Tracer Bullet

That was what most people originally proposed. From a national and tv standpoint I think it works better this way. Penn State is always going to be a good program or at least a threat to be very good with their tradition, resources and in-state talent base. what's going to be funny is when they truly split E/W and the West wins the first 3 conference titles.

I do not think you can realistically create divisions that takes Penn State away from all its nearest opponents, and puts them in with all of their furthest opponents. no kidding. and why are we treating PSU the same as OSU? In the last 10 years, Wisconsin and Iowa have been better overall than PSU. Do we really care what these programs were like in 1980 if we're gunning for competitive balance in the future? I guess it's a consideration, but not nearly as much as the last 10-15 years. Flip Wisconsin and PSU and I think you have a fairly realistic split.

How is McGehee on the other side of the same coin that Fox is on? McGehee had 1 good year for the Brewers and is now coming back down. Chances are much better that they'll both end up on the same side of the coin (the one with the rest of the crappy players that play a season or a couple seasons in the majors, but don't cut it long term). Maybe he'll be the rare player that had a peak MiLB OPS of .776 but routinely puts up an .850 OPS in the majors. But so far, there's not nearly enough information to say that he is a good everyday player.

wow - that's awesome

where did Soto get the reputation for being a defensive liability? Wasn't it just last year that the pitchers were saying how much they liked him as catcher and how he knows just the right thing to say to get the pitcher back into it (whether it's an ass chewing, a word of encouragement, or a joke about a fan in the 1st row)? I don't remember Soto being in Barrett/Doumit territory ever. Even if Hill is better, Soto would have to be a brick wall for Hill's defense to make up the difference in offense.

Carroll's youtube response is laughable.

I don't think that's a determination that can be made at this point. The difference could very well be significant, particularly if the new alignments bring two or more divisions closer together on their outlook of the future of the BCS. I don't think it's a linear effect. divisions? I don't think I follow. The major players don't change and ND, like it or not, is a major player. I meant conferences. There potential difference comes from having the major conferences now aligned in their goals. There's a greater chance that they'll be able to come to agreement on the future of the BCS and not have to fight as hard to protect their own interests. The players are the same, but the simple reduction in number of conferences means there's potentially less fighting and more back-scratching. maybe, but how much power do the weaker conferences have anyway? I just don't think the landscape has changed. The major powers are mostly the same (maybe add Florida and take away GA or some other SEC school) and they've shown a desire to continue playing ball with ND. There's just nothing to this that suggests to me that ND can't remain independent. They may not, but I think they can do so successfully and hope that's how it ends up.

That's why I buy it. Lou's behavior of late makes me think he's stopped caring. I don't know this of course; its supposition on my part based on the circumstances. I briefly saw a minute or two of the Cubs game yesterday....has Lou stopped shaving? The guy is totally losing it. Yeah, he looks like hell. didn't len & bob say it was in support of the Hawks and he'd shave if they won last night?

I don't think that's a determination that can be made at this point. The difference could very well be significant, particularly if the new alignments bring two or more divisions closer together on their outlook of the future of the BCS. I don't think it's a linear effect. divisions? I don't think I follow. The major players don't change and ND, like it or not, is a major player.

Simply because Notre Dame can't carry as much weight against fewer larger conferences as they did against more smaller conferences. Each superconference as more consolidated power than before. Again, it's not about them being locked out completely. It's about having to settle on more limitations and a smaller piece of the pie because the conferences just don't have to budge the way they had to before. The likeliest candidate is a new ACC with added schools from the Big East. But the situation on the east coast will probably develop last. The longer that plays out and the longer Notre Dame holds out, the less bargaining power they'll have if they decide to negotiate with the Big Ten. but there isn't much difference. There were 5 conferences, but not all created equally. The Pac-10 was driven mostly by 1 school. Texas rules the Big 12. Then there's the SEC and the Big Ten. The major players are still the same. And several of the biggest players want to play against ND. It makes no sense. Agreed. Real quick though, since you're kind of an impartial observer to the big 12 breakup/merge into the big 10... in your opinion, would adding texas make more sense than adding iowa state? Since I grew up both an Irish fan and a Hawkeye fan, I'm against anything Iowa State. So I'm not really impartial here.

what I just posted: the limit is 15 per year. So you can't use EEs or whatever other tricks that all schools use to be flexible with their scholarships. USC can only take 15 scholarship players each year. Does it say anything about giving free transfer as an exception to the 1-year sit out rule? I didn't see it on first reading, but heard it might be in there.

worse yet: 15 total per year. So they can't play with the numbers to lessen the blow.

