AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Top 10 program rumored to be in NCAA crosshairs
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
Yeah? What have the other programs outside of USC accomplished over the last 50 years? 1 National Championship. ONE!! Colorado alone doubles the number of national championships in the conference outside of USC of the last half century. How many in the Big 12 in the same time frame? Twelve! How do you make an argument against that?
The Pac 10 hasn't accomplished **** outside of USC including your Cal cubs which haven't accomplished anything of note even though they reside in a major recruiting hotbed state. Yet Colorado comes into the Pac 12 at number two all time in wins in the conference coming from a conference that was far more difficult. Sorry buddy, reality is a bitch and the facts speak for themselves. You are USC and the nine dwarves. I don't need an algorithm to figure that out since simple addition and subtraction are sufficient.
Maxer
Member
As I said -- if conference standings were determined by "all time wins" or "number of national championships in the last 50 years", then that would be a great argument. They aren't, and it isn't.
If you say the Big 12 is "more difficult", then hey, you're entitled to your opinion. Many people agree with you. But it's not a "fact" that a conference with 2 huge powers (that you don't have to play every year), and a bunch of other schools that are sometimes good, and a bunch of terrible teams, is better. No matter how much you believe it.
How about this -- if Colorado wins 6 Pac-12 games next year, then you're the big winner and I will buy you a case of beer containing a delicious array of California microbrews. If they don't, then you do the same for me with Colorado beer. Sound good?
As we've gone over a ton of times before, the Big 12 and the Pac-10 end up equivalent on pretty much every measure when you average them out. Some skew toward one conference, some skew toward the other. But the Big 12 gets there with 3 all-time superpowers at the top (Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas) while the Pac-10 gets there with 1 superpower (USC) and a lot more depth. It comes down to what you value more. I like the Pac-(now 12) a lot better because every single matchup is interesting and every single program will make its runs and have BCS bowl game years.
Still find it very funny that every major school (except Oregon) backed off recruiting Seastrunk as the recruiting cycle wore on. I remember some people on national boards saying "this is the weirdest recruitment of a 5* player I have ever seen". Just sayin'.
Oregon had $25k on the books for paying a street agent for "scouting reports". They're saying that this is in complete compliance with NCAA guidelines.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6179423
The yahoo report on Oregon's practices wasn't so dismissive: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news;_ylt=AleAzSQ1E3z4_BbaXwKpjM4cvrYF?slug=cr-oregon030311
thats really chump change... wonder where the rest of the money went.
Darian3Hagan
'89 Player of the Year
Theres no reason to bash our new conference we are lucky to be there.
Junction
Club Member
Maybe that's all the cash that changed hands. The rest of the deal involved a lifetime supply of Air Jordans...
On the drive home from work today I got to listen to Canzano (who had the we-did-nothing-wrong quote) talk about this. He sounds very disappointed in the Ducks and Kelly. He should have a column tomorrow. While I don't think this is huge, I do think this is who Cowherd was referring to.
Duck's page at the Oregonian
Duck's page at the Oregonian
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
Odd that uo is about the only school that didn't back off recruiting the db from cali -- Harris. IIRC, grades/academics scared just about everyone else away. just sayin'
While it looks really dirty here is the relevant rule:
12.3.3.1 Talent Evaluation Services and Agents. A prospect may allow a scouting service or agent to distribute personal information (e.g., high-school academic and athletics records, physical statistics) to member institutions without jeopardizing his or her eligibility, provided the fee paid to such an agent is not based on placing the prospect in a collegiate institution as a recipient of institutional financial aid"
There are enough holes in that rule you could drive a truck through it. Basically as long as you have the fig leaf of "legitimate recruiting services", e.g. the guy gave us some film, the only way you can get punished is if there are explicit tapes or someone comes out says yep, they paid me to go there. Oregon recorded this as a legit business expense, so if nobody cracks and they can prove they got some sort of recruiting service they'll likely skate. That said there are lots of internet rumors out there that Oregon is pretty blatantly ignoring a lot of the rules.
