Any idea if this guys is reliable?
Link:
Puke Worthy If True
59 Replies
2y
He changes his mind all the time. Copies stuff from other people's twitter and posts it as his own. Got his whole rep riding on FSU going to the Big 10. Massive Big 10 homer. I post replies with facts but get no response.
Some of his theories are OK like eventually CFB having two power conferences. Or a separate division.
He says he sells software to some athletic dept's in the Big 10.
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
This "source" blocked me on Twitter.
I don't even know why. Probably by putting something factual into the replies. And I'm not the kinda guy to go flaming people on social media in case you are wondering. In fact, I am not sure that anyone else has ever blocked me for any reason.
Regardless of his blocking proclivities, the dude is a clown. He takes shots at people like Greg Flugaur but won't reveal his own identity. Makes ridiculous claims as if he has connected sources, then when proven wrong, he never admits being incorrect, he just deletes posts.
Yeah, he makes the Dude of WV look credible.
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
2y
young guy, had alot of medical issues, and about a yr ago suddenly collapsed
Appeared he was in pain alot, and his craziness was one of the things (other than WV mountaineers) that kept him positive
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
That's not the same "Dude of WV". The guy you are talking about had a
YouTube Channel and was just a cool and fun good old boy who just liked to throw out realignment scenarios. I had no problem with that guy. RIP.
But the Dude of WV (the bad one) is Christopher Lambert. Now he does a lot of "Big XII" stuff on Twitter now. But he has always fancied himself as an expert on Realignment, and was quite self righteous, yet incorrect, about it. As far as I know, he doesn't have a YouTube channel.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 1/12/2024, 1:33:14 PM
(In response to this post by DMV Gobbler)
I think this is the original Dude of WV….
Link:
Dude of WV
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
I think this is the guy.
MVher3 was around when the Dude of WV site was spewing its nonsense back in the day. I don't think they are the same guy.
This is who I think the Dude of WV is now. Same tone vacillating between WVU arrogance and WVU victimization. But always insufferable.
Link:
Dude of WV
(In response to this post by Femoyer Hokie)
2y
He had at least 2-3 new theories every day.
Dude of WV? Every coach to ever win a National Championship wanted to coach at WVU.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
T
Truthahn
2y
It was pure realignment porn, however. He would have rocked the past year. RIP
(In response to this post by mrcaniac)
2y
Looks like he passed away in early April right before CO, UT, AZ, ASU bolted for the Big 12, UO and UW to the B1G, and Stan/Cal/SMU to the ACC. He would have been uploading videos every hour the last 8 months.
RIP
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
S
Stech
2y
for the teams they want. As for the Virginia and North Carolina schools, if a conference just takes 2, the other 2 would be great prospects for the other P2. Consequently, I see the Oregon and Washington ramp deal is given to both state schools, probably from one conference. Virginia Tech and NC State have the better football programs and Virginia and North Carolina have the better basketball programs. Basketball is going to either completely break off or expand and the Sweet 16 is going to be paid like the College Football Playoff money, which I think eventually goes to 16 IMHO.
PS I don’t think anybody moves until they settle the pay for play proposal proposed by the NCAA. It’s the Big Bang, not adding more teams IMHO.
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
H
hokieZ71
2y
If it’s SEC, great.
If it’s B1G, great.
If it’s the B12 East with UVA, WVU, NC State, Louisville, Cincinnati, UCF and Pitt, not great but at this point whatever let’s just get to it.
Get it over with, set the goals for making the playoffs and let’s go.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
right now. I think they said there was a meeting on it next week, possibly Monday, but it’s been a while since I read the December 5th proposal that was released publicly.
(In response to this post by hokieZ71)
2y
you ask for. I for one, want my school (KU) to have nothing to do with the SEC - in any way, shape, or form. The conference just got rid of Texas, and we now do not have one school running our conference. The Big 10 has Ohio State, and they too, less publically, are the gorilla in the room.
