Speaker 1: You see in the won't be Fooled twice department. What
Speaker 1: happened to us last week was we were on the
Speaker 1: road storm chasing. I thought we'd get home Thursday, and
Speaker 1: we ended up being out on the road until early
Speaker 1: in the morning Friday. This week, we're also going to
Speaker 1: be out on the road. That's why we're jam packing
Speaker 1: a show on Tuesday, June sixteenth, there of our lower
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six, because we can't go seven whole days
Speaker 1: between shows. I mean, it's savagery. Who in the world
Speaker 1: does that? So we are jampacked. We're high, top of glorious,
Speaker 1: really really comfortable downtown Nashville, Tennessee. And we got to
Speaker 1: put a button on this Brendan Soresby thing. Who would
Speaker 1: have thought, Jesse, if we would have told ourselves the
Speaker 1: two highest performing videos we're gonna have, like all Spring
Speaker 1: and Summer are gonna be Brendan Soresby centric videos. What
Speaker 1: would you have thought Brendan Soresby had done? You can
Speaker 1: remind us to really dark places. As it turns out, well,
Speaker 1: we all know the circumstances. So I got some more
Speaker 1: to say about that. But it's a loaded mail bag show.
Speaker 1: And for the first time. We're not merely taking questions.
Speaker 1: Several of you have just presented comments, some of them nice.
Speaker 1: I think some of them pretty rude. But we're gonna
Speaker 1: answer them on the show and it's gonna be fun.
Speaker 1: We got a big day tomorrow. We're gonna be stormchasing.
Speaker 1: I'll I don't actually think I'll talk more about that later.
Speaker 1: So I'm just gonna tell you if you want to
Speaker 1: follow along with the stream storm Chaser Brad Arnold, that's
Speaker 1: where we'll be streaming that thing. Friend of the program,
Speaker 1: Prez is coming along for the ride because he moved
Speaker 1: his dentist appointment. They're watching us in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Victoria, Texas,
Speaker 1: Mystic Connecticut, Albuquerque, New Mexico tuned in as well. Please
Speaker 1: make sure you subscribe to the channel. And the reason
Speaker 1: where we're doing hurry up right here is because I
Speaker 1: don't want to have a two and a half hour
Speaker 1: show and we've got a loaded, I mean loaded mail bag.
Speaker 1: Listen to how heavy that pack papers is. So without
Speaker 1: further ado or further to do, as me and Mom
Speaker 1: would say, let's get into it. First up. This actually
Speaker 1: wasn't first up. We cheated and put this at the
Speaker 1: top of the show because I wanted to go ahead
Speaker 1: and get this out of the way. Matt from Nashville,
Speaker 1: Tennessee leads us off. He said, aside from becoming the
Speaker 1: villains of college athletics, what exactly did Texas Tech and
Speaker 1: Cody Campbell gain by staking their reputations as well as
Speaker 1: Texas Techs on an over hyped quarterback prospect. Two stances
Speaker 1: that I have here, one I have across the board,
Speaker 1: and that is benefit of hindsight is not allowed in
Speaker 1: these sorts of debates. And if you want to make
Speaker 1: points on their own, merit be my guest. If you've
Speaker 1: got a problem with the way Texas Tech handled themselves,
Speaker 1: if you don't like the way Cody Campbell pops off
Speaker 1: at the mouth, well that's all well and good, but
Speaker 1: what you can't do is do this thing where you know,
Speaker 1: they signed Brendan Soresby and then they found out what
Speaker 1: everyone found out and kind of found it out at
Speaker 1: the same time, and then they went through all what
Speaker 1: they went through, and now it's blown up and you're
Speaker 1: sitting there, well, it shouldn't have taken him. Well, that
Speaker 1: wasn't really on the docket. That wasn't really on the
Speaker 1: radar when they decided to take him. So let's just
Speaker 1: independent of what you think about how Texas Tech handled
Speaker 1: this whole deal, and I've spoken my piece on it,
Speaker 1: and most everyone in the free world has as well.
Speaker 1: Independent of what you think about that, let's at least
Speaker 1: do this. Let's at least be fair and honest about
Speaker 1: the chain of events here. So I'm going to read
Speaker 1: you something sort of a paper popper of a stat line.
Speaker 1: Eighteen of thirty two, one hundred and thirty seven yards,
Speaker 1: no touchdowns, two interceptions. What is that? What does that
Speaker 1: mean to you? Does that ring any bells? Because that
Speaker 1: was the stat line on January first of Brendan Soresby. No,
Speaker 1: it wasn't. That was the stat line of Baron Morton,
Speaker 1: the previous quarterback there in the playoff game, the one
Speaker 1: and done that Texas Tech had in the playoffs. And
Speaker 1: it was that moment shortly thereafter where Texas Tech realized
Speaker 1: we're a quarterback away. Rest of this team's good enough,
Speaker 1: rest of next year's team will probably be good enough.
Speaker 1: We're a quarterback away. Everybody realized that. Anyone who watched
Speaker 1: that Orange Bowl realized it that was January first, January fourth, boom,
Speaker 1: Brendan Sorosby to Texas Tech. Then you fast forward all
Speaker 1: the way through January, all the way through February and March,
Speaker 1: and you get towards the end of April and April
Speaker 1: twenty seventh. That's when this story broke. So the first
Speaker 1: thing you can't do is you can't say, well, they
Speaker 1: rolled the dice on a guy that they knew bet
Speaker 1: on games and would come with all this baggage because
Speaker 1: they didn't know he had bet on games and they
Speaker 1: didn't know he would come with any baggage whatsoever. Now
Speaker 1: that's where the period is placed in that sentence. Then
Speaker 1: if you want to call him over hyped, I don't
Speaker 1: even know where that comes from. I don't even know
Speaker 1: that anyone in our mail bag is qualified to evaluate Brinda.
Speaker 1: Maybe you are, maybe you aren't. I don't, Jesse, do
Speaker 1: you think he was hyped? I didn't even view Brendan
Speaker 1: Soresby as When I say hyped, I don't mean was
Speaker 1: Texas Tech excited about him? Yeah, they were excited about him.
Speaker 1: Does anyone out there disagree that he was going to
Speaker 1: be an upgrade from Baron Morton to whatever degree. Notwithstanding,
Speaker 1: doesn't everybody pretty much agree that he would have been
Speaker 1: an upgrade, so you should have been excited about it.
Speaker 1: I didn't see people hyping Brendan Soresby like this. I
Speaker 1: saw him looking at it and saying, hey man, Texas
Speaker 1: Tech got better at quarterback. You know, they're gonna have
Speaker 1: a good roster around him. They're gonna make another run
Speaker 1: and hopefully go deeper than just making the playoffs. That
Speaker 1: was I didn't get the sense that he was over hyped.
Speaker 1: Then again, I only cover college football year round, so
Speaker 1: maybe I missed something. Then. The third part of this,
Speaker 1: the part that most people take issue with, is the
Speaker 1: way Cody Campbell has handled himself, the way Texas Tech
Speaker 1: has handled themselves. And it seems like there were multiple voie,
Speaker 1: you know, multiple microphones out there. I just got to
Speaker 1: tell you, I wonder, and it's baseless because I'll never
Speaker 1: be able to know, but I just really wonder how
Speaker 1: different this would have been case by case. If this
Speaker 1: mess would have fallen in Oregon's lap, how would Oregon
Speaker 1: have handled it? If this mess were to have fallen
Speaker 1: in Arkansas's lap, how would Arkansas have handled it? And
Speaker 1: my point there is obvious, and that is that winning
Speaker 1: is what matters more than anything in this sport. Now,
Speaker 1: it's not what matters more than anything, but really, when
Speaker 1: you come down to it and you combined the interest
Speaker 1: of everything from a coach to an ad to the
Speaker 1: fan base to the alumni base to the administration, they
Speaker 1: have different self interests or individual interest but if you've
Speaker 1: been diagrammed that thing winning football games is where it overlaps.
Speaker 1: That's the most important thing, and actions flow downstream of
Speaker 1: that goal. And you could put anything you want to
Speaker 1: in a press release. Everyone understands the deal here. The
Speaker 1: deal here is not that complicated. You went and got
Speaker 1: him just as Arkansas may have, or Minnesota may have,
Speaker 1: or Virginia Tech may have. It just so happens that
Speaker 1: it was Texas Tech that went and got a guy
Speaker 1: that they thought was the missing piece. After they got him,
Speaker 1: they realized, uh, oh, we got trouble here, and they
Speaker 1: had one of two choices. They could either choose the
Speaker 1: route they went, which is to fight it. And let's
Speaker 1: be real now, Brendan Soresby fought it as well. Like
Speaker 1: it's not just Texas Tech deciding to fight it is
Speaker 1: Brendan Soresby decided to fight it, or they could have
Speaker 1: just said, all right, we quit, he's done, let's move on.
Speaker 1: And I just got to be honest with you. This
Speaker 1: is not to absolve Texas Tech of anything. They're big boys,
Speaker 1: they can speak for themselves. I'm just saying I don't
Speaker 1: get the sense this would have played out much different
Speaker 1: most anywhere else. There are exceptions. I understand that there
Speaker 1: are places like I knowing the compliance and knowing the
Speaker 1: administrative structure of Ohio State, I don't think Ryan Day
Speaker 1: would have been able to go down the road that
Speaker 1: Texas Tech went down because they got all kinds. They
Speaker 1: have red tape wrapped around pretty much every office up there.
Speaker 1: It's crazy that they win at the level they do.
