Speaker 1: Welcome to the solid verbal.
Speaker 2: I'll that for me.
Speaker 1: I'm a man, I'm forty.
Speaker 2: I've heard so many players say, well, I want to
Speaker 2: be happy. You want to be happy for Dake Edith State.
Speaker 1: Is that?
Speaker 2: Whoo whoom? And Dan and Tie.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the solid verbal, boys and girls. My
Speaker 1: name is Ty hilden Brandt joining me over there in
Speaker 1: b e a Utvil, New York City. My man Dan Rubinstein, sir,
Speaker 1: how are you.
Speaker 2: Fresh off of putting the solid baby into the bath?
Speaker 2: Don't worry, he is now out of the bath and
Speaker 2: with Jody with and I. But I feel refreshed myself,
Speaker 2: even though it was just it was just external for me.
Speaker 1: By the way, we should we should point this out here, Dan, Yeah,
Speaker 1: please tell the kind folks listening wherever they are, Oh
Speaker 1: my gosh about your bath setup for the little man.
Speaker 2: The bath set up. Oh it is patriotly related. I guess, good,
Speaker 2: good transition. So I am just learning all of these
Speaker 2: things as a very stupid new father. But you just
Speaker 2: pour water over them when they're in the bathtub, and
Speaker 2: like the contraption that holds them in place. And I
Speaker 2: am using the Lee high cup that I purchased I
Speaker 2: think the morning of your wedding that I used for
Speaker 2: many years to drink my cold brew and iced coffee
Speaker 2: out of. And now it has been retired and it
Speaker 2: is now I guess the solid baby taking very Patriot
Speaker 2: League back.
Speaker 1: It is the Patriot League circle of life.
Speaker 2: It is and it does get wet. Yeah, there are
Speaker 2: there's lots of skin and it's a it's a Patriot
Speaker 2: League drum and fifee bath.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the show. We've been doing Q and
Speaker 1: A shows the last three weeks. So the first time
Speaker 1: we did it in the month of May was you
Speaker 1: asked me, then me asking you with a weird sort
Speaker 1: of role playing Ben too wonderful. And then last week
Speaker 1: we had questions from the verboler hood out there today, Well,
Speaker 1: we're doing is going back to an old concept and
Speaker 1: by old I mean a year old. We did it
Speaker 1: once previously.
Speaker 2: Can we change the name?
Speaker 1: We can absolutely change the name, But let me give
Speaker 1: some parent text for where we're headed with this. Last
Speaker 1: year the show that we did it may have been
Speaker 1: the first week of June. If I recall we called it,
Speaker 1: Are we sure that dot dot dot? And the whole
Speaker 1: premise behind it is you and I are going to
Speaker 1: take some college football topics, ones that really play into
Speaker 1: conventional wisdom, and we're going to challenge those beliefs. We're
Speaker 1: going to stress test them a little bit and see
Speaker 1: if for sure it is something that we are sure
Speaker 1: of or not. Now, the show last year was titled
Speaker 1: are We Sure That? And you expressed an interest a
Speaker 1: couple days ago and now again just a few seconds
Speaker 1: ago to change the name to something else.
Speaker 2: Is it's apparently like a Bill Simmons phrase, And I
Speaker 2: mean he uses it. He didn't invent it, for sure.
Speaker 1: There are other people who have used that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know. I mean, we could pump the brakes,
Speaker 2: pump the brakes. It could be college football ish with
Speaker 2: after further review or upon further consideration, or I kind
Speaker 2: of like pumping the brakes.
Speaker 1: I love pump the brakes. I use that four times
Speaker 1: a day.
Speaker 2: And we can. Yeah, you probably are PhD level with
Speaker 2: your corporate lingo.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, buddy, you are.
Speaker 2: What was the one you told me yesterday? Blocking and tackling,
Speaker 2: Blocking and tackling?
Speaker 1: What is that? It refers to the mundane elements of
Speaker 1: corporate life, the busy work, the seat work, if you will.
Speaker 2: So paperwork, calls, conference calls, meetings blocking you have to
Speaker 2: be through. Never heard it. I had to ask somebody
Speaker 2: the first time I heard brass tacks. Let's get down
Speaker 2: to brass tacks, like, I don't where are we going.
Speaker 1: We can go offline, we can go soup to nuts,
Speaker 1: we can go thirty thousand foot view whatever you want
Speaker 1: to do?
Speaker 2: Should we do an entire episode? Like right before we begin,
Speaker 2: I don't know how we're going to preview this year.
Speaker 2: I think we should mix it up. Should we just
Speaker 2: preview the big ten as if we are in a
Speaker 2: Monday morning meeting?
Speaker 1: I could absolutely do that.
Speaker 2: Okay, so let's pump some brakes and actually determine whether
Speaker 2: or not we should just hit the gas. You know,
Speaker 2: perhaps righting the brakes is not the move. It's the
Speaker 2: off season, so there's a lot of stop and start.
Speaker 2: You have news, you have spring ball, you have recruiting
Speaker 2: and signing day, and coaches moving around, so there is
Speaker 2: there is action, but then there's no action, so there's
Speaker 2: a lot of break pumping. Anyway, orb myyer announces he's
Speaker 2: the coach and waiting at us. See, there's all of
Speaker 2: those stories coming and going, So I like pump the brakes.
Speaker 2: So here's the only issue with this. Yeah, and we
Speaker 2: should explain what this actually is. We will explain what
Speaker 2: this is.
Speaker 1: I had my hypothetical sound all cute up and ready
Speaker 1: to go. I don't know if you can get me
Speaker 1: a break screeching sound while I'm doing some of our
Speaker 1: setup here on tonight's podcast. If you could put that
Speaker 1: in the little bit just box.
Speaker 2: Hold in the in the back of your mind thing
Speaker 2: to yourself. Should we be pumping the brakes?
Speaker 1: No, I'm saying I need Oh you want audio element? Okay,
Speaker 1: tonight's show. If you could find that, put it in
Speaker 1: the folder. I'll see if I can spin it up.
Speaker 1: Need it in a wave, though.
Speaker 2: Dan, you need it in a wave? Okay.
Speaker 1: Here is what we are doing this evening again to rehash.
Speaker 1: We are taking college football conventional wisdom for the coming
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen season, and we are stress testing it. We're
Speaker 1: going to look at some things that we have come
Speaker 1: to accept as fact, for better or worse, and deciding
Speaker 1: should we pump the brakes, should we go pedal to
Speaker 1: the metal on these ideas? Are we willing to accept
Speaker 1: those under the big tent? That is a Soliverble podcast.
Speaker 2: Roll through the stop sign no breaks.
Speaker 1: If you are listening for the first time, you can
Speaker 1: find the show at solidverbal dot com. You can also
Speaker 1: find us out there on social media. Solid Verbal is
Speaker 1: available via Facebook, via Twitter, Instagram. We're also out there
Speaker 1: on Reddit. We've got a subreddit that's created by our
Speaker 1: loyal I almost did it again and said lawyer Verballers,
Speaker 1: which we got an email from lawyer Verballers at g
Speaker 1: We've got a bunch a lot of lawyers who also
Speaker 1: listen to the show who are Verballers and loyal at
Speaker 1: that Shout it out to our subreddit started by some
Speaker 1: of those loyal fans. Reddit dot com, slash art slash
Speaker 1: solid verbal and don't forget. I know we keep reminding people,
Speaker 1: But if you are on the website at soliverbal dot com,
Speaker 1: sign up for the newsletter. You know we're getting into
Speaker 1: June here. We got some stuff that we're cooking into laboratory.
Speaker 1: You might want to be among the first to find
Speaker 1: out about that stuff. You can get the newsletter of
Speaker 1: intent delivered to your inbox. We won't spam you. We
Speaker 1: just use it to parrot out some of our more
Speaker 1: important things and Finally, wherever you could find a podcast,
Speaker 1: you can find soliverbal We're always adding our show to
Speaker 1: whatever directories may exist out there in the wild. Wherever
Speaker 1: you can find your podcast, you could download the show,
Speaker 1: and we will be here all throughout the offseason. Once
Speaker 1: we get a little closer to the start of the
Speaker 1: college football season, we'll switch it up from once week
Speaker 1: to twice a week, just to make sure you get
Speaker 1: bare minimum a week, bare minimum twice a week to
Speaker 1: be fair, just to make sure that you've got enough
Speaker 1: college football content flowing through those ears.
Speaker 2: Oh, thank god, check the check the dropbox, check the
Speaker 2: drop box. Okay, yeah, well.
Speaker 1: Why don't you Yes, let me explain this work up
Speaker 1: our first topic.
Speaker 2: So over the course of the offseason, there's just a
Speaker 2: ton of college football conventional wisdom, like, for instance, saturdays
Speaker 2: are amazing. I don't think I can question that that
Speaker 2: is something that we have accepted as fact or near fact.
Speaker 2: What we're doing today with today's exercise is saying, is
Speaker 2: this true though, this is what we've sort of accepted
Speaker 2: to be the universal college football truth narrative wise, player wise,
Speaker 2: program wise, But should we take a moment and question it?
Speaker 2: As the college football scientists we are. Isn't it true
Speaker 2: that if you're supposed to get a PhD you have
Speaker 2: to defend your dissertation, right, mm hmm. You submit it
Speaker 2: and then it's questioned by your peers and you have
Speaker 2: to defend it. Or if you're doing some sort of experiment,
Speaker 2: it has to be blind, you know, double blind. Whatever
Speaker 2: it is, there has to be an element of challenging.
Speaker 2: I probably used the blind determine correctly, but there has
Speaker 2: to be you know, you have to redo your experiment
Speaker 2: to see if you can get the same results over
Speaker 2: and over again. So there's an element of questioning things.
Speaker 2: That's what we're doing here today as college football scientists.
Speaker 2: Does the sound load and is it good to go?
