thundercleetz

Ts, I completely agree with you that it was the wrong move to add Hester over Butler, but as you also said, it's not as if anyone else added Butler to their 53 man roster. If SSS or Perriman get hurt we can sign Butler immediately. IMO good move by Butler going to a different practice squad, get some diversified experience from a different coaching unit, make yourself better that way. If we ever get him back he'll probably be an even better player. We've lost UFA's before and signed them back.

Nothing surprises me anymore with this team. I thought we were in for a long day after Ubaldo gave up the 3-run HR in the first. Incredible he went nine. Great performance!

As papa said, Disney stock is down. It's not $100 a share at around $94, down over 9% YTD when the market is up over 7%. Cord cutting is definitely a concern. But it's also an opportunity to gain market share: see Direct TV with Sling TV. Disney and Comcast aren't adjusting well thus far.

Not a bad point, but the conventional thought is that it will be four conferences of 16 for 64 schools. Not five conferences of 16. The market does not support more schools making $25M or more a year in TV rights than that. Pac 12 is at 12 and Big 12 is at 10, the Big 12 needs to get to 12 to ensure the Pac 12 doesn't try and steal Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and maybe Texas Tech (almost happened in 2011, could happen in 2024 when the Big 12 grant of rights expires). If the Big 12 gets to 12 it should be safe until 2024 or so. Research and data states if the Big 12 expands to 12 teams and reduces to 8 conference games it will increase its chances of reaching the playoff by 12-15% or so. That's where the money is with the current system and its what I expect the Big 12 to do. The next test will be 2024 when the Big 12 grant of rights expires and Texas and Oklahoma are essentially free agents. ACC was able to get their schools to sign a grant of rights extension through 2031, so that takes big names like FSU, Clemson and even Notre Dame off the market. Can the Big 12 get Texas to agree to a grant of rights extension? If so, then the Big 12 will be perfectly fine at 12, and I don't foresee any other conference expansion.

Not impossible, but for a Big 12 Network to happen the TV networks would have to make Texas whole. Texas is guaranteed approximately $15M per year from ESPN until 2031. That's ON TOP of TV rights. So you're looking at assuring Texas gets all inclusive TV rights of at least $40-50M per year or so expanding out to 2031. Maybe more, because the B1G and SEC are up for new contracts in 2021 or so and Texas will want at least what those schools get. So two scenarios: TV networks pay a lot more than what they are paying to make Texas whole and create a Big 12 Network (highly unlikely, this is what the Big 12 has been trying to do the last year, hiring consultants and exploring all expansion avenues, with no success). Or option two: other schools in the conference take less money to ensure Texas (and Oklahoma likely) continue to receive revenue equivalent to the B1G/SEC in exchange for a Big 12 Network (much more likely, as schools like Kansas Stats, Iowa State, Texas Tech, TCU and Baylor would have few options should Texas and Oklahoma leave the Big 12 and the conference collapses.) ESPN lost $45M on the LHN in the first five years, I don't think they want to pay Texas more money. Especially after recently agreeing to pay Wake Forest, BC and Syracuse $25M a year through 2030. The other Big 12 schools have a tough pill to swallow coming up. 14 schools is much more deadweight for Texas and Oklahoma to handle than 12. At least BYU and Houston have proven they can survive on their own, I don't think the same can be said for UCF, USF or any other G5 school.

Eww I don't like the move. An unfortunate consequence of bringing back a 38 year-old Steve Smith. This move could compound into an even worse one as Kamar Aiken is an UFA this offseason. A 900 yard+ 6 TD season and Aiken will get paid by someone.

Which is exactly why the Big 12 won't add UCF or USF. Cable companies are already paying out the ass in rights fees for these networks. The cable companies in Florida don't want to pay out extra money for a Big 12 network. Without a Big 12 Network, UCF or USF has limited appeal. ESPN already has UCF at a discount in the AAC, why would they pay more? The only reason ESPN created an ACC Network was because, allegedly, ESPN signed a bad contract with the conference years ago which stated if a conference network wasn't created by this year they would owe the ACC at least $40M. Now ESPN is paying the likes of Wake Forest, Syracuse, and Boston College $25M a year. Not to mention ESPN is paying Texas $15M a year from ESPN for the Longhorn Network ON TOP of the Big 12 TV rights. No wonder Disney stock has been so heavily criticized. UMD was smart to get out of the ACC.

Good point. Haha hopefully the Big 12 only adds two schools so they'll actually be the Big 12. God forbid they add four schools and are the Big 12 with 14 schools.