It isn't about being "competitive" by receiving more media money, as the Indiana's and many others in the Big 10 will not be competitive, no matter how much more media money they recieve. To me, a realistic pathway to the expanded playoffs is where the future lies. There are a lot of quality programs in the B12, and any one of those schools can rise above the parity with good coaching and good recruiting.
No matter how this plays out, the B12 will have their shot in the expanded playoffs, and the money, and ratings of the future will be there. Y'all can have the P2 if you want, as I was in the same boat a couple of years ago. If, however, you want to play the top teams in the SEC, or Big 10 in the playoffs, the better route will to be to keep the ACC together, and if that isn't viable, VT and a few others, with the addition of the 4 corners, puts the B12 in a position to up their next contract, and will compete with the P2 in all facets of college ball.
Just the ramblings of a lunatic mind here that would really like VT in the B12.
(In response to this post by hokieZ71)
2y
executives, etc. have no idea who is going where and when. Anything that comes out right now is not reliable......from anyone.
** Edited by Nortazhokie at 1/11/2024, 10:58:15 AM
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by Nortazhokie)
2y
All of these people are just throwing out what they think is the most likely and then others echo it.
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
2y
markets. I don't see the P2 passing up an opportunity to place a flag in these states. Will the SEC try and lock out the B10 from those markets? Frankly, I don't see that their expansion strategy has anything to do with the B10 as many profess, because if that were the case, GT, FSU, and Miami would be going to the SEC. It's just not that simple IMHO.
What I do know (still an opinion), is that if the ACC implodes, there will be some quality programs available for the "safety net" of the B12. I just hope they have truck stop kind of fans.
(In response to this post by hokieball)
2y
Buc-ee's!
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
Wall and when called out he blocks you and deletes the tweets of previous prediction. Mhver3 and dude of WVU are more reliable than this one.
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
S
Stech
2y
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
2y
And if FSU UNC and UVA left, it would just be phase one. The ACC would lose more after that.
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
V
VTCALS72
2y
1st, I do not believe that a 3rd "power" conference is in the plan at all. And if the Big can't provide that, what is their advantage over an ACC that in your specific example still has Miami, Clemson, VT, NCSU and others. The Big 12 commish is good, really good but not that good.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
And in the scenario, I would hope for a Big Ten invite.
If we don't enter the SEC when UVa does, we have no leverage to go there for quite some time if ever.
But we'd have a lot to off the Big Ten.
In fact, if the B1G wants to get serious about football south of the Mason-Dixon line, FSU, Clemson and VT will handle that for them. Best three football schools in the ACC IMHO.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
H
hokieZ71
2y
And adding UNC and UVA to Maryland and Rutgers isn’t the best option. If the B1G goes 24 and has four 6-team divisions, an East a division with Penn State, FSU, Clemson, Miami, Rutgers and Maryland looks pretty nice. The B1G also adds ND, Utah and Stanford and and the latter join the 4 west coast schools in the Pacific Division.
Oh, no VT in the B1G? That’s because the SEC grabs all four NC and VA schools. Also adds Kansas, Ok State, Arizona and Arizona State.
Two 24 team behemoths. Each has their 4 division champs and second place teams stage an 8 team playoff for the Conference Championship and the winners meet in the College Super Bowl. Just look below and imagine the division champs getting home games and the 2nd place teams being wild card teams.
SEC East
Kentucky (1)
VT (2)
UVA
UNC
NCST
South Carolina
SEC South
UGA (1)
Bama (2)
Auburn
Florida
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
SEC Riverlands
LSU (1)
Ole Miss(2)
Miss St
Arkansas
Kansas
Missouri
SEC SWC
Texas(1)
aTm(2)
OU
Ok State
Arizona
Arizona State
Then the B1G
B1G East
Penn State(1)
Clemson(2)
FSU
Miami
Rutgers
Maryland
B1G North
Ohio State(1)
Michigan(2)
ND
Mich St
Indiana
Purdue
B1G Midwest
Wisconsin (1)
Iowa(2)
Nebraska
Minnesota
Illinois
Northwestern
B1G PAC
Washington(1)
Oregon(2)
USC
UCLA
Stanford
Utah
Play the 5 teams in your division and rotate other divisions in your league every 2 years H/A. That’s 11 common games to Decide division champs and runners up. Then play one game vs the other conference against a similarly rated opponent in a week one, made for TV matchup.
