Speaker 1: You know what hurts me a lot is when you
Speaker 1: have a friend and then you have another friend, and
Speaker 1: then those two friends are fighting because it's like they
Speaker 1: want you to choose a side. And even if they
Speaker 1: don't ask you to choose a side, you fear the
Speaker 1: inevitable is they're going to ask you to choose a side.
Speaker 1: And you know, that's kind of where we are Jesse
Speaker 1: with Sark and Joey Maguire right now, friends of the program,
Speaker 1: and I just hope they don't make us choose sides.
Speaker 1: What we are going to choose to do is talk
Speaker 1: about this little lone star spat could be the name
Speaker 1: of a future rivalry game. Sounds corporate enough, so we'll
Speaker 1: talk about that. Were jam Pack. We're high top a
Speaker 1: pretty stormy downtown Nashville, Tennessee, on this Sunday night, May
Speaker 1: thirty first, the Year of Our Lord twoenty twenty six.
Speaker 1: We're kind of trying to walk a tight rope, as
Speaker 1: I vowed to you that I would walk in the
Speaker 1: Year of Our Lord two thousand and twenty six, about
Speaker 1: not letting the show slash my mood take a negative turn,
Speaker 1: as it can do in May and June when there's
Speaker 1: no games happening, and we're after spring and we're before
Speaker 1: media days, and everyone's just got to find something to
Speaker 1: talk about. So if people stir things up, couldn't be us.
Speaker 1: We just react to the stirring, but we don't contribute
Speaker 1: to the stirring. So far, we've done I think a
Speaker 1: solid B plus job of that this year, and I'm
Speaker 1: trying to maintain. So we're gonna talk about some conference
Speaker 1: superiority stuff tonight. We're gonna have some Bowl predictions on
Speaker 1: the show. Somebody asked a question about Alabama's aura, and
Speaker 1: we will talk about that. We got Steve Sarkis and
Speaker 1: Joy maguire sniping a little bit, and as someone who
Speaker 1: has recently sat down with one and may just sit
Speaker 1: down with the other within the week, I will comment
Speaker 1: on the goings on out there in Texas, and I will,
Speaker 1: and I mean ever so briefly touch on this whole
Speaker 1: Senate bill. There are some things you need to know,
Speaker 1: and I will tell you they're watching us in Mayra, Texas, Omaha, Nebraska, Bogata, Columbia.
Speaker 1: Checked then in the live chat and slidell Louisiana. Thank
Speaker 1: you so much. I say thank you every time, but
Speaker 1: it's not in the script. I mean it. Thank you.
Speaker 1: We get to do this year round. I'm not forced
Speaker 1: to talk Spurs Nicks, not that there's anything wrong with that,
Speaker 1: but we just get to talk college football year round,
Speaker 1: and that's all we do because that's really what we're
Speaker 1: passionate about around here, and it's because of you. So
Speaker 1: just one small request, if you're not already subscribed to
Speaker 1: the channel, subscribe to the channel, because that is how
Speaker 1: we keep this show the way we want it. By we,
Speaker 1: I mean you and I because if you're here, I
Speaker 1: presume that you want college football year round as well.
Speaker 1: Big week for the Speaker series because there have been
Speaker 1: some allegations thrown around about us in the past. You know,
Speaker 1: about whether G five Josh is dead, Jesse. Some people
Speaker 1: think G five Josh is dead, and I've told you
Speaker 1: five Josh is not dead slash G six Josh. But
Speaker 1: you know what we'll find out this week. We'll find
Speaker 1: out this week. In the meantime, let's dive into the mailbag.