Speaker 1: But most places it would have happened close to the
Speaker 1: same way. I believe that. I can't prove that. Maybe
Speaker 1: I'm dead wrong about that, but I am excited slash
Speaker 1: interested to see what it's like at Texas Tech moving forward,
Speaker 1: because you got to You got to be stupid to
Speaker 1: think that that relationship between them and their league office
Speaker 1: is not still very frosty, and them and the other
Speaker 1: member institutions in that league, in the big twelve is
Speaker 1: not still very frosty. Oh, it's gonna be. It's gonna
Speaker 1: be very very much so, even if Soursby's not playing
Speaker 1: this year. So that's my feelings on that. Let's move on. Oh,
Speaker 1: this is a good question here, mails loaded. Like I said,
Speaker 1: Kevin in Ohio said, is there a reason you talk
Speaker 1: so little about recruiting? Recruiting is such a major part
Speaker 1: of college football, and I'd love to hear more of
Speaker 1: your thoughts on the big recruiting battles and future stars.
Speaker 1: As these commitments happened. Man, I'm glad he submitted this because, dude,
Speaker 1: I used to be so hardcore into recruiting. It is
Speaker 1: the lifeblood of this sport, every bit as much as
Speaker 1: the draft is the lifeblood of the National Football League.
Speaker 1: I think two things have happened, really, three things have
Speaker 1: happened here, Kevin, Okay, So I'm gonna mention the third thing. First,
Speaker 1: interest has greatly waned when we talk recruiting on the show.
Speaker 1: The other two things I'm gonna mention are the reasons
Speaker 1: why I think interest has waned, and I can relate
Speaker 1: to him. So I'll just share my feelings because I
Speaker 1: think my feelings are pretty closely reflected in the general marketplace.
Speaker 1: The first thing that's happened is churn. This is not
Speaker 1: difficult to figure out if you've covered college foot followed
Speaker 1: college football for a long time. The churn and the
Speaker 1: rosters via the transfer portal has happened enough years in
Speaker 1: a row now that you've become jaded and you've become
Speaker 1: very turned off by the whole process, and you're not
Speaker 1: turned off watching your team. That's why the TV ratings
Speaker 1: are still really big. We talk about this all the time.
Speaker 1: People point out TV ratings and well, since the ratings
Speaker 1: are big, there must be nothing wrong with college football.
Speaker 1: That's not always true. It's just that you have to
Speaker 1: know where to look, okay, and when one of the
Speaker 1: first areas that I always point to for people to
Speaker 1: look at if you want to see a little bit
Speaker 1: of a symptom of some sickness in the sport is
Speaker 1: a fraction of people are as passionate about following recruiting
Speaker 1: as used to. It used to be that it was
Speaker 1: a whole industry, and it still is, But I mean
Speaker 1: people followed it religiously, almost like it was its own
Speaker 1: separate entity, Like you had the games on the field
Speaker 1: in the fall, and you had recruiting, which was this
Speaker 1: whole separate sport. I was headfirst into it, man, like,
Speaker 1: I was all about it. And then the reason that
Speaker 1: it changed, one of the reasons is because of churn
Speaker 1: and because you kept on watching guys commit and then leave.
Speaker 1: And it's not that transfers never happened, but transfers used
Speaker 1: to be the rare exception to the rule, and now
Speaker 1: they are much more the norm. And so obviously the
Speaker 1: mentality becomes, why should I get overly invested in following
Speaker 1: the recruitment of a sophomore in high school? Because trust me, Like,
Speaker 1: if you're younger and you don't know what it used
Speaker 1: to be like, you would start paying attention to sophomores
Speaker 1: in high school and then you would get like the
Speaker 1: rivals junior rankings, but you would already know like who
Speaker 1: had offers and stuff like that. Like I knew about
Speaker 1: Jadavion Clowney in tenth grade. I think he was a
Speaker 1: tenth grader, Julio Jones. People knew about him in South
Speaker 1: Alabama when he was in tenth grade, aj Green in
Speaker 1: South Carolina, So you'd follow him because like Julio Jones,
Speaker 1: once he commits to Alabama, it's this massive win for Alabama.
Speaker 1: Once South Carolina keeps Jadeveon Clowney at home, once Georgia
Speaker 1: pulls aj Green out of South Carolina. These are like
Speaker 1: tick or tape parade moments for these programs. If you
Speaker 1: fast forward to modern day, it's still a big deal,
Speaker 1: but your mentality now is all right, we got him
Speaker 1: for his freshman year, then we'll have to deal with
Speaker 1: a whole separate recruitment with teams trying to poach him
Speaker 1: in the transfer portal. And it's just a turnoff when
Speaker 1: it comes to following recruiting. It's a turnoff. So you
Speaker 1: become really jaded towards it. And then the other thing,
Speaker 1: I think, even separate and beyond that is the transactional
Speaker 1: nature of recruiting. So this is where I really need
Speaker 1: you to hear me preface what I'm about to say.
Speaker 1: This is the preface right here. I know money always
Speaker 1: changed hands in recruiting. I know, I have personal knowledge
Speaker 1: of it. I know, but it was way different. It
Speaker 1: was way different when it was under the table, when
Speaker 1: it was bag man, and it was almost like romanticized.
Speaker 1: Is like people kind of whispered about it, and you
Speaker 1: kind of knew it was happening, but sort of everyone
Speaker 1: was doing it, so like, no one's really going to
Speaker 1: rat each other out. And there was this code also
Speaker 1: back in the day of who you could and couldn't
Speaker 1: rat out, Like if someone came in your state from
Speaker 1: outside your state and was throwing money around, well then
Speaker 1: it was okay to knock on them. But innerstate payment, no, nope, nope,
Speaker 1: that's all's well, all's well there. So back in the day, yeah,
Speaker 1: money changed hands. The difference was number one, the amounts
Speaker 1: weren't nearly as big. And I don't care about the
Speaker 1: ammount I couldn't care less if it's ten dollars or
Speaker 1: ten million dollars. As long as you know people are
Speaker 1: roughly trafficking in the same amounts, I don't really care
Speaker 1: about all that. But here's what started to happen. What
Speaker 1: started to happen is the relationship and the value of
Speaker 1: the relationship really started to wane. And back in the
Speaker 1: day that was not the case. Even though money was
Speaker 1: changing hands. Back in the day, kids were committing to
Speaker 1: the schools they committing to because they bought into going
Speaker 1: to that school. Because if you're down to Tennessee or
Speaker 1: Michigan or Florida, and all of them that like have
Speaker 1: some degree of cash on the table. It's not like
Speaker 1: it is today where Michigan offers you one point two,
Speaker 1: but then Florida comes in despite the fact that you've
Speaker 1: been a verbal commit to Michigan for a year and
Speaker 1: a half and Florida hasn't even been on the radar.
Speaker 1: Florida could just come in at the last minute now
Speaker 1: and offer you one seven plus some other perks, and
Speaker 1: you're going to Florida. And it's not that it's wrong.
Speaker 1: It's that from the perspective of someone wanting to follow recruiting,
Speaker 1: you look at that and say, I just wasted a
Speaker 1: year and a half paying attention to this kid being
Speaker 1: committed to Michigan only for the transactional nature of like
Speaker 1: nil and whatnot. Now to pull the rug out from
Speaker 1: under everything I thought I knew at the last minute, Well,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to invest time and energy and emotion
Speaker 1: into caring about this the way I used to. That
Speaker 1: is where things have been. Now that's bad news. Here's
Speaker 1: the good news. This could radically change. Like one of
Speaker 1: the things that has me excited about this Senate bill
Speaker 1: or any structure being introduced back into college football is
Speaker 1: if you have five years to play five and especially
Speaker 1: if you have one penalty free transfer, that takes us
Speaker 1: almost back to the way it used to be, really
Speaker 1: and it makes commitment and it makes the initial signing
Speaker 1: out of high school mean a whole lot more because
Speaker 1: percentage wise, you're a whole lot more likely to stick
Speaker 1: around where you commit, which means I care more about
Speaker 1: your high school recruitment. Again, this is one area where
Speaker 1: we can go back in time, not fully, but we
Speaker 1: can go back to the way it used to be.
Speaker 1: And also, like if you have a more structured revenue
Speaker 1: sharing world, if you have you know, caps on nil.
Speaker 1: I don't know how feasible this is, but if you
Speaker 1: have that, then it kind of goes back to the
Speaker 1: way it used to be, only there's a lot more money.
Speaker 1: But if everyone's roughly roughly if the big boys roughly
Speaker 1: passing around the same amounts of money, well then there's
Speaker 1: not an offer coming in last minute that two times
Speaker 1: what everyone else is offering. That renders the past three
Speaker 1: years irrelevant in terms of following a recruitment. Selfishly, that's
Speaker 1: why I hope that it happens. One of the reasons
Speaker 1: that I hope it happens because I love following recruiting.
Speaker 1: You will not find someone who followed recruiting more hardcore
Speaker 1: than me. But I've just been turned off by it
Speaker 1: in recent years. Still follow it, but we also don't
Speaker 1: talk about it on the show because it doesn't It
Speaker 1: doesn't show to have the interest from you guys that
Speaker 1: it once did. What does have interest is the Pate
Speaker 1: State Store, and specifically the new items we have in there, red, white,
Speaker 1: and chew. I mean July fourth, right around the corner.