** Edited by hokieZ71 at 1/12/2024, 1:13:34 PM
** Edited by hokieZ71 at 1/12/2024, 1:14:18 PM
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
V
VTCALS72
2y
I do not believe getting down to 48 teams is the goal for this phase. I think it is much less.
If the Big could get Stanford and ND I think they would shut down the idea of challenging the SEC in their area and stay at 20 until the next phase which IMHO will cull some existing teams.
I am also not sure that the Big will want to challenge in the Southeast.
I am pretty sure the SEC will not expand geographic area with the possible exception of getting 2-4 teams from VA/NC, is done.
(In response to this post by hokieZ71)
2y
BIG and SEC will stop at 20 for now, then pick off one or two from the B12 as they "prove" themselves in the playoffs.
I read an article that said that if the ACC loses their top 4-6 teams, that the PAC could be resurrected as the 4th "P" conference. While they do not have a media deal at the moment, it's very possible that the PAC takes ACC leftovers, a few top Mountain West and AAC teams, and gets a solid contract in the $25M range. Call it the PAC, ACC, or some other name, there will be 4 P conferences.
(In response to this post by hokieZ71)
2y
The Mountain West schools make less than $2 million each (Boise makes a little more.) The other Western conferences make even less than that. Which of those school do you have in mind when you say they could make $25 mill. each? The NCAA may be generous enough to declare them "A5" like the "P" conferences, but no media company will pay them double-digit millions. And the CFP committee will certainly give them the SMU treatment for playoff money. SMU marks the end of G5 schools being promoted to "Px" pay level. I was somewhat surprised that Cincy, Houston, etc. got full P treatment when they moved. But the media companies needed that business to finish before they crushed the PAC. It won't ever happen again.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
schools, then 3 or 4 land in the B12. I see the leftovers being CSL, Stanford, SMU, BC, Wake, Cuse, maybe even Duke. Those institutions could form an academic conference, and end up in the new "PAC". Add Rice, Tulane, and the P2 would fit nicely in that mix (although not perfectly). Cal and Stanford could be the ones leading the new conference, and SDSU and Fresno State, while not academic institutions, would most definitely bring a west coast flavor. Add South Florida, and you have the makings of a "P" conference that could command $20M - $25M in media money. Just spitballing, but combining the ACC and PAC assets could create the foundation to build such a conference. Again, could be called the PAC or ACC, as those are national brands.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
V
VTCALS72
2y
baseball. That is the majors of the P2 who rules and maybe even has contracts with individual triple A teams to place Plan B recruits etc. In this triple A there will not be enough $$$$ to run one big national conference so after this phase is over, the AAA will be less independent conferences and more just divisions etc. under some higher authority. Maybe that authority will be a revised NCAA or maybe ESPN but there will be something to assure everyone not in the P2, stays, "in their new lane."
If this happens then the lack of $$$$ will force smaller regional groupings so all sports operations can survive. So maybe the toothless ACC becomes Triple A East, the toothless B12 becomes triple A Central and the currently defunct PAC revives a bit to become the triple A West.
I think the idea that any of the ACC, B12 or PAC can survive/revive long term as a power anything is pretty remote.
** Edited by VTCALS72 at 1/15/2024, 12:23:55 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2
2hhoop3
2y
a power conference anymore than people outside of the Big 12 view that conference to be a power conference with the departures of OU and UT. They are a G5 existing on the borrowed time of a contract received more for what they facilitated than the value they really contribute. The P2 have substantially achieved their desired result with the exception of ND and POSSIBLY a few more stragglers.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
more former "P" schools than G5 schools, they certainly could make the argument to get paid the same as other "P" conferences in regards to the playoff money distributions. There should be enough PAC and ACC leftovers to form a power conference, with a couple of additions that bring markets or football to the equation.
