISU. We'll see how it goes, but get out there and support the Hawks in Memorial!
Posted 3 April 2013, 8:42 a.m.
Clemson is a better football school than both of those choices (at the moment). The other thing you have to look at is geographic proximity to FSU. I personally think Miami is a better long term play because they'll eventually get football going again and Miami would bring tremendous attention to the league. Miami is a little bit toxic at the moment because they look bad because of their recent cheating transgressions.
Posted 26 January 2013, 10:07 a.m.
Not really. It depends what your goal is. If your goal is to only add schools, then yeah, they blew it because Louisville is a pretty decent athletic add. If you think league finances matter, then the league made the right decision. It supposedly would have cost about $2 million per school/yr. so if you think KU should have given up $20 million over the next 10 years to call Louisville a league member, then I would say it's a mistake. What people forget is that the league had the choice between WV and Louisville. Football money is 70-80% of TV contracts and WV is a way better football brand than Louisville.
Posted 26 January 2013, 9:14 a.m.
I can tell you're a newbie when it comes to this stuff. ACC has a new TV deal and it's by far the smallest per team of all the conferences. That's one of the reasons that league is teetering on the edge of survival and pretty much every one of their schools is talking to another league. When it comes to TV contracts, 70-80% of the money is football money so that's why football matters so much. Where basketball comes into play is that it's valuable content for leagues that have a conference network, which neither the Big 12 or ACC have. The individual matchups don't mean as much, but you need to have enough attractive content that you can drive subscriptions. So it doesn't matter if people are watching or not because you're in large markets where you have a lot of subscriptions. Football, on the other hand, is a far more watched sport, which is why those national telecasts are so important and networks pay so much to have them.
Posted 26 January 2013, 9:01 a.m.