Speaker 1: And it's a very very clever play on words that
Speaker 1: Alex has come up with all on her own, with
Speaker 1: no help from Jesse whatsoever. And for that reason, the
Speaker 1: shirt is flying off the shelves. We have sleeveless options
Speaker 1: as well. I know what you were going to ask. Yes,
Speaker 1: we have sleeveless options, and every now and then, if
Speaker 1: you show yourself wearing one of our shirts, I'm known
Speaker 1: to just randomly ship a chalice of supremacy your way.
Speaker 1: So peytstatematerial dot Com for pretty much all your clothing needs.
Speaker 1: We don't have Ostrich belts over there, but outside of that,
Speaker 1: we got pretty much everything you need. It's a long
Speaker 1: story that I don't feel like telling today. We move
Speaker 1: on important question here, really important question about bad guys. Jack.
Speaker 1: I don't know where he's from, but Jack said, can
Speaker 1: you rank the top five villain arcs going into twenty
Speaker 1: twenty six by public perception? Well? I got four. I
Speaker 1: didn't come up with a fifth one because I don't
Speaker 1: think Trinidad Chambliss is a villain. Like Jack said, Trinidad Chambless,
Speaker 1: Trinidad Chamblass is not a villain. The only people mad
Speaker 1: at Trinidad Chambliss are the NCAA, and no one really
Speaker 1: cares that the NCAA is mad at anyone. I don't
Speaker 1: think Mississippi State folks love him, but I don't think
Speaker 1: that they view him as a villain anymore so than
Speaker 1: another Ole miss quarterback. So I do think Texas Tech
Speaker 1: fits here because of what just happened. Now it's going
Speaker 1: to be a different level of villain because Soresby's not
Speaker 1: going to play. He's off to the supplemental draft. But
Speaker 1: I do think the lingering effect of people having witnessed
Speaker 1: what they just witnessed, which the rest of the world
Speaker 1: viewed as unjustified, and Texas Tech disagrees. But you're talking
Speaker 1: about villains. That's the nature of a villain. The villain
Speaker 1: is doing what the villain wants to do and what
Speaker 1: they think is right, and everyone disagrees. Voila, you have
Speaker 1: a villain. I do wonder what it's going to be
Speaker 1: like for Texas Tech on the road this year, because
Speaker 1: it was never going to be pleasant, but maybe a
Speaker 1: different level of vitriol. I could see that. I also
Speaker 1: stay in the lone Star state. I think Texas could
Speaker 1: be presented as one of the big villains this year,
Speaker 1: and that's just because a lot of people think Texas
Speaker 1: gets credit that it doesn't deserve. And case by case,
Speaker 1: you're not wrong. It's happened on this show before. I'll
Speaker 1: go as far as to say, so you're not always
Speaker 1: wrong when you say that Texas has the third best
Speaker 1: odds to win the national title this year. Arch Manning
Speaker 1: is gonna get a lot of preseason love. Texas is
Speaker 1: going to get a lot of preseason love. Sark is
Speaker 1: going to get a lot of preseason love, but also
Speaker 1: a lot of preseason pressure, and people are gonna look
Speaker 1: and say, why start getting credit right now, What has
Speaker 1: he done? What is he accomplished? What is he won
Speaker 1: well in terms of national titles? None? What is arch
Speaker 1: Manning won well in terms of Heisman trophies? None. If
Speaker 1: that's the only way that we measure success, then you're right,
Speaker 1: Texas has not done anything. A lot of people will
Speaker 1: be predictive in nature. I'm gonna be one of them,
Speaker 1: and I expect a lot from Texas this year, and
Speaker 1: that'll turn a lot of people off. So I would
Speaker 1: say Texas is gonna be one. I think Lane Kiffin
Speaker 1: is on this list more than Trinidad Chambliss because I
Speaker 1: think people are gonna I think people will look back,
Speaker 1: and I think a lot of people have a problem
Speaker 1: just that Lane left Ole miss I think a lot
Speaker 1: of people have a problem with that. So I'm sure
Speaker 1: if we had Lane on a show right now, or
Speaker 1: verge Asberry, or like any representative from LSU, of course
Speaker 1: they have their version of the events. But you're not
Speaker 1: the public. The public is the public. The public is
Speaker 1: not changing how they feel. So I'm sure there's a
Speaker 1: large enough portion of the college football public that thinks
Speaker 1: Lane Kiffin did something wrong by leaving or taking the
Speaker 1: LSU job that they'll villainize him. And then the last
Speaker 1: one is not an active player or an active coach.
Speaker 1: But I don't think the villainization, if you will, of
Speaker 1: Greg Sank is going anywhere. Number One, he's the commissioner
Speaker 1: of the SEC, and the SEC is largely despised outside
Speaker 1: the South. He is right smack dab in the middle
Speaker 1: of the playoff debate. And while I think he's on
Speaker 1: the right side, he is alone right now on the
Speaker 1: side of let's not expand this thing to twenty four
Speaker 1: which is why, as far as I'm concerned, God bless
Speaker 1: Greg SANKI on that front. And thirdly, I think that
Speaker 1: as we get into as we get down the road
Speaker 1: a little ways on this Senate bill, it's going to
Speaker 1: require him to continue to be outspoken. Now that's the
Speaker 1: frontier where maybe he and I have some differing viewpoints,
Speaker 1: but most people don't like Greg sank because of the
Speaker 1: three letters on his chest. So Texas Tech, Texas Kiffin,
Speaker 1: Greg SANKEI. I would say those are the ones that
Speaker 1: I would circle, moving right along, chugging right along, Chuck
Speaker 1: hit me up. It's pretty wordy, but essentially he's talking
Speaker 1: about being born and raised in the Northeast, but he
Speaker 1: spent his four years of college in Ohio, and whenever
Speaker 1: he travels across the country, he feels the major footprint
Speaker 1: that is college football, and in many cases, as a
Speaker 1: result of local ties to teams lacks in the Northeast.
Speaker 1: So the question is what needs to change in the
Speaker 1: Northeast for college football to be larger, to be a
Speaker 1: bigger deal. I don't know that anything can change. I
Speaker 1: think this is just the way it is. As Bruce
Speaker 1: Hornsby once said, there's no viable national brand in the
Speaker 1: Northeast outside of Penn State. If you view Penn State
Speaker 1: as a Northeastern team, which I really don't. When I
Speaker 1: think of Penn State, I think of I don't know, Wilderness.
Speaker 1: I think of a more remote program that happens to
Speaker 1: be northeast of where I live. But I don't think
Speaker 1: of when I think of like New York, Boston, Hartford, Philadelphia,
Speaker 1: all the way up to Vermont and New Hampshire and Maine.
Speaker 1: I am not grouping state College Pennsylvania in there, but
Speaker 1: if you want to, for argument's sake, you can. But
Speaker 1: outside of Penn State, who up there, not just now
Speaker 1: but historically are you getting on board with saying, all right,
Speaker 1: that's the Northeast team right there. I mean who markets
Speaker 1: themselves as that? I mean who is that? So that's
Speaker 1: the first problem you have. Second problem is high school
Speaker 1: football almost non existent up there, Like you do not
Speaker 1: think of the Northeast at all. You don't see the
Speaker 1: Northeast well represented outside of New Jersey when it comes
Speaker 1: to high school recruiting very much. And obviously because of
Speaker 1: those things, you don't have like the natural tie or
Speaker 1: attachment to the sport, and Northeastern sports fans have always
Speaker 1: skewed heavily pro sports. So I guess the way they
Speaker 1: feel about baseball in New England is the way they
Speaker 1: feel about college football where I come from, or in Ohio,
Speaker 1: and I don't I don't think that that's really changing,
Speaker 1: and I'm fine with that. You know, some some battles
Speaker 1: are worth fighting. Trying to proliferate the Northeastern corridor of
Speaker 1: sports fandom with college football. It's great if it happens,
Speaker 1: and make no mistake, like the big moments in college football,
Speaker 1: those TV markets tune in. But you're never gonna get
Speaker 1: the Boston television market to perform like the Birmingham television market.
Speaker 1: When it comes to college football consumption, for what I
Speaker 1: think are obvious reasons, we move on Keelan for Heisman.
Speaker 1: Hit us up. What do you know? He said, it's
Speaker 1: very annoying seeing the discourse around Texas and arch Manning
Speaker 1: last year, basically guaranteeing arch Heisman in year one. But
Speaker 1: when Keilan Russell comes around, higher rated recruit by the way,
Speaker 1: everyone in the national media is super cautious. Why is that, Well,
Speaker 1: we did have to check the rival's rankings. Keelan Russell
Speaker 1: number two rated quarterback in his cycle, arch Manning number
Speaker 1: one rated quarterback in his respective cycle. However, point is taken.
Speaker 1: You're saying, these are very comparable talents from different classes
Speaker 1: at the same position. Arch Manning got hyped to the
Speaker 1: moon and back. And you're saying people feel kind of
Speaker 1: cautious around Kielan Russell. Yes, they are. I don't think
Speaker 1: it has anything to do with Keilan Russell. I think
Speaker 1: it has everything to do with arch Manning. And I
Speaker 1: think that arch Manning is just the exception because of
Speaker 1: his last name. There was never a world where arch
Speaker 1: Manning wasn't going to be treated different than other players.
Speaker 1: Comparable to him, just from a talent or rating standpoint.
Speaker 1: But take every other quarterback man like, remove Arch Manning,
Speaker 1: take the other five star kids from his class, take
Speaker 1: the other five star kids from Keilan Russell's class. Like
Speaker 1: nobody else in recent memory has been treated like arch Manning.