Speaker 1: Sometimes we go mailbag to lead the show off, and
Speaker 1: one of you, you were noticing some things this week
Speaker 1: about some comments that had come out of these various
Speaker 1: spring meetings. So Josh from Miami, Florida, said, did you
Speaker 1: see where Brett McMurphy had a poll where the SEC
Speaker 1: and the Big Ten are basically even in terms of
Speaker 1: being the number one conference? What says you? Well, the
Speaker 1: first thing I say, Josh is have you talked to
Speaker 1: Jesse and has Jesse told you that we have proof
Speaker 1: that this pole even happened? I mean, do we know
Speaker 1: that the poll exists? Okay, well, let's take a look
Speaker 1: at the poll them because I've got I gotta see
Speaker 1: the wording from myself. Not that I'm calling you a liar, Josh,
Speaker 1: but I gotta see the wording. So Brett McMurphy's wording
Speaker 1: was SEC Commission Greg Sanki said the SEC is quote
Speaker 1: by far the strongest football league unquote. Do you agree
Speaker 1: which conference is the strongest football league? That was a
Speaker 1: poll question from Brett McMurphy, friend of the program. The SEC,
Speaker 1: by zero point one percentage points ends up taking the
Speaker 1: number one spot. So you're asking, Josh, do I agree
Speaker 1: with these results? No? I don't. The Big Ten's the
Speaker 1: best conference in college football right now, So I would
Speaker 1: have voted Big Ten. It turns out my vote would
Speaker 1: have tied it up, so my apologies to everyone, and
Speaker 1: then we would have gone to a runoff, and I
Speaker 1: don't even know how that works in Twitter poll. So yeah,
Speaker 1: the Big Ten's is the best conference in college football
Speaker 1: right now. So no, I don't agree with the Twitter
Speaker 1: poll results. Now, what Brett McMurphy said there, as you'll notice,
Speaker 1: is by far the strongest football league. Well those weren't
Speaker 1: his words, those were the words of the SEC commissioner.
Speaker 1: So I'll get to that in a second. But look,
Speaker 1: let's just rerack the balls here for a second. No immunity.
Speaker 1: I know what the argument for the SEC is. I
Speaker 1: make it a lot of times on this show. But
Speaker 1: I'm not talking about conference superiority. But even even if
Speaker 1: I was, like if I had to take the side
Speaker 1: of the SEC, I just talked about conference depth, which
Speaker 1: is the same thing Greg Sinkie's talked about. But nobody
Speaker 1: judges leagues from the middle of the pack. Like, let's
Speaker 1: be real, now, if the SEC was in the Big
Speaker 1: TENHS position, all you guys would be banging the drum
Speaker 1: of Ohio State, Michigan, and Indiana past three national champs.
Speaker 1: That's how you judge conferences now, It would be different
Speaker 1: if it was one team, if it was Ohio State
Speaker 1: that had won back to back to back titles and
Speaker 1: everyone else sucked, that's a little bit different. But having
Speaker 1: three different teams win three different national championships over the
Speaker 1: last three years, and then you got Oregon sitting there
Speaker 1: as a prime candidate to maybe make it a fourth
Speaker 1: and four years. For all we know this year, Yes,
Speaker 1: that's the best conference in college football. We don't really
Speaker 1: need to argue how Vanderbilt stacks up against Iowa or
Speaker 1: Michigan State, all due respect, but if you did want
Speaker 1: to argue conference depth, yeah, I do think that's a
Speaker 1: little different conversation. But I do want to go back
Speaker 1: to what Greg SANKI was talking about because I do
Speaker 1: think there's some different layers to this. Okay, so I've
Speaker 1: already answered the question Big Ten's the best conference in
Speaker 1: college football. But Brett McMurphy put up this Greg sank quote.
Speaker 1: This is from SEC spring meetings about a week ago.
Speaker 1: This was a quote from the league commissioner. He said,
Speaker 1: if you look at the entirety of our football league,
Speaker 1: we are by far the most competitive and the strongest
Speaker 1: in football by far. The depth of this league. This
Speaker 1: league stands alone. I don't have a huge issue with
Speaker 1: most of what he said there. It really is all
Speaker 1: in the eyes of the beholder. Conference superiority, as Memo
Speaker 1: once said, is in the eyes of the beholder. If
Speaker 1: best means deepest to you, the SEC is the best
Speaker 1: in college football. I choose to look at the top,
Speaker 1: and at the top, the Big ten's the best, and
Speaker 1: I think disproportionately, that's how most people, including me, judge
Speaker 1: best conferences. So it's the Big Ten for me. However,
Speaker 1: if you then want to remove it a little bit
Speaker 1: and go with all these different qualifiers, like you want
Speaker 1: to ask about the most entertaining league, the most parody
Speaker 1: wrought league, the most competitively balanced league, Well, I would
Speaker 1: actually argue the Big twelve has been the most competitively
Speaker 1: balanced for a little while. But you know, comparing these
Speaker 1: two leagues, yeah, the SEC. I think the bottom of
Speaker 1: the SEC is probably ahead of the bottom third or
Speaker 1: pybly a bottom quarter of the Big Ten. You can
Speaker 1: make that argument. I wouldn't really mind that a whole lot.
