[Snorlax94]

I just started reading the CU board thread about the Mel Tucker drama. I haven't gotten to the part where he leaves, but, the guy said this on SATURDAY, so I can imagine what kinds of comments await. Just brutal...

[tweet]https://twitter.com/GuerrieroCU/status/1226617060639117312?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1226617060639117312&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2F2%2Ftwitter.min.html%231226617060639117312[/tweet]

---

The 5th or 6th best program in the BIG is able to throw that kind of money around, but hey, at least we can all watch water polo and gymnastics on the conference owned Pac 12 network!


LOL - that was perfect!

Since At&t uverse dropped the pac-12network, I can’t even do that.

[Snorlax94]

I just started reading the CU board thread about the Mel Tucker drama. I haven't gotten to the part where he leaves, but, the guy said this on SATURDAY, so I can imagine what kinds of comments await. Just brutal...

[tweet]https://twitter.com/GuerrieroCU/status/1226617060639117312?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1226617060639117312&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2F2%2Ftwitter.min.html%231226617060639117312[/tweet]

---

The 5th or 6th best program in the BIG is able to throw that kind of money around, but hey, at least we can all watch water polo and gymnastics on the conference owned Pac 12 network!


LOL - that was perfect!

Since At&t uverse dropped the pac-12network, I can’t even do that.

[76lsjumb]

This is all getting very confusing.  I keep forgetting which of the threads are filled with posts bemoaning how horrible it is that football coaches get paid so much money and which of the threads are filled with posts bemoaning how horrible it is that the PAC-12 isn't in a position to pay coaches so much more money...

[76lsjumb]

This is all getting very confusing.  I keep forgetting which of the threads are filled with posts bemoaning how horrible it is that football coaches get paid so much money and which of the threads are filled with posts bemoaning how horrible it is that the PAC-12 isn't in a position to pay coaches so much more money...

[Farm93]

LOL on the Colorado destination job stuff.

No Pac-12 job is a destination job at this point.   Some might be content with UW or USC pay and prestige, but even those jobs don't match up to the best SEC and BigTen jobs.   Even when the head coach salary is close, the salary needed to retain the staff is definitely not there.

The other Pac-12 head coach jobs are definitely stepping stone jobs to the SEC, BigTen or NFL.  That is why I remain confident Stanford's next coach will be on The Farm for 3 years or less unless they are consistently mediocre (see Willingham).

FWIW - The stepping stone stuff is not Scott's problem.   The relative strength of the Pac-12 vs SEC is a function of demographics, geography, culture, and now medicine (CTE). 

I would be a bit bitter if I was a Colorado alum since only one year is a bit too quick, but it is not unprecedented since the same type of thing happened to Oregon in 2017.

[Farm93]

LOL on the Colorado destination job stuff.

No Pac-12 job is a destination job at this point.   Some might be content with UW or USC pay and prestige, but even those jobs don't match up to the best SEC and BigTen jobs.   Even when the head coach salary is close, the salary needed to retain the staff is definitely not there.

The other Pac-12 head coach jobs are definitely stepping stone jobs to the SEC, BigTen or NFL.  That is why I remain confident Stanford's next coach will be on The Farm for 3 years or less unless they are consistently mediocre (see Willingham).

FWIW - The stepping stone stuff is not Scott's problem.   The relative strength of the Pac-12 vs SEC is a function of demographics, geography, culture, and now medicine (CTE). 

I would be a bit bitter if I was a Colorado alum since only one year is a bit too quick, but it is not unprecedented since the same type of thing happened to Oregon in 2017.

[BostonCard]

And lex and BC, I love how you guys embrace the eye test and the need to play entertaining ball in the Farhan/Giants discussion, but seem to downplay it when it comes to Stanford football.

In the other thread, I noted that the following two things can be true:
1) Analytics can maximize an individual team's win potential.
2) Analytics applied league-wide can make the games boring.

In other words, one can support it on a team level, after all, one might want to win ugly above losing pretty, but lament its application league-wide.