Speaker 1: I've got it. So the very first topic we have here, Yeah,
Speaker 1: do we want to pump the brakes? That's pretty good, right,
Speaker 1: that's good. I like it.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: On the idea that Manny diaz Oh was the right
Speaker 1: hire for the Miami Hurricanes, Now, okay, this was a
Speaker 1: pretty big story. Give me the case for this is
Speaker 1: a pretty big story. So the case for many das
Speaker 1: is that he's got a familiarity with the area, right,
Speaker 1: He's he's from absolutely. Miami didn't go to Miami, went
Speaker 1: to Florida State, but he's a Miami guy. He was
Speaker 1: coaching the very recently. Is a defensive coordinator under Mark Richt.
Speaker 1: Was actually hired to be a head coach at Temple.
Speaker 1: Only had that chod for about three weeks before Mark
Speaker 1: Richt retired from Miami and the Canes hired him back.
Speaker 1: He's got a ton of experience as a defensive coordinator,
Speaker 1: has been a DC for about thirteen years. Has had
Speaker 1: a bunch of stops along the ways Missippi State. Sure,
Speaker 1: so people know many Diaz. He's long been thought of
Speaker 1: as a very bright young mind in the sport of
Speaker 1: college football, has got a lot of passion, is seen
Speaker 1: as a very good recruiter. There's a lot to like there.
Speaker 1: That is the case for. The case against is that
Speaker 1: he's never been a head coach before, and the case
Speaker 1: against is certainly that Many Diaz is stepping into a
Speaker 1: situation where Miami. I know we've joked about losing the swagger,
Speaker 1: but Miami is not what Miami used to be, and.
Speaker 2: That might go number one overall fantasy things wise, Miami
Speaker 2: losing swagger. If you are Ty Kuiper, Junior or Ty McShay.
Speaker 2: And you are projecting out Miami trying to find its
Speaker 2: lost swagger or swag? Are you? Is it a top
Speaker 2: four pick so one of our first two picks each.
Speaker 2: Do you think it's more of a reach because whatever
Speaker 2: happens during the season happens, and that adjusts the storyline
Speaker 2: of trying to recapture the swag. It might be more
Speaker 2: of an off season fantasy thing. I love that so much,
Speaker 2: Oh my god, because and well, we'll put this online.
Speaker 2: We'll put it on Twitter. Our dear, dear friend Bruce
Speaker 2: Felbn wrote a story about Manny Diaz trying to recapture
Speaker 2: the lost Miami swag. And I did the research, and
Speaker 2: you could argue that Miami has been swagless more often
Speaker 2: than it has been swag full. And you can look
Speaker 2: if you look up Al Golden or Randy Shannon or
Speaker 2: Mark Richt or Butch Dave. You just keep going back.
Speaker 1: They're all trying to capture the swag.
Speaker 2: And you look and interviews with recruits and it's just like,
Speaker 2: we're going to bring that swag back. There is more
Speaker 2: attempting to bring swag back in Coral Gables than there
Speaker 2: is than there are days filled with swag, right and
Speaker 2: by limited research. By the way, that's what I have.
Speaker 1: When we say swag, we mean swagger for the people
Speaker 1: out there who will call us on it. But you
Speaker 1: get the gist of what we're saying. That is the
Speaker 1: case both for and against Manny Diaz. Dan, how do you?
Speaker 1: How do you feel about this hire? Just from a
Speaker 1: thirty thousand foot you if you will.
Speaker 2: I haven't thought about it a lot. But it's an
Speaker 2: interesting time for Miami since Florida is still undergoing changes
Speaker 2: Florida state, you know, not a super hot start to
Speaker 2: Willie Taggart in terms of raising the profile of the
Speaker 2: brand in the state of Florida. Uh, the ACC has
Speaker 2: one clear major power. So it is a good time
Speaker 2: to not be, you know, in a c full of
Speaker 2: really destructive forces. And so I like the timing. I
Speaker 2: like Manny Diaz. I think he's bright, I think he'll
Speaker 2: recruit pretty well. I'm curious to see what happens in
Speaker 2: the short term at quarterback. I don't think Tate Martell
Speaker 2: is going to be necessarily the answer, and that has
Speaker 2: really been what has dogged Miami recently is getting two
Speaker 2: three good games from somebody whoever it is Malik Rogier
Speaker 2: most recently, and then it going sideways. And so quarterback
Speaker 2: to me is a huge deal. And I know it's
Speaker 2: more difficult to find really good quarterbacks in Florida because
Speaker 2: of the level of defensive competition in high school. Hard
Speaker 2: to develop in Florida. So that's why Miami has gone.
Speaker 2: You know, Brad Kaye is from like right by where
Speaker 2: my parents are in southern California. That's why they have
Speaker 2: to go out of state. So I think there are
Speaker 2: challenges with that job that are not obvious and people
Speaker 2: just think, oh, South Florida, they'll load up with talent,
Speaker 2: it'll be great. Maybe it's a for sure winnable division
Speaker 2: given where those teams are at. But my only real
Speaker 2: question is is he in the back of his mind
Speaker 2: orized on a daily, hourly, every minute basis, you know,
Speaker 2: knowing what's going on in the program, having a vision
Speaker 2: Because to me, saying he's from Miami, he gets it.
Speaker 1: Ye see, That's that's where I was gonna go with this.
Speaker 1: That's why I'm pumping the brakes on this.
Speaker 2: You know, it feels too much sister USC schoolish to
Speaker 2: me at that I'm worried about that angle, which doesn't
Speaker 2: necessarily mean he will fail, but it means he has
Speaker 2: to outgrow that angle, getting.
Speaker 1: The guy who knows the culture. The whole welcome home
Speaker 1: thing that I know we've had fun with in the past.
Speaker 2: Mark Rick just was welcomed home, and it was just
Speaker 2: welcoming home, and Scott Frost was welcomed home, and they
Speaker 2: tried to welcome Harbor.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Jeff Bram home to live like. I get the angle.
Speaker 1: I understand why bringing Jim Harbaugh home to Michigan's a
Speaker 1: big deal and that Super Bowl coach different to the alumni, right,
Speaker 1: I get that whole angle. There is definitely a place
Speaker 1: for it. But I think it's overrated. I realized why
Speaker 1: really overrated. I didn't used to feel that way, but
Speaker 1: then I did the show for twelve years, and now
Speaker 1: I really feel like it's an overrated quality that a
Speaker 1: lot of fans latch onto when it comes to head
Speaker 1: football coach. I like Mandy Diaz. I think he's forward thinking.
Speaker 1: He's certainly not rooted to any like old school mentality
Speaker 1: when it comes to coaching the football team, but we
Speaker 1: still don't really know what he is. He's very much
Speaker 1: an unknown quantity. Some of his stops as a defensive
Speaker 1: coordinator have gone better than others, so his stock has
Speaker 1: sort of risen and fallen over the course of time here,
Speaker 1: over like the last decade or so. I'm pumping the
Speaker 1: brakes on this just because we don't know a lot
Speaker 1: about what that team is going to look like. We
Speaker 1: don't know if he's going to be able to bring
Speaker 1: that swagger back. We know he's got a passion for
Speaker 1: that area of Florida and certainly for the school that
Speaker 1: is Miami. I think his father was the mayor of
Speaker 1: my or something like that. There's a lot of familiarity there.
Speaker 2: But that, by the way, I believe, and I'm confirming
Speaker 2: this as we speak. I believe both Butch Davis and
Speaker 2: Jimmy Johnson went to Arkansas. Yeah, so it's are like
Speaker 2: their coaching careers, a lot of it took place in
Speaker 2: Texas and Oklahoma, and they're.
Speaker 1: On rushmore in quarrel rifles, So you don't need to
Speaker 1: be from there. Miami Building winner Dennis Erickson definitely isn't. Yeah,
Speaker 1: let's pump the brake on many das. I hope it works.
Speaker 1: College football is more interesting when Miami is interesting and
Speaker 1: I would love, truly if somebody could bring the swagger back,
Speaker 1: but he's just so much of an unknown quantity at
Speaker 1: this point. I think. Given here's what I will say,
Speaker 1: Given the fact that it broke down with Mark Richt
Speaker 1: as late as it did in the coaching carousel, the
Speaker 1: fact that they were able to go out and get
Speaker 1: Manny Diaz away from Temple was a coup in that sense.
Speaker 1: It was absolutely the correct, the right move. Who else
Speaker 1: are you going to get at that juncture. It's a
Speaker 1: tough spot to put any program in.
Speaker 2: Here's the other thing that I think can be both
Speaker 2: over and understated. Miami just hired a new Temple coach.
Speaker 2: Like if you get rid of the connections, right, they
Speaker 2: don't pipeline. No, no, no, I'm not referring to al Gold.
Speaker 2: That's not what I'm talking about. Oh okay, Think about
Speaker 2: a group of five school who has had some success
Speaker 2: and they hire a new coach whatever. Like I don't
Speaker 2: know what example I could give right now, Like, who
Speaker 2: is a decent group of five school that just hired
Speaker 2: an up and comer that has had decent success. I'll
Speaker 2: give it some thought, or you can give it some thought.
Speaker 2: As I'm talking, it was plain a day that Manny
Speaker 2: Diaz has worked up to the point where, yes, he
Speaker 2: should be given a shot as a head coach on
Speaker 2: a somewhat major college football level. And it made sense. Oh, Temple, Holde,
Speaker 2: Temple hired Manny Diaz. He is that made sense to everybody.
Speaker 2: He was a new Temple level head coach who has
Speaker 2: suddenly without coaching, jumped up a pretty significant deal.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Right, And so that to me is curious that this
Speaker 2: might be too big a leap too quickly, and that
Speaker 2: we might look back and maybe he'll have a great
Speaker 2: if he doesn't work out in Miami, he'll have a
Speaker 2: great you know, second stage of his career, and he'll
Speaker 2: look back and say, you know what, I don't know
Speaker 2: if I was ready for it in that moment, Like
Speaker 2: it would have been nice to get two three years
Speaker 2: of reps at a group of five, So thin Eli
Speaker 2: Drinkwitz kind of thing, Yes, yes, and I don't know.
Speaker 2: I mean many Diaz has been a little bit more
Speaker 2: high profile at Texas and Mississippi State in Miami, so
Speaker 2: he has higher level experience. Yeah, but yes, if Eli
Speaker 2: Drinkwitz was hired at app State, and then all of
Speaker 2: the sudden Washington State, if Mike Leach had left with like,
Speaker 2: oh we really want Eli Drinkwitz like oh wow, that's
Speaker 2: but okay, hop hop and that that might be something
Speaker 2: that comes into play.