Speaker 1: I don't really think it matters, although it could be
Speaker 1: argued that it matters when it comes to strength of schedule,
Speaker 1: So if you want to argue the strength of conference
Speaker 1: schedules are tougher than the SEC, that's fine. If you
Speaker 1: want to argue that the overall lineup of games is
Speaker 1: more appealing and more entertaining on a Saturday, these sound like, oh,
Speaker 1: I don't know what you would call them. They sound
Speaker 1: like backup arguments when you can't tout the main argument,
Speaker 1: which is just we're the best at the top. But
Speaker 1: if that's the route you want to go, then I'm
Speaker 1: happy to agree with you on that, just as long
Speaker 1: as you circle back around and acknowledge why you've resorted
Speaker 1: to that, Because, Jesse, what I noticed when the SEC
Speaker 1: was running off that string of consecutive national championships is
Speaker 1: no one was talking about the things they're talking about now.
Speaker 1: So you're having to resort to these things, which is fine,
Speaker 1: but let's just make sure we tell the truth about that. However,
Speaker 1: it is truth. It is definitely truth about the entertainment aspect.
Speaker 1: Like I work in the media business, so I pay
Speaker 1: a little more attention to this than I talk about
Speaker 1: on the show. But I remember when we were at CBS,
Speaker 1: still in the latter days, maybe like the last year,
Speaker 1: when I was at CBS. I was so mad that
Speaker 1: they didn't even put a competitive bid on the table
Speaker 1: for the SEC contract and ESPN got the whole thing,
Speaker 1: and they didn't make a serious run at that. I
Speaker 1: don't even think they submitted a bid for the playoffs.
Speaker 1: And I was mad about that because I wanted to
Speaker 1: be network that had the most valuable inventory. And so,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm not at CBS anymore. But obviously CBS
Speaker 1: has a deal. They get a package of Big Ten games.
Speaker 1: NBC's kind of got something similar. You know that Fox
Speaker 1: has the number one game per week from the Big Ten,
Speaker 1: but man, some of those some of those lineups are sparse,
Speaker 1: and Fox gets first pick. But even with Fox, like
Speaker 1: the Big Ten does not really schedule up all that
Speaker 1: much in out of conference play early in the year.
Speaker 1: Ohio State, notwithstanding, they played Texas this year, last year,
Speaker 1: Michigan's played Oklahoma this year last year. But there aren't
Speaker 1: a ton of marquee matchups as evidenced by the Big
Speaker 1: Noon on Fox. The Big Noon kickoff lineup came out
Speaker 1: the other day. Jesse, I think Kent State's on there, right,
Speaker 1: and Ohio's on there? Who is it? It's it's North Texas, Indiana,
Speaker 1: and then they got a huge one in ann Arbor
Speaker 1: in week two of Oklahoma and Michigan, and then it's
Speaker 1: Kent State, Ohio State. It's just not a lot to
Speaker 1: choose from. And then you look at those lineups, those
Speaker 1: triple hitters that ABC gets to stack up. So yeah, man,
Speaker 1: if you wanted to talk about ratings, I don't care.
Speaker 1: But if you want to talk about that, and you
Speaker 1: want to talk about entertaining top to bottom and keeps
Speaker 1: you tuned in, great, okay, advantage SEC. I'm pretty sure
Speaker 1: that conference are traded in a heartbeat right now if
Speaker 1: they could have back to back to back national titles.
Speaker 1: So I don't really know what the end result of
Speaker 1: that argument is. Here's my question, how long does this
Speaker 1: status quo last? How long do we continue to look
Speaker 1: at this picture and say, well, the SEC may be
Speaker 1: the deepest conference, but man, the Big ten's the best
Speaker 1: at the top. Is that just something that starts to
Speaker 1: become a trend that's a constant over the next five
Speaker 1: years or is it just that? Is it a trend
Speaker 1: right now? Is it cyclical? Is there like an ebb
Speaker 1: to the flow? What could happen which I would laugh
Speaker 1: at is someone like Texas any given year, Let's say
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six. Let's say Texas just rattles off dominant
Speaker 1: season this year and they win the national title, but
Speaker 1: elsewhere nobody else in the SEC even sniffed it. What
Speaker 1: would be funny is everybody who thinks national titles are
Speaker 1: the end all be all would look and say, well,
Speaker 1: I guess the SEC reigns supreme now, and you'd have
Speaker 1: other people look and say, well, in totality, the league
Speaker 1: was worse this year than it has been in recent years.