Now that being said, a lot of the stuff I enjoy most people would find boring.  I prefer pitching duels over slugfests and would favor rules that would encourage those types of games (fences back, enlarge the strike zone, etc.), and in football I prefer well executed plays and defensive performances over razzle dazzle, so I tend to favor rule changes that encourage that (for example, enforcing illegal downfield blocks, offensive holding and allowing more aggressive defensive back coverage).  But regardless, as a Stanford football fan, I would support a win-maximizing strategy, even if it wasn't my preferred offensive or defensive strategy, and I have no problem with turtling as a strategy when it makes sense.

BC

[BostonCard]

And lex and BC, I love how you guys embrace the eye test and the need to play entertaining ball in the Farhan/Giants discussion, but seem to downplay it when it comes to Stanford football.

In the other thread, I noted that the following two things can be true:
1) Analytics can maximize an individual team's win potential.
2) Analytics applied league-wide can make the games boring.

In other words, one can support it on a team level, after all, one might want to win ugly above losing pretty, but lament its application league-wide.

Now that being said, a lot of the stuff I enjoy most people would find boring.  I prefer pitching duels over slugfests and would favor rules that would encourage those types of games (fences back, enlarge the strike zone, etc.), and in football I prefer well executed plays and defensive performances over razzle dazzle, so I tend to favor rule changes that encourage that (for example, enforcing illegal downfield blocks, offensive holding and allowing more aggressive defensive back coverage).  But regardless, as a Stanford football fan, I would support a win-maximizing strategy, even if it wasn't my preferred offensive or defensive strategy, and I have no problem with turtling as a strategy when it makes sense.

BC

[CowboyIndian]

Thus IMO it's related to the delivery media...cable is on the way out.

And what is your internet source? I assume in urban or suburban communities a great percentage is cable.

[CowboyIndian]

Thus IMO it's related to the delivery media...cable is on the way out.

And what is your internet source? I assume in urban or suburban communities a great percentage is cable.

[cardcrimson]

No Pac-12 job is a destination job at this point.  

Well, apparently the one in Palo Alto appears to be, at least for the incumbent.

[cardcrimson]

No Pac-12 job is a destination job at this point.  

Well, apparently the one in Palo Alto appears to be, at least for the incumbent.

[Phogge]

2.5 million in Boulder, 5.5 million in East Lansing and I bet the cost of living in Michigan is lower than Colorado. Perhaps the three million is small potatoes to a bunch of Stanford grads but ultimately he had no choice but to bolt. Guys I went to school with would bolt too.

[Phogge]

2.5 million in Boulder, 5.5 million in East Lansing and I bet the cost of living in Michigan is lower than Colorado. Perhaps the three million is small potatoes to a bunch of Stanford grads but ultimately he had no choice but to bolt. Guys I went to school with would bolt too.

[SamuelMcF]

Thus IMO it's related to the delivery media...cable is on the way out.

And what is your internet source? I assume in urban or suburban communities a great percentage is cable.

IMO means "in my opinion," so...my opinion.

I'm 25. Not a single other 25-year-old I know has cable.

[SamuelMcF]

Thus IMO it's related to the delivery media...cable is on the way out.

And what is your internet source? I assume in urban or suburban communities a great percentage is cable.

IMO means "in my opinion," so...my opinion.

I'm 25. Not a single other 25-year-old I know has cable.

[winflop]

Leach bolted in part because of lack of resources.
Tucker just bailed after one year because of resources.

When is enough going to be enough? When are the Presidents/Chancellors going to fire the putz Larry Scott? He has completely and totally failed. A major restructuring is needed at both the conference and especially the network, and he's clearly not the guy who's going to do that.

[winflop]

Leach bolted in part because of lack of resources.
Tucker just bailed after one year because of resources.

When is enough going to be enough? When are the Presidents/Chancellors going to fire the putz Larry Scott? He has completely and totally failed. A major restructuring is needed at both the conference and especially the network, and he's clearly not the guy who's going to do that.

[CowboyIndian]

Thus IMO it's related to the delivery media...cable is on the way out.

And what is your internet source? I assume in urban or suburban communities a great percentage is cable.

IMO means "in my opinion," so...my opinion.

I'm 25. Not a single other 25-year-old I know has cable.