Speaker 1: All right, let's move on. Let's go over to another one.
Speaker 2: I'm not pumping brakes, but I am going through the
Speaker 2: yellow cautiously.
Speaker 1: Are we pumping the brakes on Jalen Hurts fitting in
Speaker 1: at Oklahoma? Now, Okay, if we must rehash this for
Speaker 1: the kind folks, the smart folks that certainly listen to
Speaker 1: the show, Jalen Hurts is transferring over from Alabama. He
Speaker 1: went twenty six and two in an Alabama uniform as
Speaker 1: starting quarterback, albeit running a much much different offense. Certainly,
Speaker 1: as we saw with Kyler Murray last year, and as
Speaker 1: we saw that Oklahoma program ramp up on offense under
Speaker 1: Lincoln Riley, there's no shortage of playmakers. The question for
Speaker 1: them will be along the line this year they lose
Speaker 1: a bunch of guys, right, we did ask I believe
Speaker 1: in this very same show, virtually the same question about
Speaker 1: Kyler Murray in twenty eighteen, sort of that we're asking
Speaker 1: about Jalen Hurts now at Oklahoma, the fit is it
Speaker 1: worth the emotional energy? Where do you come down on
Speaker 1: Jalen Hurts?
Speaker 2: So I can very clearly see a world in which
Speaker 2: he succeeds pretty electrically. But the nagging thing to me
Speaker 2: is Kyler Murray, who we had in this position last year.
Speaker 2: Kyler Murray had time years plural in Lincoln Riley's system,
Speaker 2: mental reps, practices, film whatever, Baker Mayfield years and it
Speaker 2: was already at Texas Tech in a very not similar
Speaker 2: but you know, there are similarities system, whereas what Jalen
Speaker 2: Hurts is used to doing offensively can be pretty different
Speaker 2: than what Oklahoma has done. Not to say Oklahoma won't
Speaker 2: fit their offense to take advantage of his dual threat strengths,
Speaker 2: but that has me curious since the record is not
Speaker 2: great of quarterbacks immediately jumping into a system as a
Speaker 2: grad transfer and succeeding. Now, there aren't always quarterbacks who
Speaker 2: have been as successful as Jalen Hurts making that move.
Speaker 2: So I understand that and the fact that Oklahoma's a
Speaker 2: Heisman factory, but the lack of time, the lack of comforts,
Speaker 2: it is worrisome because there were certain advantages that Jalen
Speaker 2: Hurts enjoyed with Alabama's defense and didn't have to score
Speaker 2: a ton of points to put together a twenty six
Speaker 2: and two record, right. No, Oklahoma's defense got to score
Speaker 2: a little more than what the threshold is at Alabama,
Speaker 2: and he will have playmakers, as you have noted. But
Speaker 2: I am far less sure. And I was not terrifically
Speaker 2: sure of Kyler Murray last year. I'm far less sure
Speaker 2: about Jalen Hurts because of what we saw him do
Speaker 2: in the biggest games for Alabama. Even when he won,
Speaker 2: it was not always the prettiest thing. And I have
Speaker 2: it up right here. Jalen Hurts was the twenty ninth
Speaker 2: best quarterback in twenty seventeen against ranked teams with yards
Speaker 2: per attempt, if that's a metric you care about, in
Speaker 2: twenty sixth against ranked teams ratings, so statistically fine. I
Speaker 2: just he had so many advantages at Alabama, and as
Speaker 2: soon as a better thrower came along, he looked twenty
Speaker 2: times better through the air.
Speaker 1: Yeah. The good news. The good news for Jalen Hurts
Speaker 1: His regular season schedule is a much lighter lift at
Speaker 1: Oklahoma than it ever was at Alabama. As I look
Speaker 1: through it here, it's a while before you get to
Speaker 1: a notable defense. It's probably, in all reality, not until
Speaker 1: we get to the Red River shootout in middle of
Speaker 1: October against Texas, until we're talking about this team playing
Speaker 1: what I would consider a real defense. Okay, the Big
Speaker 1: twelve has this reputation. It's not so much a defensive
Speaker 1: conference like the SEC, and that will bode well for
Speaker 1: Jalen Hurts if only to get his feet wet in
Speaker 1: the first half of the season, and I think that
Speaker 1: will help him along. That learning curve point, though, was
Speaker 1: very valid. He has not had the mental reps, the
Speaker 1: practice reps of Kyler Murray from a year.
Speaker 2: Right garbage time Kyler Murray a couple of years ago. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I do like the fact that he's very mobile and
Speaker 1: that should help him. We certainly got playmakers around him,
Speaker 1: but the line's going to be a little sketchy to
Speaker 1: start until it jels. I think Lincoln Riley will find
Speaker 1: a way to bring it all together. I think they
Speaker 1: will find a way to make him fit in. He
Speaker 1: may not fit in a heisman sense like we saw
Speaker 1: with Kyler Murray. He may not fit in a Heisman
Speaker 1: sense like we saw with Baker Mayfield. But there's certainly
Speaker 1: enough talent around him, and I think Lincoln Riley is
Speaker 1: bright enough of a college football mind that he can
Speaker 1: tailor a system. He's had all off season to think
Speaker 1: about this. He can tailor an offensive system that will
Speaker 1: work for Jalen Hurts and will emphasize what he does well.
Speaker 1: My bigger question about Oklahoma is what Alex Grinch does
Speaker 1: on the defensive side. That's not the question here right
Speaker 1: as we move forward now into preview season, That's the
Speaker 1: question I'm going to be asking more. I'm going to
Speaker 1: ask about that offensive line, sure, but my first question
Speaker 1: is whether or not Alex Grinch can bring along that
Speaker 1: defense the way he's brought defenses like Washington stayed along
Speaker 1: in the past.
Speaker 2: I think Texas Tech will be a good measuring stick
Speaker 2: at the end of September for Jalen Hurts because that
Speaker 2: defense has come a long way and now I think
Speaker 2: it's being run by the old ASU defensive coordinator Keith Patterson.
Speaker 2: It's come a long way and it is probably okay,
Speaker 2: and that I think will give us He should have
Speaker 2: a good game, not a great game, but he should
Speaker 2: have a good game against Texas Tech. I'm curious to
Speaker 2: see that as a measuring stick because Houston South Dakota
Speaker 2: UCLA you see on the road kind of interesting. The
Speaker 2: defense has been kind of in shambles the last couple
Speaker 2: of years. Those two games UCLA on the road in
Speaker 2: Texas Tech, I think will be quite interesting to see
Speaker 2: what the potential bar is for Jalen Hurts. But yeah,
Speaker 2: the Texas game by mid October will be huge.
Speaker 1: That'll be the measuring stick. All right, where do you
Speaker 1: want to go next? Dan, Let's go to Okay. I
Speaker 1: like this one, and I think that there's a lot
Speaker 1: to talk about. An unpack here are we? Can we
Speaker 1: pump brakes? Are we positive? Are we sure that whatever?
Speaker 1: After further consideration, can ed Orzron provide something tangible for
Speaker 1: LSU that less Miles couldn't? Okay, get that sound in there,
Speaker 1: Go ahead.
Speaker 2: Please, This is the because LSU fans are very quick too,
Speaker 2: like what what?
Speaker 1: What?
Speaker 2: Huh?
Speaker 1: What?
Speaker 2: No? What? What? No? I like ed Orzron. I like
Speaker 2: ed Oorzron a lot. Near the end of his tenure,
Speaker 2: less Miles was losing three games a year, and he
Speaker 2: had and it was it was doing so in confusing
Speaker 2: manner at times. The late game situations were pretty problematic,
Speaker 2: and that culminated with the Auburn situation. I want to
Speaker 2: say twenty sixteen, then at Oorzron becomes the interim and
Speaker 2: I think a lot of people have rallied behind him,
Speaker 2: and they were a ridiculous game away from winning ten
Speaker 2: regular season games last year, that crazy overtimes game against
Speaker 2: Texas A and M So tangibly speaking, right now, Edorzron
Speaker 2: is not necessarily getting great passing. It's fine. I don't
Speaker 2: think it's anything demonstrably better or worse than where less
Speaker 2: Miles was and inconsistent passing games. He's lost three games
Speaker 2: he has there, I don't think elsus. This is my
Speaker 2: correction from before they've scored a touchdown in Baton Rouge
Speaker 2: against Alabama since twenty fourteen, a single touchdown and that
Speaker 2: was in the first quarter in twenty fourteen, so it's
Speaker 2: been a while. I think it's been eleven quarters if
Speaker 2: my math holds up. So that is worrisome, and so
Speaker 2: tangibly speaking, I think Edorsron needs to take LSU to
Speaker 2: ten regular season wins and until that happens, is is
Speaker 2: he like Barrel chested less, Miles Baryl just In just
Speaker 2: in turn terms of bottom line, I understand the organization.
Speaker 2: I understand that coaches may have more confidence in him
Speaker 2: running the program day to day, that he has evolved
Speaker 2: into this very impressive head coach. But when do they
Speaker 2: get their news, Zach Mettenberger. When do they get that
Speaker 2: one year JaMarcus Russell? When do they get above average
Speaker 2: quarterback play at the same time as great defense, great recruiting,
Speaker 2: confidence from the coaching staff, confidence from the administration and boosters.
Speaker 2: Is is there anything else other than ten wins that
Speaker 2: would provide a tangible improvement light shining on at oriz Ron.
Speaker 2: That is such a good question, Dan, And here's the
Speaker 2: sub question, Ty, and you can answer that one first,
Speaker 2: But what is the biggest perception change with one win?
Speaker 2: Like is it going from five and seven to six
Speaker 2: and six? You're like, oh my god, this is a
Speaker 2: totally new improved team because all of a sudden they're
Speaker 2: going to the minu Key car Care Bowl. Or is
Speaker 2: it going from nine to ten? Is it going from
Speaker 2: eleven to twelve, which obviously undefeated before a potential conference championship.
Speaker 2: Is it going from seven barely Bowl eligible to eight comfortable.