Speaker 1: Now is it dumb that he got treated that way
Speaker 1: because of his last name? Yeah, a little bit. And
Speaker 1: the closer you get to the sport, like people who
Speaker 1: watch it every day, I don't think many of those
Speaker 1: people treated Arch Manning the way the Drive By Sports
Speaker 1: media did. Like the Drive By Sports media that otherwise
Speaker 1: would never touch college football, they looked and they said, ooh,
Speaker 1: a Manning, ooh, he's committed to Texas, and you know,
Speaker 1: you know, the Dion tax also applies to arch There's
Speaker 1: an Arch tax. So the Dion tax is a term
Speaker 1: we had to make up on the show. For the
Speaker 1: fact that Dion Sanders was so popular, he transcended college football,
Speaker 1: which means he made a lot of people outside of
Speaker 1: college football talk about college football, which is a good thing. However,
Speaker 1: when people outside of college football talk about college football,
Speaker 1: they tend to talk about it really loud, despite the
Speaker 1: fact that they know almost nothing about the sport, and
Speaker 1: it's cringey, but you got to deal with it. Well,
Speaker 1: the arch tax exists as well because of arch Manning's
Speaker 1: last name and who he is. That's not taking anything
Speaker 1: away from him as a talent, but his talent alone
Speaker 1: would not have gotten him the coverage he's gotten. The
Speaker 1: name and the talent did because of that name. A
Speaker 1: lot of people who otherwise don't touch college football talked
Speaker 1: about arch Manning. Everyone had a take on arch So
Speaker 1: a lot of your frustration is not arch Manning. Your
Speaker 1: frustration is misguided. It should be towards how people treated
Speaker 1: arch Manning, because he's just who he is, and which is,
Speaker 1: by the way, been a model player, model citizen, has
Speaker 1: never been in an ounce of trouble, nothing like that.
Speaker 1: Why would you be mad at arch Manning If you
Speaker 1: can't stand the coverage of arch Manning, get mad at
Speaker 1: the coverage. Don't get mad at arch Manning. So this year,
Speaker 1: here's the irony of this all. If that's a proper
Speaker 1: usage of the word, we'll check with Atlantis. I think
Speaker 1: both of them are going to have big years because
Speaker 1: I think arch is gonna shine this year and I
Speaker 1: think Keilan Russell is going to end up being the
Speaker 1: starting quarterback at Alabama, and I'm sky high on him
Speaker 1: as well. But I don't think it's a it's an
Speaker 1: anti Keelan Russell thing as much as it's a irrationally
Speaker 1: pro Arch Manning despite all conventional logic thing. You're right,
Speaker 1: people hyped him right out of high school, and people
Speaker 1: considered him a failure when he didn't immediately take the job,
Speaker 1: and in year two when he finally got a start,
Speaker 1: when he didn't immediately thrust himself into the finalist Heisman picture,
Speaker 1: what's wrong? Is he a bust? And that goes down
Speaker 1: a whole nother rabbit hole of how dumb the idea.
Speaker 1: The concept of a player being a bust is like,
Speaker 1: think about that for a second. Arch is not gonna
Speaker 1: end up being a bust. But let's say he did
Speaker 1: flame out entirely. What would happen, because I've seen it
Speaker 1: happen a million times before, is a bunch of people
Speaker 1: who talk about sports for a living, or right about
Speaker 1: sports for a living, who hyped him up would never
Speaker 1: look in the mirror. They would look at the player
Speaker 1: and say, you didn't fulfill on my expectations. That means
Speaker 1: you're a bust instead of them saying you didn't fulfill
Speaker 1: on my expectations. My expectations must have been wrong. I'm
Speaker 1: the bust. No one in our business ever says I'm
Speaker 1: the bust. That's why I throw the clown nose on
Speaker 1: when I go oh for five pick in Indiana games.
Speaker 1: I'm the bust. They let me know about it too.
Speaker 1: Let's move on. Benji from ames, Iowa. What are the
Speaker 1: most undervalued aspects of the sport? Great question. I wrote
Speaker 1: down four things. I guarantee you our audience could come
Speaker 1: up with one hundred more. One of the things that's
Speaker 1: really underrated about college football is Fridays on campus. I
Speaker 1: get to be there most every Friday. I get to
Speaker 1: be at a big game on a Friday, and the
Speaker 1: rising level of energy on a typical Friday in the fall,
Speaker 1: weather's a little bit cooler, hopefully it's good weather and
Speaker 1: it's cooler, and you know, kids are either skipping class
Speaker 1: or class as a joke that Friday, and the buzz
Speaker 1: is in the air, and you've got folks rolling in
Speaker 1: from you know, all across the region. A lot of times,
Speaker 1: maybe game days in town. There's nothing like that buzz
Speaker 1: on a Friday. You don't even have to be on Saturday.
Speaker 1: Everybody knows Saturday is incredible the Friday, like the rising
Speaker 1: app if you will, of everyone having this invisible countdown
Speaker 1: clock on their forehead as you're walking around campus, knowing, man,
Speaker 1: twenty four hours now, eighteen hours, not twelve hours from now,
Speaker 1: it's going down right over there, point to the stadium,
Speaker 1: right over there, that's going down. That's underrated to me.
Speaker 1: I think also, what we were talking earlier about and
Speaker 1: we labeled the two pm eyebrow raiser is really underrated
Speaker 1: in college football. Not the eyebrow raiser that you shave
Speaker 1: your eyebrow off with be psychotic. No, the two pm
Speaker 1: Saturday afternoon check of the cell phone and seeing a
Speaker 1: score that comes out of nowhere that makes your eyebrows
Speaker 1: raise on your head, because guys, it happens, if not
Speaker 1: every Saturday, like six or seven Saturdays out of the year.
Speaker 1: Because if you think about that noon kickoff window, you
Speaker 1: do have big noon kickoff going on, so you've got
Speaker 1: at least one pre game going on, but a lot
Speaker 1: of times it's highly ranked teams favored by sixteen seventeen
Speaker 1: points in a game that it's good enough to be
Speaker 1: on ESPN, it's good enough to be on ABC or whatnot,
Speaker 1: but it's not the premier game that day, Like that's
Speaker 1: the warm up act for the three thirty and seven
Speaker 1: thirty windows. But see, no one ever tells the underdog that,
Speaker 1: And so inevitably, multiple times per year, sometimes multiple times
Speaker 1: per Saturday, you check your phone and you're like, hold
Speaker 1: up you, Seela's doing what to Penn State. Now that
Speaker 1: wasn't at two pm Eastern because it happened on the
Speaker 1: West coast. But that kind of score that just slaps
Speaker 1: you in the face. That's underrated because you I don't
Speaker 1: know that you can get that anywhere else because college
Speaker 1: basketball plays multiple nights per week, so there's never that
Speaker 1: one central day. Pro sports are pro sports, So the
Speaker 1: biggest upset in the NFL it pales in comparison to
Speaker 1: even a modest upset in college football. So I would
Speaker 1: say that I would say a new out of conference
Speaker 1: destination as a fan base, Like, if you're an Ohio
Speaker 1: State fan right now, you have known that you had
Speaker 1: a home and home with Texas coming up for years,
Speaker 1: and so you knew you were going to get him
Speaker 1: in Columbus last year and then you knew you were
Speaker 1: going to Austin the next year. And I can't tell
Speaker 1: you how many folks around Ohio State, around Columbus have
Speaker 1: had that trip circled. Like you have saved up money
Speaker 1: to book a hotel in or around Austin, tickets, You've
Speaker 1: probably scoped out what the concert scene is there that weekend.
Speaker 1: You've you've learned everything you need to learn about Austin,
Speaker 1: Texas in advance of making what will be a once
Speaker 1: in a lifetime trip because you don't know when the
Speaker 1: Buckeyes will ever go back to Austin, Texas and that
Speaker 1: sort of thing. I remember when we were at Penn
Speaker 1: State a few years ago and Auburn played up there,
Speaker 1: and I just remember thinking to myself, first off, wow,
Speaker 1: it's my first white out. Secondly, when will Auburn ever
Speaker 1: come to Penn State again? And when will these people
Speaker 1: like Auburn travel pretty well to the game. When will
Speaker 1: these people ever come to State College Pennsylvania again? That's
Speaker 1: pretty awesome if you can afford to do it, and
Speaker 1: even if you can, if you're just watching at home
Speaker 1: seeing your guys, like Miami fans this year, seeing their
Speaker 1: team play in South Bend, Indiana, plus the romanticism of
Speaker 1: that because of how old a rivalry it is. I
Speaker 1: love that. And this is probably my favorite of all
Speaker 1: that not all of the public gets to see the
Speaker 1: agedness and decrepitness of college football stadium infrastructure. I would
Speaker 1: not change if I could. Niland Stadium is a classic
Speaker 1: example of this, but it's not the only one. You
Speaker 1: turn on the TV on Saturday and Niland Stadium looks
Speaker 1: like an orange and white circus. It's incredible. Maybe you're
Speaker 1: even a ticket holder. You know the venues a little
Speaker 1: bit older when you're walking into it, but you sit
Speaker 1: in your seat and you see the seating bowl, you
Speaker 1: see the field. It's incredible. Great one of the great
Speaker 1: scenes in college football. Let me tell you what the
Speaker 1: visiting team sees. The visiting team sees all that, and
Speaker 1: then they see wrought iron gate in the end zone
Speaker 1: and they walk through it. And if you're laying kiff
Speaker 1: and you get stuff thrown at you as you walk
Speaker 1: through it, but you walk through it, and then you
Speaker 1: enter into this medieval Roman colisseum bowels of the building
Speaker 1: place that it looks like at one point caged animals
Speaker 1: used to be stored. It looks like several people have
Speaker 1: gone down this tunnel and not come out alive. The
Speaker 1: locker rooms are way too small. The media room is
Speaker 1: something that would make a broom closet look po And
Speaker 1: I could not love it more. I've been in there
Speaker 1: so many times. When I go to Tennessee sometimes I'll
Speaker 1: have Bill Martin just let me go to the stadium.