Speaker 1: So yeah, there's context that has to be added. I
Speaker 1: get all of it. Here's what I do know. I've
Speaker 1: never seen the SEC take the field. I've never seen
Speaker 1: the Big Ten take the field. I've seen Georgia take
Speaker 1: the field. I've seen Penn State take the field. So
Speaker 1: I kind of choose to discuss it like that. But
Speaker 1: I understand that doesn't look as good on the thumbnail,
Speaker 1: and I understand we don't get nearly as many questions
Speaker 1: in the inbox about that. Let us move on. Eleven minutes,
Speaker 1: Jesse not one of those thirty minute specials for the
Speaker 1: A Bloc tonight. So there's been there's been some argument.
Speaker 1: There's been some some chirping back and forth. James from Midland,
Speaker 1: Texas hit me and said, Sark calls out Texas Tech schedule,
Speaker 1: and Joey Maguire then says, play us, you coward, and
Speaker 1: now crickets. Is Sark running away from a check his
Speaker 1: mouth could in cash beautifully worded question. I assume most
Speaker 1: of you know what James is talking about, but if
Speaker 1: you don't, Sark was I believe the Houston Touchdown Club.
Speaker 1: I want to say that's where he was recently, and
Speaker 1: he made a comment, truthfully that he made to me
Speaker 1: a month ago, but it was off the record, so
Speaker 1: I didn't run my mouth about it. But then Sark
Speaker 1: chose to say it publicly. So whatever, it's his belief
Speaker 1: that his backups could go undefeated against Texas Tech schedule.
Speaker 1: Now it is important to note what he did not say,
Speaker 1: because here's what he did say. I'm about to read it,
Speaker 1: but let's just make sure because we had a lot
Speaker 1: of questions in the inbox asking me about what he
Speaker 1: did not say. And what he did not say is
Speaker 1: they could beat Texas Tech with their backups. Okay, because
Speaker 1: a lot of you heard it wrong, So I did
Speaker 1: not put those on the air. I put that question
Speaker 1: on the air because that question was worded correctly. Here's
Speaker 1: what sark did say. There is a team in our
Speaker 1: state that plays in another conference that has a schedule
Speaker 1: that I would argue if I played with our twos
Speaker 1: in our threes, we could go undefeated and they'll probably
Speaker 1: make the playoff this year. He's talking about Texas Tech.
Speaker 1: All right, I'll give you my take on that in
Speaker 1: a second. But then the rest of the story is
Speaker 1: all Paul Harvey would say. Once upon a time when
Speaker 1: I was a youth in Georgia was Joey McGuire was
Speaker 1: not going to sit still and take that. And so
Speaker 1: word got to Joey McGuire and Joey McGuire, I think
Speaker 1: was at Big twelve Spring meetings, which has not become
Speaker 1: a full on circus like the SECS has as of yet,
Speaker 1: and Joey McGuire decided to do what people in West
Speaker 1: Texas do. You take a shot at him. That's fine,
Speaker 1: but they're probably going to return serve at the very least.
Speaker 1: So here was Joey McGuire's response to Steve Sarkesian's quote.
Speaker 2: And I said, there's no way they're talking about us,
Speaker 2: because Sarks a pretty tough guys. Teams are really tough,
Speaker 2: and I would think that if he was talking about us,
Speaker 2: that he would call us out, like he wouldn't just say,
Speaker 2: you know, just kind of this comment of well, there's
Speaker 2: another team in our state, and so I guess he
Speaker 2: was talking about us. So I've actually talked to Keith
Speaker 2: Patterson and I've talked to GJ. Kenny, and they're willing
Speaker 2: to take our games and Aveline Christian will go to
Speaker 2: Texas State. We'll buy our contract out of Ablene Christian.
Speaker 2: I'm sure because Texas has got a lot of money,
Speaker 2: they can buy their contract out. But I do know
Speaker 2: there's a lot of Red Raiders that will help them
Speaker 2: buy that contract out if they don't want to. And
Speaker 2: they can come to Love a week one and you know,
Speaker 2: we can figure out if they're twos and threes can
Speaker 2: win this conference.
Speaker 1: I know not everyone's a body language expert, but if
Speaker 1: you are a body language expert, rich rod rig has
Speaker 1: actually had the best quote in that whole sound bite,
Speaker 1: but he didn't open his mouth, but if you can
Speaker 1: read body language, rich rod said a ton. He was
Speaker 1: just kind of seeded off to the immediate left of
Speaker 1: Joey McGuire stage right. I guess so that was great.