Speaker 2: Where to you is the biggest perception shift with one win?
Speaker 2: So I answered the first question first, and then the second.
Speaker 1: Okay, so first things first, I'm gonna talk about something
Speaker 1: that took me by surprise a year ago, and that
Speaker 1: was Joe Burrow. Now, when Edward Jeran took over at LSU,
Speaker 1: I remember distinctly you and I talking about the perception
Speaker 1: problem that we had with LSU, and it was that
Speaker 1: the offense hadn't matured or hadn't evolved to a point
Speaker 1: where it was good enough to get to the heights
Speaker 1: that lc fans wanted it to get to. Right, they
Speaker 1: brought in Joe Burrow. Now, I'm not saying Joe Burrow
Speaker 1: is Peyton Manning. I'm not even saying Joe Burrow is
Speaker 1: Cooper Cooper Manning, Cooper Manning. Okay, but Joe Burrow was
Speaker 1: pretty good. And the stats, it's fine. The stats aren't
Speaker 1: reflective of how big he came up in some really
Speaker 1: key spots throughout the course of this LSU season.
Speaker 2: LSU finished, and this is a metric. I think we
Speaker 2: both like thirty fourth nationally in offensive points per drive.
Speaker 2: So that's a pace adjusted stat that's pretty.
Speaker 1: Good, So that's an improvement. I think the fact that
Speaker 1: they've got him back now that will help solidify the
Speaker 1: offense hopefully move it forward. But that's that's the biggest
Speaker 1: issue I have fifty the year before I had let's say,
Speaker 1: with LSU under ed Orgeron, can he give them something
Speaker 1: tangible that Les Miles did. Now, if you are using
Speaker 1: one win to get to ten regular season wins as
Speaker 1: your bottom line barometer, it's been a while. It's been
Speaker 1: since twenty twelve since LSU won ten games in the
Speaker 1: regular season, I think it helps to get to double
Speaker 1: digit wins in the regular season, no doubt. I also
Speaker 1: don't think that that's the proper measuring stick. I think
Speaker 1: the SEC West constantly measures itself against Alabama constantly.
Speaker 2: That's the unfortunate thing.
Speaker 1: That's the unfortunate thing. If ed Orgeron is winning ten
Speaker 1: games almost anywhere else, he's a saint. The problem is
Speaker 1: that they're in the same conference, in the same side
Speaker 1: of the same conference as the Alabama Crimson tied and oh,
Speaker 1: by the way, pretty much every other team on that
Speaker 1: side of the conference has also gotten a lot better.
Speaker 1: They've also found ways to upgrade their program I'm looking
Speaker 1: at U Texas A and M. I don't know if
Speaker 1: that ten win mark means as much as it used to,
Speaker 1: and that's unfortunate for Ordron. He has steadied the ship.
Speaker 1: He's won nine games each of the last two years
Speaker 1: in the regular season. I think that's a good step
Speaker 1: in the right direction. But can he give them something
Speaker 1: tangible that Les Miles didn't. I'm looking at Les miles
Speaker 1: career record right now. Granted he was at LSU a
Speaker 1: long time, but he did win a national championship and
Speaker 1: he lost another.
Speaker 2: What I wonder is and we'll never know, but we've
Speaker 2: seen this in other divisions, other conferences, whether it's you know,
Speaker 2: Texas Oklahoma, whether it's you know, Mac Brown is you know,
Speaker 2: the best modern coach Texas has had, and Bob Stoops
Speaker 2: happens to also be the best coach Oklahoma has had
Speaker 2: and it just all happened at the same time. Or
Speaker 2: Jim Harbaugh taking Stanford to these crazy heights, but Chip
Speaker 2: Kelly having Oregon a little bit better. And that's this
Speaker 2: constant thing, although those are much shorter lasting, is what
Speaker 2: does the SEC West look like if Alabama is merely
Speaker 2: great and not all time elite excellent, Like what happens
Speaker 2: if it's just a year over year ten and two
Speaker 2: ish Alabama program, Like it's at a Blake Simms Alabama program,
Speaker 2: all due respect to Blake Simms or Jake Cochery, you
Speaker 2: know those kind of like that's you're not getting top
Speaker 2: top quarterback level and maybe there's defensive lapses like they
Speaker 2: had against you know, it was twenty ten South Carolina
Speaker 2: or or you know something like that Ole miss those
Speaker 2: past couple of years where that just happens a couple
Speaker 2: times a year, and what what is that? How does
Speaker 2: that change the less Miles career arc? How does that
Speaker 2: change things with Kevin Sumlin? How does that change things
Speaker 2: with I mean Dan Mullin was going to leave for
Speaker 2: Florida whenever he possibly could leave for Florida, and Hugh
Speaker 2: Freeze has nothing, you know, his departure doesn't really have
Speaker 2: anything to do with Alabama. But how does that change
Speaker 2: things around the SEC? If Alabama is merely oh, they're
Speaker 2: a great program. Well man, we've talked about this before.
Speaker 2: How many teams in the SEC, like pretty much all
Speaker 2: of them have experienced some kind of coaching turnover in
Speaker 2: the span that Saban has been at Alabama, He's driven.
Speaker 1: He's driven the SEC. He's driven all of college football crazy.
Speaker 1: Everyone's trying to get better than him, and nowhere more
Speaker 1: so than perhaps at LSU, who for so long has
Speaker 1: been that natural rival, at least in the SEC West
Speaker 1: to the Crimson tide. I like ed Orgron. I like
Speaker 1: the fact that I know, I just talked about how
Speaker 1: it's overrated, and it still is overrated. But I like
Speaker 1: the fact that he is sort of like the hometown
Speaker 1: guy that everyone's rooting for. I like the fact that
Speaker 1: he wanted the job more than virtually anyone else. I
Speaker 1: like the fact that we sometimes question how many screws
Speaker 1: he has loose. I like the fact that he brings
Speaker 1: that edge to LSU and there I think the screws
Speaker 1: are tightened, the screws might be tightened, they're still a
Speaker 1: little bit loose. And you always had that component with
Speaker 1: less Miles there, the mad hatter at LSC. There was
Speaker 1: always that edge that made ls very interesting to watch
Speaker 1: from the outside, and I.
Speaker 2: Think people just got tired of it and just like, Okay,
Speaker 2: we get what late late stage less Miles is.
Speaker 1: He needed new material rights. That's what it amounted to
Speaker 1: and perhaps the upgraded version or the different version of
Speaker 1: less Miles can be at Orgeron. Less had a lot
Speaker 1: of good years at LSU. If ed Orgeron can put
Speaker 1: together a better offense, if he can get things going
Speaker 1: in a better direction offensively, I think the talent is there.
Speaker 1: I have confidence that he can build a defense. I
Speaker 1: think he can get LSU back to a point where
Speaker 1: winning ten games is something they can do in the
Speaker 1: regular season. The question for LSU people is can they
Speaker 1: beat Alabama? Can they win the SEC West? Can they
Speaker 1: win the SEC? I don't know the answer to that
Speaker 1: right now. The answer doesn't look like it's a yes.
Speaker 2: Which are you more sympathetic to asterisk wise LSU? And
Speaker 2: I don't even know if ls do. People say this,
Speaker 2: this is me projecting, but well, I mean they're this
Speaker 2: seven overtime, They're like seventeen pulled Hammies away from winning
Speaker 2: that you know, seven overtime game. You know ed Orgron
Speaker 2: was doused in gatorade. They were so confident the game
Speaker 2: was going to end when it did. Or are you
Speaker 2: more confident in using the asterisk? When we just over
Speaker 2: and over made fun of Mike Gundy for saying, well,
Speaker 2: the Central Mission games really a win our records really
Speaker 2: because of the bad hail Mary call. I think I'm
Speaker 2: still giving the edge to more sympathy for LSU because
Speaker 2: Oblo mis State had an opportunity to win that game
Speaker 2: and they didn't LSU. That was like a way out
Speaker 2: of character game that I don't think Texas A and
Speaker 2: M definitively can lay claim to. So I think they're
Speaker 2: they're pretty close to it a ten win team.
Speaker 1: They're very close. They're very close. The question is almost
Speaker 1: unfair to edwors You're on. Can he provide something tangible
Speaker 1: that Les Miles couldn't. Les Miles provided a great deal,
Speaker 1: he won a national championship. Edworgs are on, though, I
Speaker 1: think can get them back to that level, which is encouraging.
Speaker 2: If I gave you odds right now of double digit
Speaker 2: points scored by LSU against Alabama.
Speaker 1: No, I don't want it.
Speaker 2: If I might give you plus two point fifty two.
Speaker 1: And a half to one, no I need more.
Speaker 2: If I gave you plus four hundred, I would take
Speaker 2: four to one. Four to one odds of LSU getting
Speaker 2: into double digits after being shut out two of the
Speaker 2: last three years.
Speaker 1: Okay, double digits is ten points. I would take four
Speaker 1: to one. I'm not sure about two and a half.
Speaker 2: Okay, all right, what is your next break, Pumper?
Speaker 1: Well, I have a very important question, and that is
Speaker 1: how often do you think about your socks every single day?
Speaker 1: We've been talking about it forever on the show.
Speaker 2: I'm mister no show now. By the way, Oh really,
Speaker 2: that's how I live with pants without pants? Yep?
Speaker 1: Is that a dad moved in?
Speaker 2: I don't know if it's a dad move. It might
Speaker 2: be more of a I like to wear pants to
Speaker 2: the office space I go to, but I don't care
Speaker 2: if anybody sees my ankles or my shins.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I want it to breathe as we enter into summer.
Speaker 2: So that's what I'm doing.
Speaker 1: Well, we've been talking about the merits.
Speaker 2: I don't cuff yet, if that's what you're asking.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's good. Thank you. Okay, thank you for clarifying.
Speaker 2: I'm not ruling it out, but I do not do
Speaker 2: it yet.
Speaker 1: We've been talking about socks forever. The value of having
Speaker 1: draw comfortable feet all throughout the day. The best way
Speaker 1: to accomplish just that is by looking up our good
Speaker 1: friends over at Bombas. Bombas is how you spell it.