Speaker 1: I just want to see that. I just want to
Speaker 1: see it. I just want to go see the visitors'
Speaker 1: locker room. I just want to hang out there for
Speaker 1: a while. Plus you've got to understand that's on a
Speaker 1: day when the stadium's empty, when a team's in town,
Speaker 1: when George is playing there, when Alabama or LSU are
Speaker 1: in there. Texas is going to go in there this year.
Speaker 1: You're bringing in palettes of food, You're bringing in cooler
Speaker 1: after cooler of gatorade, you got all your nutrition, you
Speaker 1: got all your medical and all that stuff set up
Speaker 1: in this dark, like dank, musty, underground cavernous tunnel. That is,
Speaker 1: it's not really really built for supporting human life anymore,
Speaker 1: and hasn't been for a long time. But that stuff
Speaker 1: exists in college, and it does not exist in the
Speaker 1: pro game because all the pro stadiums are are either
Speaker 1: new or brand new. None of of them are all
Speaker 1: that old. Even Cleveland's getting a new stadium. Jesse, what's
Speaker 1: the oldest active stadium? Like, what are some of the
Speaker 1: think about this? The Arizona Cardinals stadium has been around
Speaker 1: for a while now. That would be nicer than ninety
Speaker 1: eight percent of the college football stadiums. They tore down
Speaker 1: the Georgia Dome and it was less than twenty five
Speaker 1: years old, which was murder as far as I'm concerned.
Speaker 1: The Cincinnati Bengal Stadium is pretty old. Lambeau is the
Speaker 1: exception to the rules, like Finway, that's the exception to
Speaker 1: the rule. And hey, by the way, where are Notre
Speaker 1: Dame in Wisconsin playing to kick off the season? That's right,
Speaker 1: That's right. So those are some underrated aspects. I could
Speaker 1: talk about this all day. That was a really good question.
Speaker 1: We move on in the interest of time and fairness.
Speaker 1: Chris said, Honestly, I truly believe that my Ducks complete
Speaker 1: the gauntlet this year and get the trophy. I understand
Speaker 1: the skepticism, but I just can't see a healthy team
Speaker 1: this talented, not at least making the natty. I hate
Speaker 1: the word natty, by the way. I hate it because
Speaker 1: I think it's disrespectful to the National championship. You want
Speaker 1: to know something weird about me, that's something weird about me. Anyway,
Speaker 1: back on the rails here, Chris continues, PS. If we
Speaker 1: don't get blown out, it's a step up. So it's
Speaker 1: full on. We're about to bring home the National Championship
Speaker 1: and then at the end, but if we don't get
Speaker 1: blown out, it's still okay. Hey, I think something between
Speaker 1: those two things is going to happen this year. I
Speaker 1: do think Oregon will be in the playoff, and I
Speaker 1: don't think that they'll get blown out one and done
Speaker 1: or I guess last year they won a game and
Speaker 1: then they got blown out. I don't think that'll happen
Speaker 1: this year. Just call it a hunch. I don't think
Speaker 1: it'll happen this year. So there is a case for Oregon,
Speaker 1: Like I may pick Oregon to win the National title.
Speaker 1: I could see myself doing that. I haven't yet, but
Speaker 1: they're going to be one of the handful of teams
Speaker 1: obviously that I view is capable of winning the National title.
Speaker 1: So you've of course, got veteran talent at quarterback and
Speaker 1: Dante more really really good wide receiver corps, maybe the
Speaker 1: top defensive line in the country, really good athletic secondary. Also,
Speaker 1: like Dan Lanning, just head coach maturation. You never know
Speaker 1: how much better a guy is getting year over year
Speaker 1: and in what ways he's getting better year over year.
Speaker 1: But you assume that they are. I assume Dan Lanning is.
Speaker 1: And in the last two years, the last thing you
Speaker 1: saw from them is getting blown off the field in
Speaker 1: Pasadena two years ago by Ohio State, and then last
Speaker 1: year getting blown off the field in Atlanta by Indiana.
Speaker 1: I was at both of those games. It was ugly
Speaker 1: and the thing was over by halftime both games. And
Speaker 1: imagine what that does mentally now to a lesser person.
Speaker 1: It cripples you mentally, But Oregon is not made up
Speaker 1: of lesser people. So I just think it puts a
Speaker 1: gigantic chip on the shoulder, and I think it leads
Speaker 1: to a lot of self reflection and reevaluation of processes
Speaker 1: and systems and all this. But no stone is left unturned,
Speaker 1: And you're right when you combine all that, which from
Speaker 1: an intangible perspective, I think works in their favor, and
Speaker 1: then you combine the tangibles of what that talent roster's
Speaker 1: made up of, and the fact that I would suggest
Speaker 1: this year's team is the best one that he's had
Speaker 1: there so far, he being Dan Lanning, I feel good
Speaker 1: about that. That wouldn't surprise me at all. In fact,
Speaker 1: I would say, if Oregon wins the national title this year,
Speaker 1: and it does surprise you, how do you let that happen.
Speaker 1: Let's put that out there now, like right down on
Speaker 1: a piece of paper. Now if you think it's impossible
Speaker 1: for Orging to win the national title, so that if
Speaker 1: they do, we could have a conversation about why you
Speaker 1: let that happen to you. Next up, good mail bag
Speaker 1: so far. Jackson sent this tou He said, I've seen
Speaker 1: a lot of industry folks saying Nebraska won't win six
Speaker 1: games this year. Surely you think they'll be Bowl eligible? Yes.
Speaker 1: If you're listening on podcasts, you miss the most important
Speaker 1: part of this question, because it's not the words, all
Speaker 1: due respect, it's it's Compton's O face. I saw that
Speaker 1: a lot last year. I got I'm not gonna say
Speaker 1: sucked in because I did it. I did it freely,
Speaker 1: but I kind of got convinced to predict Nebraska to
Speaker 1: go ten and two last year because I did an
Speaker 1: episode of Busting with the boys that if it were
Speaker 1: just zoom, I don't think I would have been talked
Speaker 1: into it. But when you you got to understand something.
Speaker 1: When you look in those eyes, those longing, hungry what what? What?
Speaker 1: What word am I looking for? Like like victimized eyes,
Speaker 1: you realize you you want better. I want better for
Speaker 1: him than he's experienced, and by proxy that means I
Speaker 1: want better for Nebraska and Nebraska people than they've experienced.
Speaker 1: And so you try and wish cast it, you try
Speaker 1: and speak it into existence. And I thought last year,
Speaker 1: when you combine the matt rule year three rule rule
Speaker 1: thing with me predicting them to go ten and two,
Speaker 1: I thought that's what it would take. And instead they
Speaker 1: went seven and five. And I'm not gonna say culminated
Speaker 1: with what I'm about to show you, But the lasting
Speaker 1: image in my mind is what I'm about to show you,
Speaker 1: and that is we went up there to Lincoln for
Speaker 1: the Michigan game, which looked close on the final scoreboard,
Speaker 1: but did not look close at all standing on the
Speaker 1: sideline watching it in person and afterwards. This really sums
Speaker 1: it up. Now. Things were all happy in the beginning
Speaker 1: of the season. Everybody's all smiles ear to ear, predicting
Speaker 1: Nebraska to go ten and two. But then the baseball
Speaker 1: bat of reality hit us in the face. And this
Speaker 1: is after the Michigan Nebraska game. And I'm sitting on
Speaker 1: the feet there and I'm looking over my left shoulder
Speaker 1: and that's Compton just laid out. He's just staring at
Speaker 1: the sky, waiting for the stadium to clear out so
Speaker 1: we could sneak back over to the airport. I had
Speaker 1: just been in Michigan's locker room before I came back
Speaker 1: out there. I don't know how long he had been
Speaker 1: laying there. So the three years Matt Ruhle's been there
Speaker 1: so far, five and seven, six and six, seven and five,
Speaker 1: one could say that's linear progress. One could say five wins,
Speaker 1: six wins, seven wins means eight wins this year. One
Speaker 1: could say that it obviously comes down to Anthony Calandria.
Speaker 1: It obviously comes down to being able to say in
Speaker 1: December losing Kenny Mitchie was the best thing to ever
Speaker 1: happened to us, because it didn't feel good at the
Speaker 1: time when will Stein came in from the rafters and
Speaker 1: took him before he had even settled into his dorm room.
Speaker 1: So it all comes down to that. I don't really
Speaker 1: think we need to waste a whole lot more time
Speaker 1: on that. They're over under his six and a half
Speaker 1: right now? Now, good news, Jesse. We want to call
Speaker 1: this good news? Is it is heavily juiced to the over. Okay,
Speaker 1: So if FanDuel believed in putting out even numbers, maybe
Speaker 1: they're over underwin total would be seven. But they don't FanDuel.
Speaker 1: Mike is not doing that, and so he's putting out
Speaker 1: six and a half right now, Hey, over over again
Speaker 1: and forever over. Let's move on. I don't want to
Speaker 1: talk too much more. Let's move on. Go big red.
