Yormark says what they're all thinking
- Thread starter BleedCrimsonandGray
- Start date
On the Big-12, when Coach Prime leaves, how much value is Colorado going to have? (He's not staying long-term).
I personally feel that conference is a little "overpaid" and we might see corrections.
That said, WSU, OSU and SDSU will be getting looked at in a few years as expansion candidates for the Big-12 is my prediction. Seattle TV market is very attractive and UW will continue to regress to the "mean."
I personally feel that conference is a little "overpaid" and we might see corrections.
That said, WSU, OSU and SDSU will be getting looked at in a few years as expansion candidates for the Big-12 is my prediction. Seattle TV market is very attractive and UW will continue to regress to the "mean."
And I'm sure the SEC thinks it should get every ranked team in. And I'm sure the B1G thinks it should get every ranked team in.
Just like conferences and teams jockeying for position in the FBS playoff, and before than the BCS. Shrug.
Yeah, OK, Brett. Let's take a look at some things, hmm?
ASU's resume has non-conference wins over Wyoming, Mississippi State, and Texas State. Combined, they're 12-24. They lost to an 8-4 Texas Tech team and a 5-7 Cincinnati team. Their combined opponents record? 64-82.
Iowa State is a bit better. Their non-conference was North Dakota (not NDSU), Iowa, and Arkansas State. Combined, they went 20-16. After that, they lost to the same Texas Tech team and a 5-7 Kansas team. Combined overall 73-71.
Boise State played Oregon, Georgia Southern, and Portland State. And they took Oregon (#1 Oregon, by the way) down to the last second in Autzen. Their non-conference opponents combined record, 23-12 (thanks to Oregon). Their combined opponents record was 71-73, which compares pretty well to ISU.
They all played 2 teams who ended up ranked, neither ISU or ASU played anyone in the top 15.
Not seeing where any Big 12 team has a really strong advantage over BSU...and I hate BSU.
ASU's resume has non-conference wins over Wyoming, Mississippi State, and Texas State. Combined, they're 12-24. They lost to an 8-4 Texas Tech team and a 5-7 Cincinnati team. Their combined opponents record? 64-82.
Iowa State is a bit better. Their non-conference was North Dakota (not NDSU), Iowa, and Arkansas State. Combined, they went 20-16. After that, they lost to the same Texas Tech team and a 5-7 Kansas team. Combined overall 73-71.
Boise State played Oregon, Georgia Southern, and Portland State. And they took Oregon (#1 Oregon, by the way) down to the last second in Autzen. Their non-conference opponents combined record, 23-12 (thanks to Oregon). Their combined opponents record was 71-73, which compares pretty well to ISU.
They all played 2 teams who ended up ranked, neither ISU or ASU played anyone in the top 15.
Not seeing where any Big 12 team has a really strong advantage over BSU...and I hate BSU.
I actually have at least some respect for Yormark. Before you beat me up, look at what he has done. He put together a league, while our George Keepaboveitkoff F'ed around. Yormark has been absolutely the most transparent and out front of the P5 and then P4 league commishes with his comments. You always knew where you stood with him...if you could do him some good you were his friend, and if you could not, he had no use for you. He is another Ana Mari or Carol Foult in that he will stab anyone in the back, lie to anyone under any circumstances, and experience no guilt or angst later. Would I want this guy as a neighbor? Or in my church? Or as a partner? Heck no, because he is utterly untrustworthy. But is he predictable? Consistent? Capable of doing what he perceives to be his job? I'd say by those measures he could arguably be the best of the current commishes, and he certainly took a sh*t sandwich from 5-6 years ago and made something out of it (while others failed). He is certainly not perfect, and the WSU/OSU situation was IMHO a blown opportunity for him. I think our situation and timing simply exceeded his intellectual bandwidth.
So even though I don't like him, I have to acknowledge that he has been effective. And although I don't like his agenda, it is helpful to compare his comments to what I perceive his agenda to be.
So even though I don't like him, I have to acknowledge that he has been effective. And although I don't like his agenda, it is helpful to compare his comments to what I perceive his agenda to be.
Agree - but still wouldn’t piss on him if he was burning.
I can't disagree with your interpretations, but I'm going to disagree with your terminology.
You're right, you know where you are with him, and you know that he's going to act in the way that best serves his employer. Which means that he's not reliable as an ally, and can't be trusted even if you've got an agreement established. You should expect that sooner or later he's going to stab you in the back and then throw you under the bus. In that context alone, because I can't respect his methods, I can't respect him. Acknowledge that he's been effective in his role? Absolutely. Respect? Hell no. I hope that he ultimately gets what he's been serving, up to and including witnessing the failure of the Big 12 from his position on the unemployment line.
Similar threads