OK, non-boomer. I was just curious about where all the cord-cutters are getting their internet. I thought cable was pretty ubiquitous (for internet) in the urbs.

[CowboyIndian]

Thus IMO it's related to the delivery media...cable is on the way out.

And what is your internet source? I assume in urban or suburban communities a great percentage is cable.

IMO means "in my opinion," so...my opinion.

I'm 25. Not a single other 25-year-old I know has cable.

OK, non-boomer. I was just curious about where all the cord-cutters are getting their internet. I thought cable was pretty ubiquitous (for internet) in the urbs.

[qwerty49]

Thus IMO it's related to the delivery media...cable is on the way out.

And what is your internet source? I assume in urban or suburban communities a great percentage is cable.

IMO means "in my opinion," so...my opinion.

I'm 25. Not a single other 25-year-old I know has cable.

OK, non-boomer. I was just curious about where all the cord-cutters are getting their internet. I thought cable was pretty ubiquitous (for internet) in the urbs.

Well, I think the word "source" has you two talking about 2 different things.  

FWIW I'm "just a tad" over 25, LOL.  I cut the cord about a year ago and my new ISP is ATT Fiber, which just came into my neighborhood and took a whole lot of business away from Cox.

[qwerty49]

Thus IMO it's related to the delivery media...cable is on the way out.

And what is your internet source? I assume in urban or suburban communities a great percentage is cable.

IMO means "in my opinion," so...my opinion.

I'm 25. Not a single other 25-year-old I know has cable.

OK, non-boomer. I was just curious about where all the cord-cutters are getting their internet. I thought cable was pretty ubiquitous (for internet) in the urbs.

Well, I think the word "source" has you two talking about 2 different things.  

FWIW I'm "just a tad" over 25, LOL.  I cut the cord about a year ago and my new ISP is ATT Fiber, which just came into my neighborhood and took a whole lot of business away from Cox.

[Farm93]

No Pac-12 job is a destination job at this point.  

Well, apparently the one in Palo Alto appears to be, at least for the incumbent.

One's alma mater is a different matter.   Stanford (not the job) means the world to Shaw.  And we have been so lucky that he has wanted to be at Stanford.  If he was not a Stanford alum I suspect he would have left, likely for the NFL, after the 2012 season and 2013 RB.

[Farm93]

No Pac-12 job is a destination job at this point.  

Well, apparently the one in Palo Alto appears to be, at least for the incumbent.

One's alma mater is a different matter.   Stanford (not the job) means the world to Shaw.  And we have been so lucky that he has wanted to be at Stanford.  If he was not a Stanford alum I suspect he would have left, likely for the NFL, after the 2012 season and 2013 RB.

[OutsiderFan]

2.5 million in Boulder, 5.5 million in East Lansing and I bet the cost of living in Michigan is lower than Colorado. Perhaps the three million is small potatoes to a bunch of Stanford grads but ultimately he had no choice but to bolt. Guys I went to school with would bolt too.

Nobody has any issues with someone taking a higher paying job with more resources. The issue with Tucker is how much he misrepresented himself and how he conned people that he was staying at CU.

There was a tweet posted on the CU message board from a Buffs fan, who after seeing Tucker’s  “Destination” tweet posted his receipt for season tickets and that he was upping his donation to $500 because Tucker was committing to Colorado.

Tucker easily could have not tweeted anything confirming his commitment until the dust settled and the MSU job was filled. He could have not gone on radio, and he sure as hell could have not gone to booster events telling people to their face he was staying at CU while his agent was negotiating with MSU. The honorable thing would have been to tell CU he needed to put his CU plans on hold because there was a possibility he could take the MSU job and he needed to see it play out out.

The CU AD response was to take the high road unlike Tucker, but that doesn’t mean Tucker doesn’t deserve to be raked over the coals for his duplicitous behavior or change the fact Tucker demonstrated no character or integrity. This kind of stuff is very bad for college sports.

[OutsiderFan]

2.5 million in Boulder, 5.5 million in East Lansing and I bet the cost of living in Michigan is lower than Colorado. Perhaps the three million is small potatoes to a bunch of Stanford grads but ultimately he had no choice but to bolt. Guys I went to school with would bolt too.