Speaker 1: Let's see what is this? This is? Oh, this is
Speaker 1: the guy that asked us about all right, so someone
Speaker 1: asked us about this tweet. Someone said, did you see
Speaker 1: one of Dan Patrick's producers say he didn't know who
Speaker 1: you were? Okay, so this is what they were talking about.
Speaker 1: So there was this big thing last week where people
Speaker 1: were making a big deal. I guess about how like
Speaker 1: there's older media and newer media and the new media people,
Speaker 1: their accomplishments are a lot more impressive than old school
Speaker 1: when everything was gate kept and like if you were
Speaker 1: on ESPN, of course you were going to be a star.
Speaker 1: Those are not my words. I'm just saying that was
Speaker 1: a thought that was presented. And so apparently one of
Speaker 1: Dan Patrick's producers or maybe former producer someone said he
Speaker 1: wasn't there anymore. He responded, He said, well, barstool started
Speaker 1: twenty two years ago. Bill Simmons has been in the
Speaker 1: business since the nineties. They aren't building anything. They are
Speaker 1: already built. Here's the money line. I don't know who
Speaker 1: Josh paid is, but Pat McAfee walked into a world
Speaker 1: people like Dan Patrick helped create. Show a little respect. Well,
Speaker 1: my reaction to that is as follows. It sounds like
Speaker 1: the seating guy doesn't know I exist. That's my response
Speaker 1: to it. But the second part he said about Pat,
Speaker 1: it applies to me as well. You're never gonna get
Speaker 1: me to say a bad word about Dan Patrick. I
Speaker 1: love Dan Patrick. So I talk with Paul Papst all
Speaker 1: the time on Twitter. By the way, so somebody behind
Speaker 1: the glass there knows me or knows of me. Apparently
Speaker 1: not everyone does, but that's okay. No one asked me
Speaker 1: about this, But Dan Patrick's one of the goats in
Speaker 1: my mind. I grew up on Dan Patrick. I've got
Speaker 1: a massive, massive place in my heart for Dan Patrick.
Speaker 1: I think the dude's insanely talented. I think it's actually
Speaker 1: underrated that he's built what he's built. Now. People know
Speaker 1: that it's successful, But do you pay attention to how
Speaker 1: many other people who at one point were on that
Speaker 1: big ship and left that big ship and we're never
Speaker 1: heard from again. Do you ever pay attention to that?
Speaker 1: Because a lot of people just disappear into the ocean
Speaker 1: when they drop off that ship, that mothership as they
Speaker 1: like to call it. Dan Patrick didn't. I would say
Speaker 1: Dan Patrick may have even done his best work after
Speaker 1: he left ESPN, and that is a very very rare
Speaker 1: thing in any day and age. So like Rich Rich,
Speaker 1: I'll tell you what it was. I remember it now.
Speaker 1: Rich Eisen and Dan Patrick have been doing a sit
Speaker 1: down about those days, and it's like crack to me.
Speaker 1: I consume that stuff ten times out of ten because
Speaker 1: that's my childhood they're talking about. But you man, you
Speaker 1: will never ever catch me disparaging those guys like I've
Speaker 1: never thought about this until now, Jesse, but maybe we
Speaker 1: should pursue it. If we had Dan Patrick on the
Speaker 1: Speaker series, I think the episode could be like five hours,
Speaker 1: no break, maybe a bathroom break, maybe not. Maybe just
Speaker 1: bring an empty two liter out there, just go and
Speaker 1: go and go. I could talk about that stuff forever,
Speaker 1: but I don't need to because he and rich Eisen
Speaker 1: are doing it right now together. Interesting they're watching us
Speaker 1: in West Lafai and Indiana, Calabasas, California, and Raleigh, North Carolina.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. The mail bag very very eclectic today.
Speaker 1: Amy hit us up, he said, he or she said?
Speaker 1: Are you comfortable with the private equity involvement in the cruise? Can't? Well? Bill,
Speaker 1: I know some of you are dozing off right now.
Speaker 1: Stay tuned, Stay tuned, She continues. Do you still trust
Speaker 1: Cody Campbell and his motives with this bill? Do you
Speaker 1: really see this as saving college sports? Let's work back
Speaker 1: to front. No one bill saves college sports. The people
Speaker 1: who run sports have to save college sports. Secondly, college
Speaker 1: sports is a whole lot stronger than you know. The
Speaker 1: ventilator like deathbed. It's being presented as being on right now,
Speaker 1: it's very resilient college FOOTBALLO point three. Do I trust
Speaker 1: Cody Campbell and his motives? I think that what Cody
Speaker 1: says in a lot of cases has validity to it,
Speaker 1: even if you want to suggest that he has ulterior motives,
Speaker 1: Like I'm I'm happy to listen to you present your
Speaker 1: theories on his ulterior motives, but I don't really care
Speaker 1: what your ulterior motives are. This kind of thing makes
Speaker 1: strange bedfellows. All the time. They say that about politics,
Speaker 1: but more and more so, college football has become political,
Speaker 1: and they always say like politics makes strange bedfellows. By
Speaker 1: the way, look at the body of this Twitter or
Speaker 1: Twitter question. Ted Cruz and Maria Cantwell, those would be
Speaker 1: politically strange bedfellows. But this has brought them together to
Speaker 1: co sponsor a bill. So the Cody Campbell piece, I'm
Speaker 1: okay with it. I'm okay with it. You don't have
Speaker 1: to agree across the board with everything everyone in the
Speaker 1: room says. You don't have to like everyone in the room.
Speaker 1: I got no problem with Cody Campbell personally. I'm not
Speaker 1: saying I do. But you asked, do I still trust
Speaker 1: Cody Campbell. I'm okay with it. I'm fine with it.
Speaker 1: And then the first question was are you comfortable with
Speaker 1: the private equity involvement in the bill. I keep asking
Speaker 1: people to show me the private equity piece of the bill,
Speaker 1: and I maybe it's in there. It's one hundred and
Speaker 1: ten pages. What we've had is we've had people suggest
Speaker 1: that private equity entities are behind the bill, but that's
Speaker 1: different than being in the bill, and maybe it's just
Speaker 1: semantics there. I'll say this amy I've done actually a
Speaker 1: fair amount of digging on that. The answer is yes,
Speaker 1: I am comfortable with it. And I am the person
Speaker 1: who will tell you probably about ninety five times out
Speaker 1: of one hundred, I want nothing to do with private
Speaker 1: equity entering college sports, college football, particularly in this case.
Speaker 1: I have a pretty good hunch I know what private
Speaker 1: equities place in all of this is, and I am
Speaker 1: more than comfortable with it. That's what I'll say about
Speaker 1: that right now, because it's just a hunch. I'm not
Speaker 1: working on, you know, decided truth and fact here. I
Speaker 1: trust my hunch on it, and if my hunch is correct, yes,
Speaker 1: I'm totally fine with it. Moving on, This is from Reid.
Speaker 1: Reid said, this is not meant to be a dis
Speaker 1: Here comes the disc Jesse, this is not meant to
Speaker 1: be a dis But you constantly say you're a regular
Speaker 1: season guy, but then a large amount of time on
Speaker 1: the show is spent talking about the postseason. I get
Speaker 1: that's where the eyeballs may be, but you have real
Speaker 1: influence to move audience perspectives in my humble opinion, so read,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have a little fun with this. But before
Speaker 1: I have fun with it, I do sincerely want to
Speaker 1: say thank you. See this is not a question, it's
Speaker 1: just comment, and we've got room for that on the show.
Speaker 1: I respectfully to the second point here, I don't know
Speaker 1: that I agree with that. Read. I don't think anybody,
Speaker 1: no matter how big your voice is, has the ability
Speaker 1: to significantly move audience perspectives. I will grant you that
Speaker 1: maybe I could say something that's just a little more
Speaker 1: profound than anything you ever heard, or maybe McAfee could
Speaker 1: say something in a way that just like tugs at
Speaker 1: a heartstring and it changes a pocket of people's minds.
Speaker 1: But I don't think anyone, at least in this industry,
Speaker 1: has the power to use their microphone to fund fundamentally
Speaker 1: change public perception and public opinion. I don't believe. I
Speaker 1: don't see that happen. People largely believe what they believe.
Speaker 1: So that's the first thing. And if you're wrong, if
Speaker 1: you're right and I'm wrong, hey great, I guess that's
Speaker 1: a net positive for our show. But I don't necessarily
Speaker 1: know that me screaming into this microphone every week. You
Speaker 1: need to care about the regular season more than the postseason.
Speaker 1: And here's why it is actually going to change that
Speaker 1: a whole lot. Maybe fractionally, but not a whole lot.
Speaker 1: But the answer to your first question here or your
Speaker 1: first statement, is you're right. I am a regular season guy.
Speaker 1: I love college football's regular season more than the playoff.
Speaker 1: I care about your typical regular season Saturday more than
Speaker 1: the national championship game. I know that sounds crazy. Maybe
Speaker 1: I'm in the minority. I'm not alone, though, I know that,
Speaker 1: but that is how I personally feel. So read here's
Speaker 1: how I have to balance that. I have to understand.