Speaker 1: We need to get rich Rod's thoughts on that, because
Speaker 1: I don't think he's commented on it publicly. Look, that
Speaker 1: is Joey McGuire. That's the entire attitude of Texas Tech.
Speaker 1: Texas Tech has either become the heel athletic department in
Speaker 1: college football or the biggest babyface athletic department in college football,
Speaker 1: depending on your point of view. Either way, it's wonderful
Speaker 1: to me because I go back to a couple of
Speaker 1: beliefs I have about sports, college football included, not everybody
Speaker 1: has to like each other. In fact, I encourage this
Speaker 1: kind of environment as a child of the spur Your era.
Speaker 1: I encourage an environment where everyone doesn't get along and
Speaker 1: everyone's not concerned with hurting someone else's feelings. This time
Speaker 1: of year, especially, you want to take a shot at someone,
Speaker 1: Take a shot at someone. I don't care they're going
Speaker 1: to have a microphone because everyone does now, and they're
Speaker 1: gonna get to take a shot back at you. But
Speaker 1: if the worst thing in the world is that the
Speaker 1: head coach at Texas Tech and the head coach at
Speaker 1: Texas aren't getting along. If the worst thing in the
Speaker 1: world is people in West Texas and people in Austin,
Speaker 1: Texas figure out we don't have a whole heck of
Speaker 1: a lot in common, which is not breaking news, by
Speaker 1: the way, then I'm happy to live in that world. Frankly,
Speaker 1: it had gotten a little too cushy in hear from
Speaker 1: my liking anyway. Too many people just want to be friends. Look,
Speaker 1: you want a friend, go to the playground. This is
Speaker 1: college football, this is major major collegiate athletics. This is
Speaker 1: not the worst thing in the world. Okay, So that's
Speaker 1: the first thing. The second thing is that is the
Speaker 1: attitude Joey maguire should have. And of course the scheduling
Speaker 1: challenge is not going to be I think Texas has
Speaker 1: the toughest schedule in the country this year. They caught
Speaker 1: him in a perfect spot. It's just a little chess
Speaker 1: move by Joey McGuire. There. Sark ran his mouth a
Speaker 1: little bit and I'm gonna address what he said in
Speaker 1: a second, and Joey McGuire heard it and said, you
Speaker 1: know what, let's throw out a challenge. We know that
Speaker 1: they're not going to accept we'd be happy to play them.
Speaker 1: Texas has no illusions of adding to what is already
Speaker 1: probably the toughest schedule in the country. So, like you knew,
Speaker 1: it was a risk free shot back. But the overarching
Speaker 1: I guess story here is Texas Tech could be happy
Speaker 1: to join the SEC if the SEC called and invited him,
Speaker 1: but that call's not coming. So Texas Tech plays the
Speaker 1: hand that's dealt to them every year. They can only
Speaker 1: play the schedule they play, and they play it last
Speaker 1: year very effectively, and they'll probably play it very effectively
Speaker 1: this year. And that's whether or without Breton Soresby at quarterback.
Speaker 1: But here's the other part of it, all right, So
Speaker 1: Joey McGuire, I'm not mad at him because Joey MacGuire
Speaker 1: probably handled it exactly as I would. And then on
Speaker 1: the flip side, I don't think Sark's even wrong, which
Speaker 1: is the crazy part. So here's a little backstory. When
Speaker 1: I was out in Austin last month, we did to
Speaker 1: sit down with Sark. I hung out with him for
Speaker 1: a little while afterwards, and we got to talking about
Speaker 1: things of this nature. Okay, So the part of the
Speaker 1: conversation that's no longer privileged is the part he went
Speaker 1: public with. So he rattles that off. He says, man,
Speaker 1: I really believe our twos could go undefeated against Texas
Speaker 1: Tech schedule, and that's a power force schedule. What we
Speaker 1: were talking about was the great disparity in strength of
Speaker 1: schedule in this sport. Okay, So I shot back and
Speaker 1: I said, you have the opportunity, you slash. You had
Speaker 1: the opportunity to play Texas Tech schedule every year. It
Speaker 1: was called staying in the Big twelve. But you guys
Speaker 1: didn't want to do that. What in Sark's decision. But
Speaker 1: they didn't want to do that. They wanted to come
Speaker 1: to the SEC. So to whom much more is given,
Speaker 1: much more is going to be asked. So we have
Speaker 1: all that, and everyone understands that's the world we live in.