Simply because Notre Dame can't carry as much weight against fewer larger conferences as they did against more smaller conferences. Each superconference as more consolidated power than before. Again, it's not about them being locked out completely. It's about having to settle on more limitations and a smaller piece of the pie because the conferences just don't have to budge the way they had to before. The likeliest candidate is a new ACC with added schools from the Big East. But the situation on the east coast will probably develop last. The longer that plays out and the longer Notre Dame holds out, the less bargaining power they'll have if they decide to negotiate with the Big Ten. but there isn't much difference. There were 5 conferences, but not all created equally. The Pac-10 was driven mostly by 1 school. Texas rules the Big 12. Then there's the SEC and the Big Ten. The major players are still the same. And several of the biggest players want to play against ND. It makes no sense.

just saw the usc sanctions - never mind. no objections here at all. hahahahahaha

first - your tv revenue numbers are just wrong. don't believe everything that you read (about both sides). the rest of that is just speculation. you're talking in definite statements when you have no idea how the BCS title game will work. I don't know how anyone could at this point, with the potential for such a huge shakeup. No, that's the whole point. I'm talking about how Notre Dame cannot control their destiny without joining a conference. There's no telling what will happen (title game, BCS system, bowl affiliations, TV situation, everything) and that should really worry them. The one guarantee is that the Big Ten, SEC, and Pac-10 are going to do very well for themselves in just about every aspect. Notre Dame has no such guarantee. As for the TV revenue, Big Ten revenue is pretty well reported. The Big Ten Network alone is worth nearly $5 million a year per school and that's going to grow substantially. Just the New York Market would probably mean another $1-2 million per school at least. That doesn't even take ESPN and other advertising revenue into account. actually, the big ten tv revenue is not well reported. if you can find it broken down, i'd love to see it. I see a lot of reports that combine a bunch of revenue together, but not a true tv revenue breakdown. i still don't understand why ND has any less control over its destiny now than it did yesterday or last year. it's an NCAA cash cow. you think no conference team is going to want ND and its hoards of fans and money on their schedule? the super conferences are going to exclude ND and the rest of the ncaa from their title game? how do you get to 4 superconferences of 64 teams anyway? who makes up the 4th behemoth?

works in october-december finding anyone to schedule you during conference play would be nigh impossible. that's what, 16 games they'd have to find every year? Not sure what the TV package demand would be either. I love to think the networks would be lining up, but that's wishful thinking. did anyone else hear the KU to the Big East possibility? why not just give the NCAA trophy do the Big East tourney champ? Primary issue there is a Big East team hasn't won the tournament since 2004. I'd say the primary issue is all the other schools that would object. But the Big East with Kansas hoops would be like the Pac-16 (or whatever this behemoth will be called).

I think that's the real kicker. They were able to demand a lot the last time they figured out the BCS, but probably not anymore. again, why? you don't think ND has the same leverage with 4 superconferences (how these are made up, I still don't know, but that's another story) - why? what makes the situation so much different? Is the NCAA going to exclude all non-superconference teams from the title game? ND isn't what it used to be. The big conference's power has grown, while ND's has shrunk. How so? The last time they changed the payouts was in what - 04? Kevin dumbass White negotiated down to ND's current position (I mean, he gave up getting the full payout for the annual payout, right before the team went to 2 straight BCS games). They've been bowl eligible in 4 of the last 5 years, with 2 BCS games in that time and they're still a huge national draw that, after this year, have very good schedules, including games at Yankee Stadium and Soldier Field. ND isn't what it was in the late-80s/early-90s. But ND in 2010 is better leveraged than ND was in 2000-2004. The superconferences may or may not be more powerful. I have no idea how to even begin to figure that out since the alignment is so far from determined.

works in october-december finding anyone to schedule you during conference play would be nigh impossible. that's what, 16 games they'd have to find every year? Not sure what the TV package demand would be either. I love to think the networks would be lining up, but that's wishful thinking. did anyone else hear the KU to the Big East possibility? why not just give the NCAA trophy do the Big East tourney champ?

I think that's the real kicker. They were able to demand a lot the last time they figured out the BCS, but probably not anymore. again, why? you don't think ND has the same leverage with 4 superconferences (how these are made up, I still don't know, but that's another story) - why? what makes the situation so much different? Is the NCAA going to exclude all non-superconference teams from the title game?

first - your tv revenue numbers are just wrong. don't believe everything that you read (about both sides). the rest of that is just speculation. you're talking in definite statements when you have no idea how the BCS title game will work. I don't know how anyone could at this point, with the potential for such a huge shakeup.

I never said the punishment wasn't just. I was challenging the assertion that I should be grateful that it wasn't worse. Was there wrong-doing? Yeah, probably, according to the rules put down by the NCAA. On the other hand, I don't really think there's anything wrong with someone using their private money to get someone to go to their school. That's not what happened here but it should clarify my thinking for you. Somehow big time college sports has carved out this place where things that are standard norms in other walks of life are deemed heinous violations of the moral code. so you think this punishment (2-year bowl ban and loss of 20+ scholarships over 4 years) is just? I don't recall you saying one way or the other, which is why I asked (and am asking again, since you didn't answer).

what was a just punishment, in your mind? or do you believe nothing was warranted? or even that no wrong-doing has occurred?

i don't know that you need to capitalize grateful, but i think you're getting the gist of it.

I realize that, which is why I said the conference teams play 3-4 OOC games.

do whatever you want. i'm just saying if it were my team, i'd recognize that we got away with highway robbery and the national title and heisman trophy are worth more to the program than 20 schollies over the next 4 years. You're forgetting the two year postseason ban. And you'd recognize you got away with highway robbery as a fairly severe punishment was being handed down? Is it easy keeping all those contradictory ideas in your head at the same time? it's like going to jail for robbing a bank years after the fact. on one hand you got arrested and the punishment is fairly severe. but on the other hand, no one can take away all those hookers you bought with all that money. ding, ding, ding, ding. no one's forgetting anything. the post-season ban isn't going to matter this year b/c they aren't going to be in the title game anyway. maybe next year it will have a real significant impact, might depend on how many kids jump ship on kiffy.