Call them a tweener between G5 and the power conferences, but I don't see how one argues that a conference that has BC, Wake, Cuse, Duke, Cal, Stanford, Washington State, Oregon State, and a few academic or football additions isn't a power conference.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
The PAC10 (after USC/UCLA) could not reach a deal with Fox, ESPN, or anyone else at $25 million, with the rumored exception of Apple, all-streaming. The value of the Western content left town with The B1G. The others were lucky to catch a ride at all. I'm not disparaging the schools or their athletic programs. I'm simply referring to their value as TV content. Time zone doesn't help.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
the minute they joined other conferences in different time zones. All of them except WSU and OSU are making much more money than they were offered as a conference. No doubt in my mind that there are good enough markets, and good enough programs to command a media deal that is much higher than the AAU or the Mountain west. keep in mind, that if that were to happen, all of the other ACC schools would have found homes, and the ACCN and the PACN could merge to form their own network - and they too could be competitive, and easily be one of the top 4 conferences.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2
2hhoop3
2y
consider the Big 12 a power conference it is unlikely they consider that group a power conference either. Neither of those groups will approach the media numbers to be called a power conference.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
see it that way, but one could argue the same with the ACC if you take away the top 3 brands. or we could use media deals as the measuring stick - or playoff appearences - or ratings on TV.
What metric are you using?
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
the ACC a power conference when/if/who the schools are that walk. The media deals are a measuring stick, not necessarily the only one. We'll see what the Big 12 does next time around without UT/OU and the leverage their move along with Big 12 assistance in blowing up the PAC 12 provided in the last negotiations is no longer needed.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
football have always had bigger budgets and more money - putting them in one conference does not take away that schools like Stanford, Cuse, cal, K-state, and almost all the rest are not power programs. I think you are too hard on schools that have not won a national championship - many, because they were never considered for the major bows from the beginning of time. Now that they have access, and there will be blue bloods watching the playoffs on TV, I think things will change.
Remember, TCU beat Michigan last year in the playoffs. Cincy was in the playoffs recently. Now, new teams will be in the playoffs, and while they may not win initially, they will compete for those recruits in the future, more than the mid and lower tier SEC and BIG programs. I for one, can't wait.
Who knows, K-State may win a national championship someday - in something - as they haven't won one yet in any sport.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
say never but, as I have told you on countless occasions access in an expanded field likely decreases the probability of any given day because it now becomes "given DAYS" be it 2, 3, 4 or more in a row.
You are misreading the TCU and Cincy participation. TCU had a magical season, dodged a number of regular season bullets and was the beneficiary of what, up until that time was the typical Michigan/B1G choke job. They needed 2 any given days unfortunately the clock struck midnight and reality returned in the championship game.
In the expanded playoff that 2 game path is now 3 or 4 further reducing the likelihood of a championship. The reality is not many, if any, new teams emerge in the playoff and those that do will be early round fodder for big conference 2nd tier teams or physically strained from their first games so as to make them less likely to compete in rounds 2, 3 or 4. The expanded playoffs do not in reality increase championship probability, they are a thinly veiled money grab from tune up games. When you get to the semis you will have the usual suspects.
Recruits in the future will be even more about money and that money largely comes from big stadiums and well heeled boosters and depending how they choose to divvy the revenue pie maybe some playoff money. You'll likely have your answer on that in the next 2 years with a new CFP agreement. I will say I am not optimistic how slots or money will be divided then.