Speaker 1: But I don't even think he's wrong. Now, you can't
Speaker 1: prove a counterfactual. So Texas's backups are not going to
Speaker 1: play Texas Tech schedule, and so we don't know how
Speaker 1: they would do. I will say, if we went to
Speaker 1: FanDuel Mic right now and had the traders over their
Speaker 1: work up hypothetical lines for whatever that's worth, Yeah, they'd
Speaker 1: probably be favored in most of these games Texas's backups. Yeah,
Speaker 1: whatever that's worth is whatever that's worth. Obviously, the overarching
Speaker 1: point he's trying to make is they were sitting there
Speaker 1: with three losses last year, and they firmly believed that
Speaker 1: they were a prisoner of scheduling up scheduling Ohio State
Speaker 1: out of conference, not to mention playing a full SEC slate.
Speaker 1: Opponents to that theory would say, you didn't get punished
Speaker 1: for playing Ohio State. You got punished for losing to
Speaker 1: a really bad Florida team. And then I think the
Speaker 1: deeper dive there and the the opinion that I have
Speaker 1: is I'm not even sure they got totally imprisoned because
Speaker 1: they lost those two games. Jesse. I think the committee
Speaker 1: remembered how they were dead in the watering it's Mississippi State,
Speaker 1: how they struggled to get past Kentucky, and those were
Speaker 1: in wins, very close wins. So Texas was not a
Speaker 1: dominant team last year. But Sarks looked, he looks at
Speaker 1: it and says, you know what, even if we weren't
Speaker 1: a dominant team, we could have scheduled cream puffs and
Speaker 1: just skated by on the strength of our conference schedule,
Speaker 1: we would have been a playoff team. We got punished
Speaker 1: for scheduling up in his point is, and it's not
Speaker 1: entirely unfounded. Is there a lot of other P four
Speaker 1: schedules out there? We'd probably go undefeated against and we'd
Speaker 1: be the same team in both scenarios, but we'd be
Speaker 1: left out in one and we'd be in the playoff
Speaker 1: in the other. Now, to sarks credit, it sounds like
Speaker 1: he's making an argument for playoff expansion there. He's not.
Speaker 1: He's not. And this is where I kid you not.
Speaker 1: When I was talking to him, I think my voice
Speaker 1: raised louder than his did, because this has been one
Speaker 1: of my soapboxes I've been on for a long time.
Speaker 1: Is I don't have a problem with you scheduling really tough.
Speaker 1: I don't have a problem with someone not playing a
Speaker 1: tough schedule as long as we're going to get to
Speaker 1: the finish line, and I have committee protocol in place
Speaker 1: that properly judges your record and your body of work
Speaker 1: strength to schedule. I always have believed it's been misinterpreted.
Speaker 1: I've always believed that there is a real seat at
Speaker 1: the table, or should be a seat at the table
Speaker 1: for a Vegas odds maker's perspective, not on your record
Speaker 1: against the spread. I'm not talking about any of that foolishness.
Speaker 1: I'm talking about coming in and providing metrics that really,
Speaker 1: really are the definitive stance on how tough your schedule was.
Speaker 1: And if you need to put a nine to three
Speaker 1: team in over an eleven to one team, so be it.
Speaker 1: I wouldn't bat an eye at that. But there is
Speaker 1: still this really, really archaic clinging to you are what
Speaker 1: your record says you are mentality, and enough of college
Speaker 1: football doom that people like start look and say, why
Speaker 1: should we even schedule up if all it's going to
Speaker 1: come down to is wins and losses at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, Which makes sense in pro sports because
Speaker 1: everyone plays roughly the same kind of schedule, but makes
Speaker 1: very little sense in college sports because people play varying
Speaker 1: degrees of difficulty and schedule. I get what they're both saying.
Speaker 1: None of them, neither one of them is even wrong.
Speaker 1: My feelings aren't hurt a bit by it. But Texas,
Speaker 1: just to give you an idea of this year's landscape,
Speaker 1: we went over and looked at the odds to win
Speaker 1: a National Championship on FanDuel. Texas plays eight teams this
Speaker 1: year that have top twenty odds to win the national title.
Speaker 1: Texas Tech plays zero teams in the top thirty guys.