Tv markets matter less since there will not be a Big 12 network. More emphasis on game attendance and team branding. Texas will not let go of the Longhorn Network and the $$$$ they are getting from that

I think UCF and USF would have to be a joint package for the Big 12. UCF has some good attributes with its enormous enrollment, on campus stadium, top TV market, and fertile recruiting ground. However, academics might keep UCF out of the Big 12. Also, could UCF really carry the state of Florida for the Big 12? It's already saturated with UF, FSU, and Miami. Not to mention the Bucs and Dolphins, Rays and Marlins, etc. I have also heard a rumor that the Big 12 has a gentleman's agreement with the SEC to not expand into SEC territory. Given there will not be a Big 12 Network, the size of a TV market is less important which is a strike against UCF. I think the Big 12 adds the two best football schools: BYU and Houston. They aren't looking for schools that will be elevated by the conference, they are looking for schools that will elevate the conference. Both BYU and Houston can immediately compete and make the conference stronger in football. BYU has better attendance and TV rating than many P5 schools. BYU's fan base is national and travels well. Houston has good TV rating within the Houston market which the last five years has turned into an SEC market with A&M close by. Houston would also get great attendance numbers from playing the Texas and Oklahoma schools.

I think your analysis is spot on, TS. I think this team could win as few as six games, or surprise and win as many as 11-12. I have no idea myself. I'm just going to enjoy the season prediction free.

I think the problem is system wide instruction. To my untrained eye, it seems guy lose velocity and confidence when they come through our system. Something is missing with our instruction. If I were GM, I'd try and promote guys from systems like St. Louis and San Francisco to try and implement that culture here.

The Ravens wasted a roster spot on Perriman for nearly an entire season last year, I don't think they'll put Dixon on the IR.

Good analysis TS. Man I loved what I saw from Wallace. I think he has a really good chance to be what he was when he always killed us in Pittsburgh. With Flacco it seems he either likes you right away and throws your way, or he isn't comfortable and that rapport never develops. Flacco and Wallace have an instant rapport, it's a great fit. This might be the best group of receivers we've ever had. Aiken looks extremely strong catching the ball.

I've learned not to try and predict the Ravens: they underachieve when they should be good, they overachieve when predicted to be bad. I go into the season with low expectations and anything above that is a pleasant surprise for me.

Dee, can we get Perriman, Breshad Perriman and all variations automatically replaced with *** he who shall not be named *** sorta like *** I'm stupid for thinking this game is easy *** is?

Agreed

Tillman on the DL. I hope it's not serious but the road will be tough for us. We do have a favorable home schedule.

Let's hope so. Boston has been red hot. Their young talent on offense is absolutely insane and their entire lineup is as scary as ours. And Boston just brought up another kid this week who made a great defensive play in the outfield and had been tearing up the minors. Boston is going to be a scary team the next five years. New York is reloading and will be stacked in 2018 when their young talent comes up and their payroll is cleared for free agents. Our window to win is this year and next year. Toronto has to win this year they have a lot of their guys hitting free agency.

That falls on the offensive coordinator and head coach to make the offensive system work. There has to be chemistry in the offensive philosophy between the coaches. It was not there with Castillo and Caldwell, and it is currently not there with Castillo and Trestman. Offensive coordinator has the final say. If it continues to not gel, then it is up to the head coach to either get an offensive line coach that shares the same philopshy as Trestman, or if Harbaugh is hell bent on having a zone blocking system, get a new OC that shares that philopshy. The talent level also speaks to how fantastic of a coach Kubiak is.

I don't think you are starting the facts here. Kubiak and Castillo have the same zone running philosophy, they worked well together. The same chemistry isn't/wasn't there with Caldwell and Trestman. Ts, has it right, this goes way above Castillo. Everything I've read the players love Castillo and his instruction. It's Ozzie's fault for not getting the proper talent compatible with the scheme, it's Harbaugh's fault for tinkering with the scheme so often. KO said as much at his Raiders press conference. We are too inconsistent with our philosophy to develop an identity. That's not the offensive line coach's doing, that falls on the head coach and the front office.

Why is Castillo the problem?

The run game was awesome under Kubiak but other than that good point. We haven't had a consistent identity. Kubiak leaving really set us back.

This defense will have to play bend but don't break defense. As bad as the secondary has been, we have tightened up in the redzone. If we keep the long plays in front of us, but play tight in the redzone, that is a successful formula ala 2012. If we give up the big plays for touchdowns and are weak in the redzone, it will be last year all over again. On defense our ability hold to 3 instead of 7 will define our season. If we are going to judge the defense for getting torched in the preseason, by that same logic we also have to give them credit for holding up in the redzone.

What do you think should be done with EC?