Speaker 1: We've had Bombas socks supporting the solid verbal supporting the feet,
Speaker 1: literally of the solid verbal hosts for eons now. I
Speaker 1: can't even tell you how many years it's been. We
Speaker 1: are not kidding. I've got them on right now, Dan,
Speaker 1: you might I don't know. We were in sandals right now,
Speaker 1: but I do have a story. Continue though we've had
Speaker 1: Bombas dotting our feet for countless years, we are here
Speaker 1: to tell you they're the real deal. They're the most
Speaker 1: comfortable socks in the history of feet. They're made from
Speaker 1: super soft natural codon. Every pair comes with art support,
Speaker 1: a seamless toe, a cushioned footbed that's comfy but not
Speaker 1: too thick. For being honest, They've got numerous colors, patterns,
Speaker 1: lengths styles, Bombas. They look great at the gym. I
Speaker 1: wear them to the office. Don't tell my colleagues.
Speaker 2: I think that's cool.
Speaker 1: CIA has a very lax policy. They are what feet
Speaker 1: daydream about. Best of all, with every Bombus purchase, they
Speaker 1: donate a pair to someone in need, which is a
Speaker 1: cool little perk. You can buy your Bombas today at
Speaker 1: bom bas dot com. Slash Solid and get twenty percent
Speaker 1: off your very first purchase. Again. This is Bombas dot
Speaker 1: com slash Solid twenty percent off Bombas dot Com slash Solid.
Speaker 1: Take our word for it. We do wear them, We
Speaker 1: do appreciate their support. They've been with us forever. We
Speaker 1: know you will like them on your feet as well.
Speaker 2: I think that's right. My only real quick story is
Speaker 2: apparently I left a pair of Bomba snow shows at
Speaker 2: West Coast Kevin's place in Austin when I visited him
Speaker 2: and his family home. He wore them and he is
Speaker 2: now wearing Oh no, he gave them to our mutual
Speaker 2: friend Scott to give me when we were back in LA.
Speaker 2: This is They called it the Brotherhood of the Traveling Socks,
Speaker 2: and Scott is now just wearing them because he couldn't
Speaker 2: look at him for that long without putting him into action.
Speaker 2: So Bombas popular around the globe and could not recommend
Speaker 2: him enough. They're the most comfortable. You're only as comfortable
Speaker 2: as your feet. B O MBA asked, do it.
Speaker 1: All right, Dan? I don't know.
Speaker 2: You want to do the big dog? Do you want
Speaker 2: to do a conference?
Speaker 1: Let's coach, Let's save the big dog for later. Okay,
Speaker 1: I think we both know what the big dog is
Speaker 1: here on this list. Let's go to up and coming coach. Okay,
Speaker 1: pump the brakes, pedal to the medal, whichever way you
Speaker 1: want to play it. Jeff Brahm, did he or did
Speaker 1: he not do a good thing by staying at Purdue
Speaker 1: even with all of that cash that was being offered
Speaker 1: from Louisville?
Speaker 2: Yeah? And well and Purdue. Yeah, did he do a.
Speaker 1: Good thing staying where he's at? You pump in the brakes,
Speaker 1: you go and pedal to the medal on that?
Speaker 2: Did he miss a window to maximize his value in
Speaker 2: a very volatile profession?
Speaker 1: Yeah, so.
Speaker 2: We've sort of talked about. I mean, I will give
Speaker 2: my opinion. I won't speak for you, but he's going
Speaker 2: to make upwards of what five and a half six
Speaker 2: million dollars either this year or eventually with his new deal.
Speaker 2: And you know that sets the market for him. If
Speaker 2: you know, Purdue goes eight and four, nine and three,
Speaker 2: and he gets a job at some huge blue blood
Speaker 2: after he's done at Purdue, he will make yes, seven
Speaker 2: eight million dollars whatever, which is just crazy. My question
Speaker 2: is the sindularity is the wagon to which he is hitching.
Speaker 2: Elijah Sindelar had an extraordinary Bowl game as quarterback two
Speaker 2: years agogainst Arizona. I think that was in the Bay Area.
Speaker 2: That was Foster Farms or whatever it's called that bowl game,
Speaker 2: and then last season didn't really play. They lose to
Speaker 2: Eastern Michigan, I want to say, And he had kind
Speaker 2: of a bad game and really has not proven himself
Speaker 2: over the long term to be like I am the
Speaker 2: dude at least that even David Blau was. And is
Speaker 2: Purdue in a place now with winnable games for sure,
Speaker 2: with talent especially on offense, and taking a pretty enormous
Speaker 2: step back on defense last year culminating in that game
Speaker 2: against Auburn. Is Jeff Brohm hurting his long term potential
Speaker 2: by staying at Purdue, which probably has a pretty defined ceiling.
Speaker 2: And I don't think Louisville has that same ceiling in
Speaker 2: the ACC. I don't think anywhere else really in most
Speaker 2: other conferences have the ceiling that Purdue does. And I
Speaker 2: just I don't know if I love the place Purdue
Speaker 2: is in to fully showcase Jeff bram and I think
Speaker 2: it might hurt him.
Speaker 1: Okay, I disagree. Wow, I disagree, And here's why I disagree.
Speaker 1: You were right to point out that the defense took
Speaker 1: a significant step back, but you're also slightly blind to
Speaker 1: the fact that it took a huge step forward in
Speaker 1: year one under Jeff Brahm. I remember a lot of
Speaker 1: upperclassmen there alright, a lot of upperclassmen. But when he
Speaker 1: took over. I remember looking at Purdue in advance of
Speaker 1: I guess what the twenty seventeen season, and you and
Speaker 1: I talked to each other, like, this defense is gonna
Speaker 1: be an issue. Rough, this is gonna be a problem
Speaker 1: for the boy had done a good job going in.
Speaker 1: Yeah and lo and behold. The defense ended up sort
Speaker 1: of being the talk of that team. Now last season,
Speaker 1: not so much. They dropped pretty significantly. If you look
Speaker 1: at what Purdue did on offense over that two year span,
Speaker 1: it was sort of the opposite first year not so
Speaker 1: good down in like the nineties. I want to say,
Speaker 1: in terms of how many points they're putting up per game.
Speaker 1: Last year took a pretty significant step forward up intol
Speaker 1: like the fifties. They were in the top half of
Speaker 1: college football. So I think what I'm trying to say
Speaker 1: is that this is a guy who could coach now,
Speaker 1: it's going to take a while to try and assemble
Speaker 1: the pieces. He's only been there two years. He needs
Speaker 1: to get his guys in there. He needs to establish
Speaker 1: a culture, needs to establish a system, needs to get
Speaker 1: some of those things he has at this point. He
Speaker 1: has need to get those underclass been programmed accordingly to
Speaker 1: do what he wants them to do. But look, he's
Speaker 1: already going to be making a lot of money. It
Speaker 1: depends on your definition of maximizing your value. I think
Speaker 1: if he can get things going in a good direction,
Speaker 1: all the ships rowing in the same direction at Purdue
Speaker 1: and at least make them plucky, which he seemingly has done,
Speaker 1: that in and of itself will make him marketable. We
Speaker 1: have already wanted him after just like two seasons out.
Speaker 2: They had a connection to him. They had a connection.
Speaker 1: They had a connection. But they are not the only
Speaker 1: school that was interested in Jeff Brohm. I can assure you,
Speaker 1: and moving forward, they will not be the last. So
Speaker 1: I am not worried at all about Jeff Brohm's marketability.
Speaker 1: He is at some point going to cash in in
Speaker 1: a very big way. He is one of the few
Speaker 1: up and coming coaches who can bide his time at Purdue,
Speaker 1: wait for the right job to come along, and then
Speaker 1: cash in at a later day. I don't think this
Speaker 1: hurts him at all. I think it's good for college football.
Speaker 1: It's certainly good for the Big Ten. That he decided
Speaker 1: to stick around at Purdue. He's going to be just fine.
Speaker 2: So the phrasing I always like though, is at a
Speaker 2: certain point, can he just go six and six every
Speaker 2: year and maintain the market value that he currently has.
Speaker 1: Cliff Kingsbury is now the head football coach at Arizona.
Speaker 2: I get that, But he can point to specific quarterbacks
Speaker 2: that he helped to develop that I don't think.
Speaker 1: The Arizona Cardinals, not the University of Arizona.
Speaker 2: I get you. I think that's more of a reflection
Speaker 2: on the Arizona Cardinals than it is the general model.
Speaker 2: Also be true. I would just be worried that if
Speaker 2: he goes six and six, five and seven, seven and
Speaker 2: five in perpetuity, next two, three, four years in perpetuity
Speaker 2: obviously means forever. So I miss using that word. I
Speaker 2: just I think it's going to I think his attraction
Speaker 2: is going to plateau.
Speaker 1: Well that's look, it's certainly possible. But you and I
Speaker 1: both know there are plenty of coaches around college football
Speaker 1: who develop a reputation as being a forward thinker, or
Speaker 1: an up and comer, or you name it. Manny Diaz
Speaker 1: could be one of those, by the way, and certainly
Speaker 1: they remain marketable, perhaps longer than they should be. Now,
Speaker 1: I don't want to want Manny Diaz quite into that,
Speaker 1: but you get my point here. I think Jeff Brohm's
Speaker 1: going to be fine. I think he is viewed by
Speaker 1: enough people as an up and comer, a bright young
Speaker 1: college football mind. He will remain marketable for a good
Speaker 1: long time. This isn't going to hurt him even if
Speaker 1: Perdue Bottom's out, which I don't think they will, because
Speaker 1: he's a good coach. He's going to.
Speaker 2: Be just fine. I would like to point out that
Speaker 2: the twenty eighteen per Due boiler Makers gave up twenty
Speaker 2: three points to the Michigan State offense.
Speaker 1: Okay, okay, let's.
Speaker 2: Move on with their backup quarterback.
Speaker 1: Let's move on. I want to get your take on
Speaker 1: something here. Now. I had written another PAC twelve ish question,
Speaker 1: but you put something here that I think is an
Speaker 1: interesting topic for discussion. Yeah, are we pumping the brakes?
Speaker 1: Are we not pumping the brakes? Did the PAC twelve
Speaker 1: do the right thing by not taking ESPN's offer to distribute?