Nobody has any issues with someone taking a higher paying job with more resources. The issue with Tucker is how much he misrepresented himself and how he conned people that he was staying at CU.

There was a tweet posted on the CU message board from a Buffs fan, who after seeing Tucker’s  “Destination” tweet posted his receipt for season tickets and that he was upping his donation to $500 because Tucker was committing to Colorado.

Tucker easily could have not tweeted anything confirming his commitment until the dust settled and the MSU job was filled. He could have not gone on radio, and he sure as hell could have not gone to booster events telling people to their face he was staying at CU while his agent was negotiating with MSU. The honorable thing would have been to tell CU he needed to put his CU plans on hold because there was a possibility he could take the MSU job and he needed to see it play out out.

The CU AD response was to take the high road unlike Tucker, but that doesn’t mean Tucker doesn’t deserve to be raked over the coals for his duplicitous behavior or change the fact Tucker demonstrated no character or integrity. This kind of stuff is very bad for college sports.

[JohnR34231]

No Pac-12 job is a destination job at this point.  

Well, apparently the one in Palo Alto appears to be, at least for the incumbent.

One's alma mater is a different matter.   Stanford (not the job) means the world to Shaw.  And we have been so lucky that he has wanted to be at Stanford.  If he was not a Stanford alum I suspect he would have left, likely for the NFL, after the 2012 season and 2013 RB.

Yeah, I always thought that was one of the main reasons he got the job in the first place. Stanford was tired of coaches who would bolt for perceived greener pastures the moment they had some success.

[JohnR34231]

No Pac-12 job is a destination job at this point.  

Well, apparently the one in Palo Alto appears to be, at least for the incumbent.

One's alma mater is a different matter.   Stanford (not the job) means the world to Shaw.  And we have been so lucky that he has wanted to be at Stanford.  If he was not a Stanford alum I suspect he would have left, likely for the NFL, after the 2012 season and 2013 RB.

Yeah, I always thought that was one of the main reasons he got the job in the first place. Stanford was tired of coaches who would bolt for perceived greener pastures the moment they had some success.

[Phogge]

I don’t know about suburbia since I live on a rural ridge at almost 1000’. There is no hope for any new fibre out here and the local cable company won’t string wire up our hill since there are too few customers. So it’s satellite or nothing and some “neighbors” don’t have a clean look at the sky (big trees).

So if you are 25 don’t move out here unless you can get by with DVD’s and books.

[Phogge]

I don’t know about suburbia since I live on a rural ridge at almost 1000’. There is no hope for any new fibre out here and the local cable company won’t string wire up our hill since there are too few customers. So it’s satellite or nothing and some “neighbors” don’t have a clean look at the sky (big trees).

So if you are 25 don’t move out here unless you can get by with DVD’s and books.

[winflop]

Nobody has any issues with someone taking a higher paying job with more resources. The issue with Tucker is how much he misrepresented himself and how he conned people that he was staying at CU.

That is one of two issues. Tucker gets a big fat goose egg when it comes to integrity - about the same level as a politician.

The other issue - which is the underlying issue - is why he was able to get such a much higher-paying job. That is a structural issue that is going to increasingly plague the Pac-12 until the conference & network have different leadership and a different direction.

Cord-cutting is real, but that doesn't mean that you get paid just short of $5M and that doesn't mean that you spend some $6M/year on rent for your HQ. It also doesn't mean that you speak like a spineless wallflower when your conference is being disrespected on a national level across multiple avenues.

[winflop]

Nobody has any issues with someone taking a higher paying job with more resources. The issue with Tucker is how much he misrepresented himself and how he conned people that he was staying at CU.

That is one of two issues. Tucker gets a big fat goose egg when it comes to integrity - about the same level as a politician.

The other issue - which is the underlying issue - is why he was able to get such a much higher-paying job. That is a structural issue that is going to increasingly plague the Pac-12 until the conference & network have different leadership and a different direction.

Cord-cutting is real, but that doesn't mean that you get paid just short of $5M and that doesn't mean that you spend some $6M/year on rent for your HQ. It also doesn't mean that you speak like a spineless wallflower when your conference is being disrespected on a national level across multiple avenues.