I do not think I am too hard, somewhat cynical maybe, but, likely just realistic as to what is most probable to happen. I think you are mistaking the illusion of access for a truly competitive playing field that does not exist, has not existed for some time and which the proposed structures will not address. VT is in same boat as K-State and while hopefully they breakthrough in some sport some day the likelihood of winning multiple playoff games, be it 2,3,4,5,6 or more in basketball or football makes that a longshot. The Michael Vick led Sugar Bowl team, in all likelihood, represented VT's best shot.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
allowing college football programs to be able to bid for players, like it is turning out to be now. They will be paid, but right now, it's the wild west with third party "booster" organizations "buying" players from other teams. The recent letter by the NCAA was a shot across the bow to get congresses (and everybody elses) attention that there is a problem, and it will have to be resolved. The discussions are now going on, and if there is going to be an assemblance of "college" football, there will have to be congressional action to get anti trust or partial anti trust for the NCAA - or we may just have a semi pro league for the wealthy programs. Personally, I don't think we get that break away football league, but really, I'm just a fan.
I also think that with some sort of antitrust, this idea of a starting quarterback playing for 4 different schools will also come to an end. They will put a lid on transfers, rather than kids entering the portal for the highest bidder. I think they will allow only one transfer, with a second transfer available for specific reasons like a coaching change, or something along those lines.
A lot in this post, because it gives the background on why I think the access to the playoffs will be more important moving forward than being in the highest paid conference. They will figure out the moving targets of NIL, paying players, and the transfer portal, and the P2, while getting richer, will pay a heavy price as many blue blood programs used to postseason success, will be watching from the sidelines.
There is no substitute for good coaching, solid recruiting, and player development for 90% of college football programs. A Michael Vick might have transferred out in the old days, and coaches makin $10M or more a year is a relatively new thing as well. I just refuse to believe that this will continue without guardrails, and there is WAY too much federal money sent to these institution for them to not get involved.
Either way, the arenas, football stadiums, and TV viewership will continue, and it's my contention that we will end up with college ball at the end, not a semi pro league. Not being in the P2 will become an asset, not a liability - and of course, this is all opinionated babble, not presented as fact.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
wages or salary because we will demand that they sign contracts.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
What am I missing? Didn't the courts open the door to NIL because the NCAA/schools were preventing the athletes from earning money off-campus on their own time in their own way? Now we are going to give them NIL from the school and we think that will allow us to kill the outside NIL? This will not survive the first lawsuit. In addition, the schools will be required to share the NIL pool across all men's and women's sports... ineffective, wasteful. Paying the players a wage or salary will work fine; not so with NIL.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2
2hhoop3
2y
your opinion proves to be well founded as opposed to fantasy. Federal money to institutions is likely irrelevant to athletics and that is even before addressing the comedy of expecting the government to solve/resolve anything. We have far differing perspectives on the alternatives and likelihood and while we do differ it would be fine with me were yours to prove right or closer to the truth.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
H
hokieZ71
2y
Fox, ESPN, NBC, CBS. They’re pushing money to form the leagues the way they want them. So regarding size of conferences I think we are at the point the SEC and B1G are about to get to where the media companies want them to be. May they’re already there and this all ends. Maybe they’re going to 20 or maybe 24. I do know 24 would end it. So that post was more about getting to an endgame in response to the previous poster talking about the B1G getting serious by moving into the Southeast.
Kinda wish it would all just stop how it is. I think there’s a shot the 4 big conferences could put in a good show with a 12 team playoff in their current forms. But I don’t think that will happen.
** Edited by hokieZ71 at 1/12/2024, 4:51:58 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
V
VTCALS72
2y
football eyeballs in VA. But, what do either VT or UVA really offer the SEC other than the area? They already have all the football teams they need. They are already really good in BBB and WBB, baseball, softball etc. We could be a positive if they wanted to add wrestling but that is probably not on the SEC horizon?
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
Looks like a protected Tweet. I can't see it at least. Please paraphrase
it for us. TIA
(In response to this post by JohnsonCItyHokie)
S
Sportn
2y
Two SEC schools I was told expect FSU to the Big Ten and UNC and VA to the SEC
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2y
the SEC". Post was from a poster called Big Ten Information.
Just some other post from someone who doesn't know anything about what's going to happen with realignment, but throws something out to get attention.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2
2hhoop3
2y
throwing anything and everything he can against a wall and if/when he hits 1 despite missing on the other 1000 it will be see I told you so.
(In response to this post by Nortazhokie)