Speaker 1: Now you're gonna have to network in the lactic game. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you're gonna have to explain for the for ballerhood here
Speaker 1: what exactly transpired.
Speaker 2: So it's pretty straightforward. The PAC twelve has been big
Speaker 2: on owning itself outright, and that includes you know, they
Speaker 2: have these deals with Fox and ESPN to show games,
Speaker 2: but they own the PAC twelve network outright. They like
Speaker 2: the ownership element of the network, and I understand that
Speaker 2: in general, big picture, you want to own everything you
Speaker 2: possibly can. You have more control, you make more money
Speaker 2: if it's successful, et cetera, et cetera. The problem with
Speaker 2: the PAC twelve is, as we've talked about many times
Speaker 2: here before, there are certain built in disadvantages that the
Speaker 2: PAC twelve have, be it schools without long term traditional
Speaker 2: success or the fact that it's on West coast child schools,
Speaker 2: or most of its schools are on West Coast times,
Speaker 2: so some of the bigger games are into the night,
Speaker 2: and not a lot of people on the East coast
Speaker 2: or southeast, you know, central time are able to see
Speaker 2: all this big action, and they haven't had teams in
Speaker 2: the playoffs. They've been close since, you know, they've had Washington,
Speaker 2: they've had Oregon, but they haven't had major, major success since.
Speaker 2: I suppose both Chip Kelly's run at Oregon and Pete
Speaker 2: Carroll at USC with this nice little Washington blip, but
Speaker 2: not necessarily on a national level. So the PAC twelve
Speaker 2: is struggling with branding. The PAC twelve is struggling with,
Speaker 2: you know, garnering attention for some of its better stories,
Speaker 2: some of its more interesting team, some of its more
Speaker 2: interesting coaches, and not that you're buried on the PAC
Speaker 2: twelve network, because plenty of people can see the PAC
Speaker 2: twelve network. I think that's a little bit overstated, a
Speaker 2: little overwrought. But I think the PAC twelve has a
Speaker 2: perception issue that can be overcome with some more thoughtful
Speaker 2: exposure that they are not necessarily willing to buy into.
Speaker 2: And ESPN made them an offer to help distribute the
Speaker 2: PAC twelve network because ESPN has leverage with cable and
Speaker 2: satellite providers in exchange for extending ESPN's existing deal with
Speaker 2: the PAC twelve, presumably at probably a sweetheart rate for
Speaker 2: ESPN in exchange. So yes, I understand the PAC twelve
Speaker 2: wants to make the best deal for itself. But again,
Speaker 2: I'm at a certain point kind of talker and thinker,
Speaker 2: right or wrong. At a certain point, when does the
Speaker 2: PAC twelve say, yeah, we could need we could use
Speaker 2: a hand, right that doesn't involve private equity investing money,
Speaker 2: So the PAC twelve can still maintain whatever level of
Speaker 2: control they want. And as somebody who loves and adores
Speaker 2: PAC twelve football, I really wish and you know, let's
Speaker 2: say ESPN comes in and they say, okay, we're going
Speaker 2: to create like a hard knock style show showcasing chip
Speaker 2: Kell and UCLA or Justin Wilcox and cal will put
Speaker 2: it on ESPN. Plut like they're doing things to raise
Speaker 2: the profile of certain things or well, you know, attach
Speaker 2: cameras to ASU and herm Edwards And now I guess
Speaker 2: what's his name the Bengals coach that just joined up,
Speaker 2: Marvin Marvin Lesis Marvin Lewis. I can't keep track that
Speaker 2: they were willing to do things to go above and
Speaker 2: beyond to help with the brand of the PAC twelve,
Speaker 2: and the conference just said thanks, but no thanks, And
Speaker 2: I don't think the conventional wisdom is that the PAC
Speaker 2: twelve did the right thing. But I just like to
Speaker 2: revisit it and say, what are we doing? Well, here's doing?
Speaker 2: Come on, here's what's interesting about As.
Speaker 1: The s CHN is preparing to launch the ACC network, right,
Speaker 1: here's what's interesting about this. On this show last year,
Speaker 1: we also had a question about the PAC twelve, and
Speaker 1: that question was does the PAC twelve know what it's doing? Essentially,
Speaker 1: are we sure that the PAC twelve knows what it's
Speaker 1: doing that has somebody in charge? Again, we're asking a question,
Speaker 1: a business question, about how the PAC twelve is conducting
Speaker 1: its distribution. I don't really have a problem with this.
Speaker 1: I don't, and it's for a couple of reasons. First off, granted,
Speaker 1: the media landscape is changing, but it's sort of an
Speaker 1: open secret that live sports are very marketable and they
Speaker 1: tend to retain their value. So even if you don't
Speaker 1: cash in from ESPN now in five years, when the
Speaker 1: current deal with Fox and ESPN expires in twenty twenty four,
Speaker 1: what's to say that ESPN isn't going to come back
Speaker 1: and also try to try to get their hands on
Speaker 1: the PAC twelve, then I think ESPN would still probably
Speaker 1: be in the bidding. I'm not a business guy, but
Speaker 1: it stands to reason that if they were interested now
Speaker 1: they're probably going to be interested.
Speaker 2: Then can I throw something out as well?
Speaker 1: Sure?
Speaker 2: I have a theory that we are in a streaming bubble, okay,
Speaker 2: that that streaming has gotten to the point where okay,
Speaker 2: you're subscribing to Hulu and Netflix and whatever. What's Disney Plus,
Speaker 2: that's what's coming soon, and Warner Brothers is going to
Speaker 2: do a thing, and you have Amazon, you have you
Speaker 2: have all of these different entities, and ESPN is ESPN Plus,
Speaker 2: and Fox says, I don't know if it's Fox Sports
Speaker 2: go still or just Fox Sports. You have all of
Speaker 2: these different entities that you need to shuffle between, and
Speaker 2: it's almost like, hey, if we could have, even with
Speaker 2: how evil all of them are, if we could have
Speaker 2: one overarching system to watch everything we wanted to watch,
Speaker 2: say with a cable hooked up to you like a bundle,
Speaker 2: like some sort of bundle, that might work out well.
Speaker 2: And I just think getting in well with cable companies
Speaker 2: who have the distribution modeled down pat and not saying well,
Speaker 2: we're gonna put our games on YouTube and everybody's gonna
Speaker 2: watch it, because that's how everybody's gonna be watching TV
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty three. I'm pumping the brakes on that thought.
Speaker 1: How about that, Well, that that's fair and we could
Speaker 1: take that offline. Yeah, if you'd like to talk more about.
Speaker 2: I mean, you're a YouTube TV subscriber and I have
Speaker 2: because of Jody with and I I don't know I've
Speaker 2: reconnected the cord because when she was on maternity leave,
Speaker 2: She's like, no, I'm not dealing with any of that crap, right,
Speaker 2: give me, give me channels.
Speaker 1: And that's all fair. I just I don't think that
Speaker 1: there's a whole lot that could happen between now and
Speaker 1: five years from now that's gonna make the packful of
Speaker 1: any less valuable. I don't necessarily disagree with the fact
Speaker 1: that we're in a bit of a streaming bubble. I
Speaker 1: also think that it's somewhat wise to wait around and
Speaker 1: at least explore other options, not take the first deal.
Speaker 1: In this respect, can.
Speaker 2: I tell you what I think might make the PAC
Speaker 2: twelve less valuable by twenty twenty four?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 2: Sick?
Speaker 1: Was it?
Speaker 2: Five six straight years nineteen twenty one, two, three, four,
Speaker 2: six straight years of every team going somewhere between four
Speaker 2: and eight and ten and two okay, and not appearing
Speaker 2: in the playoff, not showing out well in huge games
Speaker 2: in early September or in early January, and not necessarily
Speaker 2: having big time systems or coaches or huge national wins
Speaker 2: year over year over year. I think that could diminish
Speaker 2: the value of the PAC twelve.
Speaker 1: Well, we'll see, we'll see. I am skeptical that there's
Speaker 1: a whole lot that could happen that would make live
Speaker 1: sports rights, at least in that sense, less valuable. And
Speaker 1: I don't really have a problem with it. The PAC
Speaker 1: twelve has been poorly run. We've had a lot of
Speaker 1: question before. Yeah, it's been poorly run. At this point,
Speaker 1: you've already got a deal. It's not like your games
Speaker 1: won't be distributed. Why not wait a year or two,
Speaker 1: see what your options are, see if there's anything new
Speaker 1: that develops. I think that's okay. Pump me some breaks? Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: fair enough, Daniel.
Speaker 2: Yeah, do you want to finish with one big one?
Speaker 2: You want a couple more? What do you want to do?
Speaker 1: Are we pumping the breaks? Uh?
Speaker 2: Oh?
Speaker 1: On Clemson being a dynasty with no end in sight.
Speaker 2: Okay, lot to unpack, A.
Speaker 1: Lot to unpack here, So I did a show. I
Speaker 1: did a show. Gosh, I guess it was some at
Speaker 1: some point in December. Maybe it was before the National
Speaker 1: Championship game, before the playoffs with our friend Larry Williams
Speaker 1: from Tiger Illustrated, like the foremost authority on Clemson football
Speaker 1: all three of his books here on my bookshelf, an
Speaker 1: incredible resource, knows everything about Clemson football. He is impossibly
Speaker 1: bullish on the Clemson football program moving forward. It is
Speaker 1: certainly buoyed by the fact that they've got all world everything.
Speaker 1: Trevor Lawrence as their starting quarterback, had an incredible true
Speaker 1: freshman campaign. DJ Yuia Galle Yeah, I mean they're putting
Speaker 1: together maybe the best recruiting class of all time is
Speaker 1: coming recruiting cycle. So Clemson is in a very good spot.
Speaker 1: It's clearly a program that has reached critical mass. Larry's
Speaker 1: high on them. I don't think there's any college football
Speaker 1: fan out there who isn't high on Clemson as well.
Speaker 1: This is not a program that is going to experience
Speaker 1: any kind of dip anytimes They're not going to dip
Speaker 1: down eight and four. It's just not going to happen.