Speaker 1: And I am in the minority on that opinion. To
Speaker 1: what degree I'm not sure, but surely more people care
Speaker 1: about the postseason and national championship game than anyone given
Speaker 1: Saturday in our audience. Surely that is the divide, like,
Speaker 1: surely that's what the fraction would look like. And so
Speaker 1: I have to stack the show for the audience, not
Speaker 1: for me. I could go home and talk to myself
Speaker 1: in the mirror, and that may sound a little bit different,
Speaker 1: and I do it all the time. I encourage that
Speaker 1: kind of behaviors, make sure no one's home. But as
Speaker 1: far as the show goes, I mean, how out of
Speaker 1: touch would it be? And this is respectfully back to
Speaker 1: you read how out of touch would it be for
Speaker 1: me to try and force feed a worldview that I
Speaker 1: know is not shared by most people. And by the way,
Speaker 1: I could still fully respect the regular season and celebrate
Speaker 1: the regular season. But the way I do that is
Speaker 1: by me and this staff pouring absolutely everything we have
Speaker 1: into every show during the regular season, especially those Sunday shows.
Speaker 1: I promise you you will never see a more full
Speaker 1: throated effort behind a show our whole season then on
Speaker 1: those Sundays during the season. We put more effort into
Speaker 1: those shows than we do the show after the National
Speaker 1: Championship Game. I say, it's not even close. So we
Speaker 1: don't save anything up for the next show. We squeeze
Speaker 1: the rag out entirely, every drop is squeezed out of it,
Speaker 1: and then we go right back to work for the
Speaker 1: next show forty eight hours later. That, to me is
Speaker 1: how you celebrate that ideology, more so than just trying
Speaker 1: to convince everybody to think the way you think. But
Speaker 1: I do appreciate d comment. All right, we got a
Speaker 1: question about sparks here, Dylan from Panama City, Florida. He said,
Speaker 1: do you think Kirby Smart has lost his spark? I'm
Speaker 1: a huge Georgia fan, but after a couple of underwhelming seasons,
Speaker 1: I can't help but notice that Kirby seems a little
Speaker 1: calm on the sideline that I'd like, especially when we're
Speaker 1: playing poorly. Keep this up for just a second. Underwhelming seasons,
Speaker 1: he says, Dylan Jesse, anybody correct me if I'm wrong.
Speaker 1: I'm looking at the past two years in the SEC
Speaker 1: here and it says in twenty twenty four, Georgia won
Speaker 1: the conference? Is that right? And then it says the
Speaker 1: next year, in twenty twenty five, they also won the conference?
Speaker 1: Is that right? And it says both years they made
Speaker 1: the playoff and had a first round By. Is that accurate?
Speaker 1: Where's the underwhelming part of this? No answer, Bradley says,
Speaker 1: where the playoff wins. That's what it's come to now.
Speaker 1: If you don't make the playoff, it's not enough to
Speaker 1: win the league. It's not enough to make the playoff.
Speaker 1: It's not enough to have won one national titles already.
Speaker 1: This is different than Landing, like Landing's been doing it,
Speaker 1: but he had won titles. Kirby's won titles already, underwhelming, Dylan, Dylan,
Speaker 1: I would like you to do something. I would like
Speaker 1: you to pick up that cell phone. I know you
Speaker 1: got one, and I want you to call Austin, Texas.
Speaker 1: I want you to call Knoxville, Tennessee. Hey call fav
Speaker 1: of Arkansas. But call some of these other outposts and
Speaker 1: ask them if they think Kirby's last two years are underwhelming.
Speaker 1: I sound like Kirby right now. No, no, no, no. Apparently
Speaker 1: he'd be much calmer than this. Kirby would be like
Speaker 1: he'd e or the whole thing, Hugh, I guess, so
Speaker 1: just fade into obscurity. Go dogs. I think winning titles
Speaker 1: changed a lot for Kirby. Smart so he's entering his
Speaker 1: eleventh year as a head coach. I think winning those
Speaker 1: two national championships psychologically changed a lot for the Georgia program.
Speaker 1: I think it changed something for kirk And by that,
Speaker 1: I don't mean he's started to try less or care
Speaker 1: less or anything like that, but I do think that
Speaker 1: psychologically there is a different way you can carry yourself.
Speaker 1: When you've been to the mountaintop twice, you've grabbed the
Speaker 1: belt twice because you're no longer having to prove to
Speaker 1: people anything. Ryan Day just hit this, Sark is still
Speaker 1: trying to. Dan Lanning's still trying to and I think
Speaker 1: that does something. It doesn't take down the intensity level,
Speaker 1: but the intensity maybe things are channeled, Maybe the energy
Speaker 1: is channeled in a different way. That's just a theory.
Speaker 1: I don't think Kirbye would agree with that, but maybe,
Speaker 1: like if a psychiatrist got him on a couch, they
Speaker 1: could convince him of that. That's that sort of thing.
Speaker 1: The second part about how much more calm he is.
Speaker 1: I think anger from a head coach is very very
Speaker 1: often tied to performance relative to the standard they've set.
Speaker 1: So that's why, like a lot of these guys, it
Speaker 1: could be and it could be Kirby, it could be
Speaker 1: Kurt Signetti. You'll see him sometimes blow up in blowout
Speaker 1: games and you'll say, what, they're up forty nine to ten,
Speaker 1: why is he doing that? Well, it is because whatever
Speaker 1: just happened didn't meet the standard that they hold the
Speaker 1: program to. No matter what the scoreboard says. The scoreboard
Speaker 1: should actually be ignored in those situations, because that's how
Speaker 1: you create bad habits. So these last two years with Kirby,
Speaker 1: you notice he's talked glowingly about his team, like he's
Speaker 1: never indicated or even hinted that he's unhappy with his team.
Speaker 1: In fact, it's been quite the opposite, and so I
Speaker 1: think that explains his attitude, is my point. I think
Speaker 1: he's looked at these two teams and probably thought to himself,
Speaker 1: these teams aren't as good. The capability level of these
Speaker 1: two teams at their very best are short of that
Speaker 1: which we had in twenty twenty one or twenty twenty two.
Speaker 1: Maybe we'll get back to that level, but as for
Speaker 1: these teams here and now, their maximum potential is probably
Speaker 1: a little bit lower. But I think he's looked at
Speaker 1: him and thought to himself, why should I be angry
Speaker 1: right now? They're trying as hard as they can. They're
Speaker 1: playing their tails off, They're getting better as the season
Speaker 1: goes on. They played Bama last year at home and
Speaker 1: lost what they do to him in Atlanta a couple
Speaker 1: of months later, So why would you be angry at that? Conversely,
Speaker 1: you could have a more talented team than the one
Speaker 1: that he had last year or two years ago, that
Speaker 1: maybe achieves at a higher level. But he looks irate
Speaker 1: because in his mind, even though they're technically winning more games,
Speaker 1: they're falling short of what they're capable of. You'd never
Speaker 1: be angry at a team for maximizing their potential, and
Speaker 1: I think these last two Georgia teams have come very
Speaker 1: close to maximizing their potential. And as a leader and
Speaker 1: as the guy who constructed the entire thing, if you
Speaker 1: look at that and you say, you know what, maybe
Speaker 1: this group is a notch down. Maybe they are a
Speaker 1: step off the pace of our vintage teams. But I'm
Speaker 1: proud of them. They've done everything I've asked them to do.
Speaker 1: Why would I be angry at that? Why would Kirby
Speaker 1: Smart be angry at that? So I don't think it's
Speaker 1: losing a spark at all. Man, I'll tell you this. Uh.
Speaker 1: I can't probably take everyone for a field trip in
Speaker 1: the building there, but I've been around Georgia for a
Speaker 1: little while. I haven't noticed the intensity drop a bit
Speaker 1: in that place. I would highly suggest if you get
Speaker 1: some feedback from staff meetings or team meetings, I don't
Speaker 1: think the intensity is waned there a whole lot. Now
Speaker 1: there's a shelf life. Guys aren't doing this forever, and
Speaker 1: so eleven years in, you know, maybe he's just entered
Speaker 1: into like a different gear. You never know if it's intentional.
Speaker 1: You never know if Kirby Smart hasn't hasn't gone through
Speaker 1: courses or gotten feedback or advice and maybe consciously tried
Speaker 1: to change a little bit of the way he carries himself.
Speaker 1: But I can promise you under the hood, it's still
Speaker 1: the exact same as it's always been, just maybe the
Speaker 1: exterior looks a little bit different. It's been a good mailbag.
Speaker 1: We're not done yet, but it's been a good mail bag.
Speaker 1: And I just want to remind everyone FanDuel of course
Speaker 1: the exclusive odds provider of the show, but also if
Speaker 1: you want to submit questions, comments, whatever to the show,
Speaker 1: you could do it by responding on Twitter. That's the
Speaker 1: way most people do it. But if you go over
Speaker 1: to the FanDuel Discord, there's the QR code, or you
Speaker 1: can just go to FanDuel's discord channel and you want
Speaker 1: to submit questions or comments there. If I answer those
Speaker 1: on air, not only are you appearing on the show
Speaker 1: man celebrity status, but you're also getting one hundred dollars
Speaker 1: of bonus bets dropped in your account. And that's just
Speaker 1: not something you hear every day. Jesse FanDuel, Mike with
Speaker 1: his little angel wings just could ching. It doesn't really
Speaker 1: make that sound, but it is there. You just check
Speaker 1: your account the name day and it is there. And
Speaker 1: that's if we answer the question on the show. So
Speaker 1: it's got to be good. You can't just type gibberish
Speaker 1: and expect to show up on the show. I do
Speaker 1: that myself.
Speaker 2: Must be twenty one plus and present in select states
Speaker 2: for Kansas in affiliation with Kansas Star Casino, or eighteen
Speaker 2: plus and present in DC first online real money wager
Speaker 2: only five dollars first deposit required. Bonus issued as non
Speaker 2: withdrawble bonus bets, which expires seven days after receipt restrictions apply.