12.3.3.1 Talent Evaluation Services and Agents. A prospect may allow a scouting service or agent to distribute personal information (e.g., high-school academic and athletics records, physical statistics) to member institutions without jeopardizing his or her eligibility, provided the fee paid to such an agent is not based on placing the prospect in a collegiate institution as a recipient of institutional financial aid"
There are enough holes in that rule you could drive a truck through it. Basically as long as you have the fig leaf of "legitimate recruiting services", e.g. the guy gave us some film, the only way you can get punished is if there are explicit tapes or someone comes out says yep, they paid me to go there. Oregon recorded this as a legit business expense, so if nobody cracks and they can prove they got some sort of recruiting service they'll likely skate. That said there are lots of internet rumors out there that Oregon is pretty blatantly ignoring a lot of the rules.
certainly didnt go towards a document shredder...
So many people view Colorado as if college football started here when Hawkins was hired. How about we take a more accurate sampling. I'll bet you a case of that beer that Colorado wins more 12-Pac games than Cal in the next ten years. History may not dictate short term results, such as next year. But if you think trends such as success relative to other programs, i.e. all time wins is random and has no bearing on future results, you need to do more research. Here it is my 3rd post and I haven't predicted a national champinship for next year, as you were predicting so you aren't off to a great start.
so who the **** is in trouble... $c or Scrooge Mcduck
Darian3Hagan
'89 Player of the Year
I think you two should room together.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
fify
badfish650
Member
I didn't have time to read ALL of this thread, but the people who hope 2 teams in the Pac 12 are on probation when we come in are being ignorant.
The conference splits all moneys from bowl games amongst its schools. If USC and Oregon are both BCS teams that cant play in the BCS, it hurts us. We still have to play them (and possibly take a loss from them, which might prevent us from a bowl birth), but we don't get to reap any of the financial rewards of having them play in a bowl.
The conference splits all moneys from bowl games amongst its schools. If USC and Oregon are both BCS teams that cant play in the BCS, it hurts us. We still have to play them (and possibly take a loss from them, which might prevent us from a bowl birth), but we don't get to reap any of the financial rewards of having them play in a bowl.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
I think the only way we would lose money is if the conference couldn't fill its allotment of teams to bowls. I think there are 6 Pac12 bowl tie-ins -- as long as the conference fills those 6 slots, no money is lost from bowl splits.
The only place I can see all this hurting money-wise might be TV. If 2 teams are on ncaa probation or being investigated, it might be used as a bargaining chip by the media provider in negotiations with the conference. Hope not.
Sure. But it'll only be in Barzil.
"Willie said he was a trainer," Evelyn Seastrunk said. "Now Oregon says he's a scout? Is he on Oregon's payroll? If Willie Lyles collected $25,000 off my son he needs to be held accountable. The NCAA must find out for me. I don't know how to digest someone cashing in on my son." "
This is pretty damning imo. The mother is feeling like she and her son were not being being told the truth. Unlike the Cam Newton situation, the mother does not seem to find this to be appropriate and seems to be wanting the NCAA to investigate.
This is pretty damning imo. The mother is feeling like she and her son were not being being told the truth. Unlike the Cam Newton situation, the mother does not seem to find this to be appropriate and seems to be wanting the NCAA to investigate.
Ya read on espn that apparently Oregon hired a recruiting service in Texas to get some big time running back. This is all perfectly legal under the NCAA except some are saying UO broke one rule by paying the guy too much money. Also apparently the guy they hired had just left an actual known recruiting service and was operating solo. Seems like a lot of gray areas, seems like the ducks will get out of it with the "oh we didn't know" Not a big deal IMO and definitely not one the NCAA needs to make an example out of.
In this case, Oregon deserves everything they get. Getting involved with Lyles is a known risk.
Trying to act like they have their thumb on everything and dont let any rule breaking happen, while leaving the SEC completely alone. Don't bite the hand that feeds.