Speaker 1: I don't see any chance of that. Hard that's happening, right,
Speaker 1: But when you start talking about a dynasty, a dynasty's
Speaker 1: a different word. Over the next five years, the future
Speaker 1: looks very bright for Clemson.
Speaker 2: They've won two and three, right.
Speaker 1: Yes, two and three. But over the next ten years,
Speaker 1: where will Dablosweeney have this program? Is it a dynasty
Speaker 1: with no end in sight? The way Alabama has seemingly
Speaker 1: been a dynasty with no end insight? Yean right?
Speaker 2: So well? I mean USC won a couple in three
Speaker 2: years early on in Pete Carroll's tenure, much to the
Speaker 2: chagrin I guess still of LSU fans, and that lasted
Speaker 2: a long time, USC being really good, but they weren't
Speaker 2: appearing in national championships the back half of you know,
Speaker 2: after the Oklahoma game and after the Texas game. Then
Speaker 2: did they appear in a national championship or in that
Speaker 2: national championship conversation, they were Rose Bowl good year over year,
Speaker 2: but they slowed down, and a lot of that had
Speaker 2: to do with attrition, and then of course Pete Carroll leaves.
Speaker 2: I don't know, what is the specific thing that could
Speaker 2: slow this momentum. Yeah, Brent Venables seems like he's very
Speaker 2: happy there. I still think he'll eventually leave, but he's
Speaker 2: waiting for the perfect job. Probably maybe I'm wrong. I'm wrong,
Speaker 2: certainly often enough, I'm the surest thing in college football picking.
Speaker 2: But the only real thing I could see that could
Speaker 2: transform Clemson from eleven to one, twelve to zero into
Speaker 2: nine and three, ten and two is attrition among coaches.
Speaker 2: Dabo flirting with an NFL job or something like that.
Speaker 2: I don't fully see that right now, and just making
Speaker 2: a dut of a hire and having and this is
Speaker 2: any program like two quarterback duds in a row, recruiting wise,
Speaker 2: just misevaluation, didn't work out because of injury, system whatever.
Speaker 2: This is not really a hypothetic. It's a hypothetical. Does
Speaker 2: this dynasty continue given if the talent is, you know,
Speaker 2: still coming at this pace and developing at this pace.
Speaker 2: The position coaches are the same, offensive staff is the same,
Speaker 2: defensive staff is the same except for one guy. Is
Speaker 2: Clemson a national title contender in twenty nineteen like they
Speaker 2: are right now? If you replaced Brent Venables with Brian
Speaker 2: van Gorder. I ask you this, I, well, because that's
Speaker 2: what it is. It's going to be a like and
Speaker 2: that's sort of what happened with Auburn after they won
Speaker 2: the national championship. Just a couple of dud hires and
Speaker 2: take it easy. Gene chiswick right.
Speaker 1: I When I did the show with Larry I asked
Speaker 1: him pretty much the same question, what would it take
Speaker 1: to slow down this momentum? And it's not an easy answer,
Speaker 1: of course. It's it's all a bunch of hypotheticals. You
Speaker 1: could have a team that doesn't come together, you know,
Speaker 1: the bad chemistry.
Speaker 2: That's all hypotheticals, but it's really not it's really like,
Speaker 2: that's what happens when this is what seems slow down.
Speaker 2: It's just replacing either players or coaches with misevaluated personnel.
Speaker 1: It's something doesn't mesh. You could have bad chemistry among players,
Speaker 1: among coaches. You could have a guy like a Venables leaving.
Speaker 1: Certainly if Dabbo leaves, that could that could have a
Speaker 1: downstream effect as well. But there's no easy answer. He
Speaker 1: didn't really have a good answer. I think you look
Speaker 1: at the talent coming in, it's hard to see a
Speaker 1: situation like that taking shape anytime in the near future.
Speaker 1: But to your question specifically, Brian Van gordersteps in the
Speaker 1: schedule to me, is still easy enough that they could
Speaker 1: get by even if they're not winning the national champions
Speaker 1: They're getting to the playoff game. They've still got a
Speaker 1: ton of talent on the offensive side of the ball.
Speaker 1: This has got Trevor Lawrence in the short term in
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen, absolutely still a playoff, still a title content
Speaker 1: with BVG. Absolutely absolutely. Now they might get to the
Speaker 1: playoff and give up forty points, but are they getting
Speaker 1: to that playoff game? Sure? Absolutely, Look at the rest
Speaker 1: of the ACC, I think they're fine.
Speaker 2: How many teams in the ACC need to be legitimately good,
Speaker 2: legitimately eight nine win threats before you look at the
Speaker 2: conference and say, wow, this is now a deep enough
Speaker 2: ACC that I am legitimately worried about Clemson losing twice
Speaker 2: or three times and not even maybe still making the
Speaker 2: a SEC Championship, but not penciling them in like they
Speaker 2: are now, Like who is the team? So we know
Speaker 2: Florida State has a capability, we know Miami have the
Speaker 2: capability just because of talent availability, And I just recent history,
Speaker 2: you know, says that these could be double digit winning teams.
Speaker 2: And Florida State's won a recent national championship. That's not
Speaker 2: a huge stretch. Who is the team that, like, okay,
Speaker 2: we're now down to If Virginia Tech is year over
Speaker 2: year nine and three, is it Louisville in their own division?
Speaker 2: If Scott Saderfield gets the Cardinals to a point where
Speaker 2: they're nine and three every year with a lights out
Speaker 2: defense like they've had under him at app State, are
Speaker 2: you suddenly saying okay now that Clemson, Syracuse, NC State, Louisville,
Speaker 2: Miami are all maybe even pitt are all eight ish
Speaker 2: win threats. I don't think Clemson has an easy road anymore.
Speaker 2: Do you need more teams than that? Fewer teams?
Speaker 1: Well, they had like ten bowl teams this past I.
Speaker 2: Don't care about that. They know, but legit like eight
Speaker 2: they play eight conference games. It's not the hardest thing
Speaker 2: to get.
Speaker 1: It's got to be at least who needs to be good?
Speaker 2: What is this specific? I think it's Louisville, Louisville, Yeah, Louisville,
Speaker 2: Georgia Tech maybe yeah, potentially, Yeah, they have a high
Speaker 2: talent ceiling being where they are. Yeah, if it gets
Speaker 2: all the way down to Georgia Tech, the most obvious
Speaker 2: improvers are Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, Louisville. So if
Speaker 2: it gets down to Georgia Tech improving to eight nine
Speaker 2: wins a year, yeah, yeah, I could see that, all right,
Speaker 2: But that's we're years from your situation in the ACC.
Speaker 1: I'm not pumping the brakes on now. I don't think
Speaker 1: I am either the Clemson dynasty. Let's close out with
Speaker 1: this one. Okay, okay, it's a bigger picture thing. I
Speaker 1: already know we disagree. It'll be a fun conversation to
Speaker 1: close out the show with. Are you ready?
Speaker 2: I'm ready.
Speaker 1: Are you pumping the brakes on the college football playoff
Speaker 1: as a good thing or just pumping the breaks on
Speaker 1: a college football playoff? Are you pumping the breaks in
Speaker 1: the collegeotball playoffs? Yeah? You are. I am not explain
Speaker 1: your point. I will explain mine.
Speaker 2: It feels forced at this point, feels whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
Speaker 2: That's your point. Well, that's the opening salvo of my point.
Speaker 1: We went eons with a bowl system. I know that
Speaker 1: was essentially a beauty pageant and you're telling me a
Speaker 1: playoff system is forced. Ty, Did you ever have a
Speaker 1: crush on on a young lady when you were in
Speaker 1: elementary school or middle young last high school?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm sure you did. Sure I did as well.
Speaker 2: And I don't have a specific story about this, but
Speaker 2: I have a friend who has a specific story who
Speaker 2: pined after a young lady for years and years and
Speaker 2: just consumed all on the healthy level. He was not
Speaker 2: sitting in trees or anything like that, and eventually in
Speaker 2: high school he took her to a dance, and it's like,
Speaker 2: this is the culmination. Oh my god, I can't believe
Speaker 2: we are final, Like this is my dream, It's being realized.
Speaker 2: I've been wanting this for so many years. And then
Speaker 2: it was just disappointing. Okay, it was just disappointing. And
Speaker 2: I have reached the point where it whether it's you know,
Speaker 2: Jimmy Kimmel singing trying to get people interested in New
Speaker 2: Year's Eve, I am reaching the point where we are
Speaker 2: seeing the same games and we're seeing the same teams
Speaker 2: and we're supposed to talk about the sport as if
Speaker 2: that's not going to happen in perpetuity. Where it is
Speaker 2: just becoming tiring. And I just and we've talked about that.
Speaker 2: This is not me breaking any new ground on the show.
Speaker 2: I just want Week ten. I am just the playoff
Speaker 2: is just not getting me hot and bottle wow. First off, Dan,
Speaker 2: I want the Rose Bowl. Maybe it's because I'm a
Speaker 2: dad now and I am just feeling old fashioned and dadish.
Speaker 1: But you were. You were of this mind long before
Speaker 1: you were a father.
Speaker 2: That is true. First wheels returning, First off.
Speaker 1: How dare you? How dare you be smirched the good
Speaker 1: name of this song? I know you know I have
Speaker 1: this at already at all times.
Speaker 2: It's just you have when you have to start employing
Speaker 2: a PR firm, and not my favorite.
Speaker 1: It depends on what your objective is for a college
Speaker 1: football season as a fan of a team, as the
Speaker 1: fan of a sport. This is where we differ you
Speaker 1: for whatever reason, and I will never ever be on
Speaker 1: the same page as you. Okay, you believe that you
Speaker 1: can go to a bowl game. You believe that some
Speaker 1: of our good friends in sports media can vote on
Speaker 1: who their favorite is, and even if you're not the
Speaker 1: national champion, that's still good enough. It was a good year.
Speaker 1: It was a good run. He had a great bowl experience,
Speaker 1: a great regular season. Let's move on to the next year.
Speaker 1: I'm at be realistic. You're fine with that. I am not.
Speaker 2: I only what nine to three and winning the Alamo
Speaker 2: Bowl great.
Speaker 1: If you are going to play, why not play to win?