[stupac2]

OK, non-boomer. I was just curious about where all the cord-cutters are getting their internet. I thought cable was pretty ubiquitous (for internet) in the urbs.

I think he was clearly using "cable" to only mean the box on your TV, not the whole package. I'm not sure I've ever heard someone refer to Comcast internet as "cable", but I'm only a bit older than SamuelMcF.

As for where cord-cutters get internet, I would say it depends. In much of the country high-speed internet is a monopoly or close to it. Fortunately I live in a place where you can get the best ISP in the country (Sonic, based out of Santa Rosa). Depending on one's willingness to do the cancellation dance they may have cable from a bundle and never use it, but even with that I think you're better off saying "forget it" and going internet only.

[stupac2]

OK, non-boomer. I was just curious about where all the cord-cutters are getting their internet. I thought cable was pretty ubiquitous (for internet) in the urbs.

I think he was clearly using "cable" to only mean the box on your TV, not the whole package. I'm not sure I've ever heard someone refer to Comcast internet as "cable", but I'm only a bit older than SamuelMcF.

As for where cord-cutters get internet, I would say it depends. In much of the country high-speed internet is a monopoly or close to it. Fortunately I live in a place where you can get the best ISP in the country (Sonic, based out of Santa Rosa). Depending on one's willingness to do the cancellation dance they may have cable from a bundle and never use it, but even with that I think you're better off saying "forget it" and going internet only.

[BostonCard]

Colorado fired Tucker's predecessor (Mike McEntyre) less than two years after he signed a contract extension amid much fanfare.  I am sure the contract was meant to communicate to recruits and boosters and the like that a coach who had just gone 10-4 and won coach of the year was going to be at Colorado a long time.  He was fired at the end of the 2018 season.

I don't know why coaches are expected to be loyal when their employers sure aren't.

BC

[BostonCard]

Colorado fired Tucker's predecessor (Mike McEntyre) less than two years after he signed a contract extension amid much fanfare.  I am sure the contract was meant to communicate to recruits and boosters and the like that a coach who had just gone 10-4 and won coach of the year was going to be at Colorado a long time.  He was fired at the end of the 2018 season.

I don't know why coaches are expected to be loyal when their employers sure aren't.

BC

[OutsiderFan]

OK, non-boomer. I was just curious about where all the cord-cutters are getting their internet. I thought cable was pretty ubiquitous (for internet) in the urbs.

I think he was clearly using "cable" to only mean the box on your TV, not the whole package. I'm not sure I've ever heard someone refer to Comcast internet as "cable", but I'm only a bit older than SamuelMcF.

As for where cord-cutters get internet, I would say it depends. In much of the country high-speed internet is a monopoly or close to it. Fortunately I live in a place where you can get the best ISP in the country (Sonic, based out of Santa Rosa). Depending on one's willingness to do the cancellation dance they may have cable from a bundle and never use it, but even with that I think you're better off saying "forget it" and going internet only.

I don't know this for sure, but it seems like many people probably get their internet access via AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc. and not Comcast, etc.

You can run HDMI cables from your phone or iPad to a large screen if you want.  There are also projectors that can attach to them as well, so you don't even need a monitor. Just a screen.

Comcast charges over $100/mo for high speed cable internet where I am, and DirectTV costs about $90/mo. You can get unlimited mobile service for less than $100/mo.  I keep DirecTV for three reasons.  

1. Ability to set things to record and store on DVR.
2. Ability to rewind and pause live TV with great control. 
3. I like flipping channels back and forth with a remote button click.

I'm sure if I was 20-something I would never get cable TV, satellite TV, or cable internet. It would all be about wireless. As it is, I watch a lot of stuff on YouTube on my iPad from the home router.

[OutsiderFan]

OK, non-boomer. I was just curious about where all the cord-cutters are getting their internet. I thought cable was pretty ubiquitous (for internet) in the urbs.

I think he was clearly using "cable" to only mean the box on your TV, not the whole package. I'm not sure I've ever heard someone refer to Comcast internet as "cable", but I'm only a bit older than SamuelMcF.