Speaker 1: That doesn't say anything about how good Texas or Texas
Speaker 1: Tech will be. It only says something about the relative
Speaker 1: challenge that their schedules will present them. Now here's the
Speaker 1: other follow up to that. This is just preseason stuff,
Speaker 1: so the regular season will ultimately determine how tough their
Speaker 1: schedules were. But the season hasn't happened yet, so this
Speaker 1: is the only view that we have. But rest assured
Speaker 1: Texas is going to play a pretty tough schedule and
Speaker 1: Texas Tech's strength of schedule will pale in comparison to Texas.
Speaker 1: Now what it could be is Texas Tech ends up
Speaker 1: being the best team in the country anyway, and it
Speaker 1: doesn't matter. I've always said it doesn't matter who won
Speaker 1: the Super Bowl lest year. Jesse. Remind me right quick, Seahawks.
Speaker 1: If the Seahawks played hardaway high school schedule in Columbus, Georgia,
Speaker 1: they still would have been the Seattle Seahawks. As it
Speaker 1: turns out, they played an NFC West schedule, and they
Speaker 1: still won the Super Bowl. But my point is, you
Speaker 1: are the team you are, So it's not like this
Speaker 1: eliminator that, oh, it's impossible for Texas Tech to be
Speaker 1: the best team in the country. Look at their schedule,
Speaker 1: their schedules, their schedule. Teams aren't their schedule, but teams
Speaker 1: play their schedule. And so if we get to the
Speaker 1: end of the road, and this is really the only
Speaker 1: point Sarks made, and if we get to the end
Speaker 1: of the road, and hypothetically it came down to nine
Speaker 1: and three Texas getting in or ten and two Texas
Speaker 1: Tech getting in or nine in three Texas versus eleven
Speaker 1: and one, Texas Tech starts looking at it and saying,
Speaker 1: I highly doubt that committee's putting a nine to three
Speaker 1: team in over an eleven and one team, even if
Speaker 1: there's a mountain of data that supports one over the other,
Speaker 1: because they can't get past that win loss record. And
Speaker 1: you know what, maybe that's just the price you pay
Speaker 1: for being a member of the SEC. Every other aspect
Speaker 1: of the sport is tilted in your favor. I do
Speaker 1: not believe if Steve Sarkisian and Texas were presented the
Speaker 1: option today to just trade places in life with Texas
Speaker 1: Tech that they would. And so if you are accepting
Speaker 1: your position, it comes with pros and cons. It comes
Speaker 1: with pluses and minuses, and this just happens to be
Speaker 1: one of the Minuses's that's the only way I've talked
Speaker 1: to myself off the ledge, because I told him, man,
Speaker 1: like I almost I think I screamed once Savannah State
Speaker 1: was there. She saw it. A couple of people were
Speaker 1: in there actually, but like, I get worked up over
Speaker 1: that stuff. But then I just have to tell myself self, ultimately,
Speaker 1: you're gonna have a show the following Sunday. Either way,
Speaker 1: you personally are not losing any of these games. And
Speaker 1: if you are basically presenting the supporting argument for a
Speaker 1: playoff expansion, you need to be careful about how loud
Speaker 1: you yell it. Jesse, did you know last week that
Speaker 1: when I held up that football is Coming t shirt?
Speaker 1: We saw some web traffic. They didn't crash the site,
Speaker 1: but we saw some pretty significant web traffic, which begs
Speaker 1: the question why haven't I been holding up petstatemateial dot
Speaker 1: com products on set before this? And the answer is
Speaker 1: I forget to bring them in. That's really all there
Speaker 1: is to it, but take my word for it, or
Speaker 1: look at the TV screen. Look the monitor that director
Speaker 1: Bradley has dialed up over here. Football is coming. The
Speaker 1: hats are there, the sleeveless options are there. We've got
Speaker 1: the baby onesies there. There's a lot of new products
Speaker 1: over there at the Peyt State Store. Paystatematerial dot com.
Speaker 1: They make great Father's Day gifts, birthday gifts, random things
Speaker 1: on a Tuesday. Because your paycheck there's a little more
Speaker 1: cheese on the whopper than you expected in the last paycheck,
Speaker 1: why not paystatematerial dot com. All right, let's move on.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna spend a ton of time on this,
Speaker 1: but I did promise that I would fill you in
Speaker 1: on my thoughts on this whole Senate bill thing. Ron
Speaker 1: from Cincinnati, Ohio, Why are we wasting time on a
Speaker 1: bill that we all know isn't gonna pass? Ran, Let
Speaker 1: me tell you why we're wasting time on a bill
Speaker 1: that we all know isn't gonna pass. Cause the bill
Speaker 1: is gonna pass. That's why we're spending more time on it,
Speaker 1: and that's why we're taking it a lot more seriously.