Speaker 1: Why not play to win the whole friggin thing? Who
Speaker 1: cares about the Alamo Bowl?
Speaker 2: I care, and the fine people along the river walk
Speaker 2: would like to have a word. I am not huffy
Speaker 2: taco enthusiasts.
Speaker 1: I am not of this mindset that everyone should get
Speaker 1: the ribbon and be happy with it. I want the trophy,
Speaker 1: Give me the trophy. I don't think it's fair to
Speaker 1: start with.
Speaker 2: The playoff touchdown. Ty start start easy.
Speaker 1: I don't think it's school. I don't think it's cool
Speaker 1: that places like UCF don't get a realistic chance to
Speaker 1: play for the crown. They play a lot of the
Speaker 1: same teams, but they can't play for the crown. I
Speaker 1: think if you're going to be in that a lot,
Speaker 1: I don't know if you're going to be an FBS,
Speaker 1: they should find some way to give everyone a realistic
Speaker 1: chance to win that one big prize.
Speaker 2: But there is one big Prize baseball coach for five years.
Speaker 1: A high school baseball coach once said it was the
Speaker 1: only smart thing he ever said. Only one team should
Speaker 1: go home happy at the end of the year, and
Speaker 1: I subscribe to that. That's the way all pretty much
Speaker 1: all the rest of the speak.
Speaker 2: It's such a different setup high school baseball and college football.
Speaker 2: It doesn't have apples apples one team. One team is
Speaker 2: your champion. That's what we should be playing four.
Speaker 1: I don't like the fact that old school college football
Speaker 1: was like figure skating. We left it in the hands
Speaker 1: of judges.
Speaker 2: It's content.
Speaker 1: I want his content. We are in a content business.
Speaker 1: You're not wrong about that.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: As a fan, though, I want to see it happen
Speaker 1: on the field. I want it to be determined on
Speaker 1: the field. If you are champion, I want you to
Speaker 1: earn it. I don't want it to be voted upon
Speaker 1: earn it.
Speaker 2: If Alabama and Clemson trade off national championships the next
Speaker 2: five years, will you feel the same way?
Speaker 1: Absolutely? Really absolutely.
Speaker 2: I could see myself softening on the stance if we
Speaker 2: get like Penn State, Texas Tech. Uh. I won't say Oregon,
Speaker 2: but I'll say an interesting Pac twelve team I don't know.
Speaker 2: Utah is out of nowhere with Andy Ludwig, a team
Speaker 2: with an amazing offense, and Miami this year wild roller
Speaker 2: coaster of Butmani Diaz opening year and we get those
Speaker 2: teams in the playoff also, I definitely will soften.
Speaker 1: Let me ask you, let me ask you this, then, okay,
Speaker 1: let me spin it back around on you.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Your question is if it's the same teams in the
Speaker 1: National Championship, will I feel differently? What if it were
Speaker 1: the same situation but we still had the old school
Speaker 1: bowl system. I'm not talking BCS, but I'm talking old
Speaker 1: school bowl system. Let's say both Alabama and Clemson remain dominant.
Speaker 1: They're locked into whatever bowl game they're going to, whatever
Speaker 1: bowl agreement their conference has, and they're just playing different
Speaker 1: teams year and in year out. We are still having
Speaker 1: this debate about which one is better. Do you think
Speaker 1: that's fair? Both are presumably in the midst of great
Speaker 1: dynasties in a college football sense. Yeah, and instead of
Speaker 1: them playing it out on the field.
Speaker 2: Well, they might play it out at the Orange Bowl.
Speaker 2: Maybe we have an sec ACC game.
Speaker 1: All right, Maybe we don't, though, Maybe we're back in
Speaker 1: this old school dilemma of arguing it out who should
Speaker 1: be the best team, who should be determined as a
Speaker 1: number one team? You're cool. I love it.
Speaker 2: I want everybody to be a national champion. Yeah, I'm
Speaker 2: fine with it, I really am. I want January one,
Speaker 2: I want like twelve enormous bowl games, and I want
Speaker 2: to have to sort it out on this show for
Speaker 2: the next eight months.
Speaker 1: It would be good content. I'm fine with the content
Speaker 1: element of this, but as a fan, as a fan,
Speaker 1: I disagree. I want to see it on the field.
Speaker 2: As it stands now, we have one hundred and twenty
Speaker 2: six teams who are supposed to feel disappointed at the
Speaker 2: end of the year because they didn't make the playoff.
Speaker 2: I think that's the wrong way of looking at it.
Speaker 1: I don't know, man, I don't know. I am right
Speaker 1: in tweet us solid verbogmail dot com is the email
Speaker 1: we're on. We're gonna get like fifty thousand messages about this, Okay,
Speaker 1: we are. We've done it before. It's gonna happen again.
Speaker 2: Ty, here's my final question about this topic. What if
Speaker 2: it's not about the trophy but the friends we've made
Speaker 2: a lot. What if I told you I just want
Speaker 2: I want more days with multiple football games, and this
Speaker 2: limits things in a way that I don't love what
Speaker 2: I'm selfishly looking at this from both a content and
Speaker 2: from a day's worth of enjoyment perspective. Ever, the businessman,
Speaker 2: because mine's just a TV event. If you want the
Speaker 2: one true champion, go to sixteen.
Speaker 1: I'm fine with that too.
Speaker 2: Do it, go to sixteen, go to college campuses. We
Speaker 2: can have a conversation.
Speaker 1: My dogument Dan is that when you pick four teams,
Speaker 1: you have a better chance of picking the one true champion.
Speaker 2: That's fine too. I just don't care about the one
Speaker 2: true champion, and that could be Oregon, and I don't care.
Speaker 2: I'd rather have and I've said this to people, Ty,
Speaker 2: this is how serious I feel about it. I'd rather
Speaker 2: have three seasons of Oregon winning Rose Bowls with an
Speaker 2: exciting offense, you know, beating Wisconsin, beating Michigan, beating whoever,
Speaker 2: Ohio State, Minnesota, Michigan State, you name it, big ten team.
Speaker 2: I'd rather have three years of that than one season
Speaker 2: of Oregon putting it together and winning a national championship
Speaker 2: and having to deal with the expectations and what the
Speaker 2: program will have to go through as suddenly a national
Speaker 2: championship program. I'd rather have the Rose Bull crowns than
Speaker 2: the National Championship.
Speaker 1: Would you rather listen to a podcast with terrible audio
Speaker 1: quality recorded entirely with blue yetties or usage of blue
Speaker 1: yetties because some people do it right you?
Speaker 2: Okay? Would you rather watch I don't know what show
Speaker 2: is only okay? Would you rather watch all of the
Speaker 2: seasons of Alias in eight k or watch the Wire
Speaker 2: in four y three?
Speaker 1: They only shot the wire in four by three? That
Speaker 1: was okay, four K?
Speaker 2: Okay, So we're still talking about the wire or not? Fine,
Speaker 2: not the Wire but something else recently that's that's been excellent,
Speaker 2: Veep or Barry or any of those shows, Silicon Valley,
Speaker 2: I don't know whatever. I'm just naming HBO shows at
Speaker 2: this point. Brooklyn nine nine, I love all sorts of
Speaker 2: shows four by three not a great picture, occasional lines
Speaker 2: adjusting things, or just what was what was the show
Speaker 2: after loss? That was like a lost rip off that
Speaker 2: they tried to do. There's a show on right now
Speaker 2: where a plane disappeared for five years on ABC.
Speaker 1: And Mike Tarico and Doug Flutie were talking it up
Speaker 1: during the noted in game.
Speaker 2: Yes, that is in Manka eleven by one, Dolby whatever,
Speaker 2: just the most immersive futuristic experience. You get to watch that,
Speaker 2: you get to watch the Blacklist with that, or you
Speaker 2: get to watch Sopranos the Wires.
Speaker 1: Conversations over Dan.
Speaker 2: Four by three exactly, ty exactly, conversation's over. My gavel
Speaker 2: has been banged.
Speaker 1: We're just gonna have to agree to disagree.
Speaker 2: I'd say start slow, all right, score a touchdown in
Speaker 2: the playoff.
Speaker 1: Well, please, everyone out there listening, we encourage you as
Speaker 1: ever right in. Let us the way you think. Tell
Speaker 1: us fil the reddit subreddit, Yeah, do it up. Go
Speaker 1: to reddit dot com slash our slash soliverbal our friend
Speaker 1: Peter will get a thread going about this show. I'm
Speaker 1: sure of it. Chime in. Feel free to talk about
Speaker 1: how we're wrong. I'm fine. Thoughts, you've been talking for
Speaker 1: twelve years, my whole life, whatever, We're fine with it.
Speaker 1: Soliverble at gmail dot COM's email. We're also on Twitter,
Speaker 1: on Facebook. Check out that reddit. If you haven't already,
Speaker 1: sign up for a newsletter on our website. You can
Speaker 1: be the first among the first to know about all
Speaker 1: of our latest announcements. We've got live shows that we're
Speaker 1: working on literally as we speak. We've got T shirts
Speaker 1: which we're going to be pushing out in a couple weeks.
Speaker 1: I'd imagine it is summertime, so we're working on that
Speaker 1: some other stuff or always are ready to go.
Speaker 2: We'll put them out pretty soon, I think.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, we'll be working on all sorts of cool
Speaker 1: things here over the next few weeks as we really
Speaker 1: enter into the summer months, the home stretch before we
Speaker 1: start talking about on field college football action and if
Speaker 1: you haven't already subscribed to the show, wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts and tell your friends, tell your friends about
Speaker 1: the saliverbo Yeah. Always willing to welcome new people to
Speaker 1: be a due experience. Yes, or you know that that
Speaker 1: applies to everybody. It's not just man who can be dude,
Speaker 1: It's be a dude. Daniel, that's all I got, That's
Speaker 1: all I have for that guy over there. My good friend,
Speaker 1: still my good friend, even after that discussion. Dan Rolstine
Speaker 1: for myself, Tie Hilton Brand in rainy eastern Pennsylvania, thanks
Speaker 1: again for joining us on the show. Enjoy the rest
Speaker 1: of your week, All of your weekend and until next time,
Speaker 1: stay solid, peace in