Speaker 2: See terms at sportsbook dot FanDuel dot com. Gambling problem
Speaker 2: call one eight hundred gambler or visitfanduel dot com slash
Speaker 2: rg call one eight eight eight seven eight nine seventy
Speaker 2: seven seventy seven, or visit CCPG dot org slash chat
Speaker 2: in Connecticut, or visit nd gamblinghelp dot org in Maryland.
Speaker 2: Hope is here. Visit gambling helplinem dot org or call
Speaker 2: eight hundred three two seven fifty fifty for twenty four
Speaker 2: seven support in Massachusetts. Or call one eight seven seven
Speaker 2: eight Hope, n Y. Or text Hope and Y in
Speaker 2: New York.
Speaker 1: All right, lastly, it is bold prediction season and it
Speaker 1: is time for us to dive in and see if
Speaker 1: anyone predicted something tonight bold enough to rate at a
Speaker 1: nine point five or higher on the Boldness scale and
Speaker 1: come true, because if it does come true, you win
Speaker 1: a Chaalie of supremacy at the end of the year.
Speaker 1: First up, Luke said half of the playoff field will
Speaker 1: be from the Big Ten. Still a twelve team format
Speaker 1: this year, so Luke is saying six teams from the
Speaker 1: Big twelve or the Big Ten rather make the playoff,
Speaker 1: and that is a nine point five on the boldness
Speaker 1: scale for me. Three of them made it. Last year,
Speaker 1: the SEC got five in and people thought they had
Speaker 1: too many in, and so like even a conference having
Speaker 1: five teams in was viewed as really pushing the limit.
Speaker 1: You're saying they're going to get six in. So think
Speaker 1: about what this requires. First off, it requires six big
Speaker 1: ten teams to be viable. So you got to think
Speaker 1: Oregon's in, and Indiana's in and Ohio State and then
Speaker 1: USC's got to be good, Michigan's got to be good,
Speaker 1: Penn State or Iowa or like Illinois or maybe UCLA
Speaker 1: comes out of nowhere. All that's got to happen, and
Speaker 1: I think all of them need to be ten and
Speaker 1: two or better probably, And then you got to have
Speaker 1: I think a perfect storm in the SEC. And in
Speaker 1: the SEC the perfect storm would be let's say Georgia
Speaker 1: or Texas are really good. They separate, they just distance
Speaker 1: themselves from the pack. So there's like an eleven and
Speaker 1: one or twelve and oh team and they win the SEC,
Speaker 1: so they're in, and then the rest of the conference
Speaker 1: is just a mess, and it's a bunch of nine
Speaker 1: to three, eight and four teams at the second level.
Speaker 1: You need that to happen, probably need Notre Dame to
Speaker 1: be out of the mix. It would greatly help if
Speaker 1: Notre Dame was out of the mix only one G
Speaker 1: five team. You can't have two G five teams, and
Speaker 1: you need the ACC and the Big twelve to each
Speaker 1: be one bid leagues. If all that happens, this prediction
Speaker 1: hits all, that's not gonna happen, I don't think So
Speaker 1: that's a nine and a half on the boldness scale.
Speaker 1: Next up manavalol Obama. That's where Bartow's best resides, and
Speaker 1: he said the SEC championship will not feature Alabama, it
Speaker 1: will not feature Georgia, it will not feature Texas. That
Speaker 1: is Georgia with the best odds, Texas right behind them.
Speaker 1: They have the same odds. So Texas and Georgia are
Speaker 1: tied as number one teams to win the SEC this
Speaker 1: year at FanDuel Bama's fifth. So none of those three
Speaker 1: can even be in the game. I make that a
Speaker 1: nine and a quarter. I make that a nine point
Speaker 1: twenty five. So this does leave LSU as a possibility.
Speaker 1: But you got to have two of these teams. So
Speaker 1: LSU versus A and M or A and M versus Oklahoma,
Speaker 1: or like Ole Miss versus Tennessee or Florida versus LSU.
Speaker 1: You got to have those teams come through. A and M.
Speaker 1: May very well do it, LS, you may very well
Speaker 1: do it. If that happens, then boom, that's it. It
Speaker 1: just hit. But Bama and Georgia have one or the
Speaker 1: other been in and won the SEC championship ship every
Speaker 1: year since twenty eleven except one, right Jesse only one
Speaker 1: year since twenty eleven or twelve or whenever it was.
Speaker 1: And so that's that LSU twenty nineteen year, that's the
Speaker 1: only year so they've been mainstays. And you would think
Speaker 1: if someone knocks them off, maybe it's Texas. But for
Speaker 1: both of them to miss out on the game entirely
Speaker 1: and Texas to not be there, that's bold. It's bold enough.
Speaker 1: It's bold enough. Not as bold as the next one though,
Speaker 1: this next one from Andrew in Louisville, Kentucky. Two teams
Speaker 1: from the ACC will make the playoffs and advance to
Speaker 1: the semi finals. I'm trying to think what I would
Speaker 1: have made this if he just said two ACC teams
Speaker 1: make the playoff, it wouldn't have been a nine point five.
Speaker 1: This is a nine point five. Two ACC teams making
Speaker 1: the playoff and making it to the semi final. So
Speaker 1: take Miami and just remove them. Let's just assume Miami
Speaker 1: wins the whole thing this year. Whatever aside, They're easy
Speaker 1: to buy into. Where's my other team? Where's my other team?
Speaker 1: From the ACC? That is not only good enough to
Speaker 1: make the playoff, which means they got to have one
Speaker 1: of the best resumes in the country. Then they got
Speaker 1: to win at least one game, if not two games
Speaker 1: once they make the playoff. So is it gonna be Louisville?
Speaker 1: Is Clemson gonna resurrect themselves? Is SMU gonna be the
Speaker 1: team to make it and win games? I can't see it.
Speaker 1: I'm making that a nine and a half. And lastly,
Speaker 1: I struggled with this rating a little bit. Ronan Montana
Speaker 1: Finns fans said it'll be back to back seasons of
Speaker 1: the Heisman winner also winning the national championship. And he's
Speaker 1: talking about CJ. Carr and Notre Dame. So CJ. Carr
Speaker 1: wins the Heisman, Notre Dame wins the national title. I'm
Speaker 1: only gonna make that a nine. I changed my mind,
Speaker 1: Jesse down from nine point twenty five. I'm only gonna
Speaker 1: make it a nine. So it's bold. But here's the
Speaker 1: problem with it. CJ. Carr is the favorite to win
Speaker 1: the Heisman right now, FanDuel Notre Dame has the second
Speaker 1: best odds in the country to win the title. So independently,
Speaker 1: neither one of these is overly bold, and even though
Speaker 1: you're like grouping them together, there is a lot of
Speaker 1: correlation here. It happened last year Fernando Mendoza won the Heisman,
Speaker 1: and because Indiana had a Heisman Trophy winner at quarterback,
Speaker 1: they were good enough to go on and win the title.
Speaker 1: That was a key contributing factor obviously. So if CJ.
Speaker 1: Car is the real deal, good enough to win the Heisman,
Speaker 1: obviously it means Notre Dame's really good this year. And
Speaker 1: if Notre Name's really good this year, I got a
Speaker 1: really good shot to win the title. How many four
Speaker 1: quarter games is CJ. Carr gonna play? Though, So if
Speaker 1: you look at Notre dames schedule, one of the positives
Speaker 1: is it's a really workable schedule. But that probably means
Speaker 1: they win a bunch of games convincingly, which means CJ.
Speaker 1: Car's not in the game in the fourth quarter a
Speaker 1: whole bunch, which means he may not rack up the
Speaker 1: numbers that you need to win the Heisman. So I'm
Speaker 1: gonna put a nine on it. I thought about nine
Speaker 1: and a quarter. I put a nine on it. Good
Speaker 1: mail bag today, good solid mail bag. Now listen, we
Speaker 1: are about to head out of town right now. Actually,
Speaker 1: Big Storm Chasing Day will probably be in either Illinois
Speaker 1: or Indiana tomorrow. We will live stream it. You want
Speaker 1: to look up Stormchaser Brad Arnold's page YouTube channel and
Speaker 1: will be active, very active tomorrow, very dangerous day, which
Speaker 1: of course means we have to head towards it. So
Speaker 1: appreciate you guys so much. Make sure you subscribe to
Speaker 1: the channel for director Bradley Producer Jesse. I'm Josh Fate.
Speaker 1: We'll see you back here Sunday. Until then, God Bless.
Speaker 2: Must be twenty one plus and present in select states
Speaker 2: for Kansas in affiliation with Kansas Star Casino, or eighteen
Speaker 2: plus and present in DC first online real money wager
Speaker 2: only five dollars first deposit required. Bonus issued as non
Speaker 2: withdrawable bonus bets, which expire seven days after receipt restrictions apply.
Speaker 2: See terms at sportsbook dot FanDuel dot com. Gambling problem
Speaker 2: call one eight hundred gambler, or visit FanDuel dot com
Speaker 2: slash RG call one eight eight eight seven eight nine
Speaker 2: seventy seven seventy seven, or visit CCPG dot org slash
Speaker 2: chat in Connecticut, or visit nd Gamblinghelp dot org in Maryland.
Speaker 2: Hope is here, visit gambling heelplinem dot org, or call
Speaker 2: eight hundred three two seven fifty fifty for twenty four
Speaker 2: seven support in Massachusetts, or call one eight seven seven
Speaker 2: eight Hope n Y. Or text Hope n Y. In
Speaker 2: New York