As for where cord-cutters get internet, I would say it depends. In much of the country high-speed internet is a monopoly or close to it. Fortunately I live in a place where you can get the best ISP in the country (Sonic, based out of Santa Rosa). Depending on one's willingness to do the cancellation dance they may have cable from a bundle and never use it, but even with that I think you're better off saying "forget it" and going internet only.

I don't know this for sure, but it seems like many people probably get their internet access via AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc. and not Comcast, etc.

You can run HDMI cables from your phone or iPad to a large screen if you want.  There are also projectors that can attach to them as well, so you don't even need a monitor. Just a screen.

Comcast charges over $100/mo for high speed cable internet where I am, and DirectTV costs about $90/mo. You can get unlimited mobile service for less than $100/mo.  I keep DirecTV for three reasons.  

1. Ability to set things to record and store on DVR.
2. Ability to rewind and pause live TV with great control. 
3. I like flipping channels back and forth with a remote button click.

I'm sure if I was 20-something I would never get cable TV, satellite TV, or cable internet. It would all be about wireless. As it is, I watch a lot of stuff on YouTube on my iPad from the home router.

[SamuelMcF]

I think he was clearly using "cable" to only mean the box on your TV, not the whole package. I'm not sure I've ever heard someone refer to Comcast internet as "cable", but I'm only a bit older than SamuelMcF.

Yes, I was only meaning the actual box on your TV/live TV service. I actually do have Comcast internet, but that's it.

As for where cord-cutters get internet, I would say it depends. In much of the country high-speed internet is a monopoly or close to it. Fortunately I live in a place where you can get the best ISP in the country (Sonic, based out of Santa Rosa). Depending on one's willingness to do the cancellation dance they may have cable from a bundle and never use it, but even with that I think you're better off saying "forget it" and going internet only.

Just from my experience it makes a lot more financial sense to indeed say "forget it" and go internet only. Much cheaper, at least in my area, and with the high speeds you can stream anything live with very little delay.

You can run HDMI cables from your phone or iPad to a large screen if you want.  There are also projectors that can attach to them as well, so you don't even need a monitor. Just a screen.

Look into a Chromecast! It's a little wireless dongle that plugs into a TV's HDMI port and can replace an HDMI cable. Essentially you can "beam" your show to your TV screen (basically every major video app is compatible) and controllable from your laptop, phone, or ipad. Super cool, and only $30.

I'm sure if I was 20-something I would never get cable TV, satellite TV, or cable internet. It would all be about wireless. As it is, I watch a lot of stuff on YouTube on my iPad from the home router.

Again, anecdotally, myself and those I know agree with you.

[SamuelMcF]

I think he was clearly using "cable" to only mean the box on your TV, not the whole package. I'm not sure I've ever heard someone refer to Comcast internet as "cable", but I'm only a bit older than SamuelMcF.

Yes, I was only meaning the actual box on your TV/live TV service. I actually do have Comcast internet, but that's it.

As for where cord-cutters get internet, I would say it depends. In much of the country high-speed internet is a monopoly or close to it. Fortunately I live in a place where you can get the best ISP in the country (Sonic, based out of Santa Rosa). Depending on one's willingness to do the cancellation dance they may have cable from a bundle and never use it, but even with that I think you're better off saying "forget it" and going internet only.

Just from my experience it makes a lot more financial sense to indeed say "forget it" and go internet only. Much cheaper, at least in my area, and with the high speeds you can stream anything live with very little delay.

You can run HDMI cables from your phone or iPad to a large screen if you want.  There are also projectors that can attach to them as well, so you don't even need a monitor. Just a screen.

Look into a Chromecast! It's a little wireless dongle that plugs into a TV's HDMI port and can replace an HDMI cable. Essentially you can "beam" your show to your TV screen (basically every major video app is compatible) and controllable from your laptop, phone, or ipad. Super cool, and only $30.

I'm sure if I was 20-something I would never get cable TV, satellite TV, or cable internet. It would all be about wireless. As it is, I watch a lot of stuff on YouTube on my iPad from the home router.

Again, anecdotally, myself and those I know agree with you.