Speaker 1: You'll notice, as many of you have because I read
Speaker 1: your submissions in the in you'll notice that it seems
Speaker 1: like we've batted a thousand on predicting the way this
Speaker 1: is going to go, and all the way back to January,
Speaker 1: talking about how the Score Act was going to die
Speaker 1: again because it was terminally flawed again, and how despite
Speaker 1: the SEC and the Big Ten putting their full lobbying
Speaker 1: weight behind it, it was going to be a moot
Speaker 1: point because it was going to die again. And then
Speaker 1: it died. You'll notice how during all that I kept
Speaker 1: telling you, you know, what they should do. What they
Speaker 1: should do is they should take the versions of the
Speaker 1: School Act that work, i e. Governance, and they should
Speaker 1: take this SBA overhaul, this Sport's Broadcasting Act overhaul concept
Speaker 1: aka revenue, and they ought to just merge it in
Speaker 1: one bill well long and behold Jesse. It turns out
Speaker 1: the Senate was working on that all along. It turns
Speaker 1: out Ted Cruz and Maria Cantwell and the folks there
Speaker 1: in the Senate Commerce Committee just happened to be working
Speaker 1: on it all along. Dumb luck there. We got lucky
Speaker 1: with that one. So you'll notice we had a pretty
Speaker 1: good hit rate. As it turns out talking about this
Speaker 1: so far this year. So I am going to put
Speaker 1: that hit rate on the line here tonight, Jesse. I
Speaker 1: am going to put our perfect record on Senate bill
Speaker 1: discussion on the line, and I'm gonna say, not only
Speaker 1: is this bill going to pass, it's going to pass comfortably,
Speaker 1: it's going to pass the Senate comfortably, and it's going
Speaker 1: to pass the House comfortably. So let's just write that down.
Speaker 1: It's May thirty first, still got a ways to go,
Speaker 1: It's May thirty first, but let's just see how Let's
Speaker 1: see how that stands the test of time. But here's
Speaker 1: what I want to ask you, guys, because there have
Speaker 1: been a lot of people having a lot of takes
Speaker 1: on this, and truthfully, a lot of you are probably
Speaker 1: driving around listening to this show or watching it live
Speaker 1: right now and you'd like, don't even know what's in
Speaker 1: the bill. The very very long and short of it is,
Speaker 1: there has been an attempt by people who screwed up
Speaker 1: college sports for a long time and could not even
Speaker 1: so much is right rules that were enforceable because they
Speaker 1: were illegal, to get Congress to bail them out. We
Speaker 1: can't do our jobs. Please make it legal for us
Speaker 1: to do our jobs. Okay. Not surprisingly, they could not
Speaker 1: get enough support. They couldn't get bipartisan support. We screwed up.
Speaker 1: Please bail us out unless you run a major bank.
Speaker 1: Turns out does not get bipartisan support very often. And
Speaker 1: so enough people looked and said, wait a second, what
Speaker 1: about the players, what about the non revenue sports. You
Speaker 1: guys have screwed your world up nine ways from Sunday.
Speaker 1: If we give you rules, and we're able to give
Speaker 1: you enforcement via anti trust exemption, how are you gonna
Speaker 1: fix anything? You guys are running yourselves into the ground financially.
Speaker 1: So then there was this bright idea I don't say
Speaker 1: that sarcastically, to amend the Sports Broadcasting Act, which would
Speaker 1: allow college football to do what the NFL did a
Speaker 1: long time ago is take one pooled media rights deal
Speaker 1: and then bid it out. You'll notice how there is
Speaker 1: no NFC West or AFC South media rights deal. There's
Speaker 1: just an NFL media rights deal. And college football doesn't
Speaker 1: do that. College football can do that if the SBA
Speaker 1: is amended, and I think it will be. And at
Speaker 1: that point, you don't force conferences to pull the media rights,
Speaker 1: but you present the option to and the theory goes,
Speaker 1: and I happen to buy into it because it's true,
Speaker 1: despite the best lobbying and pr efforts out there of
Speaker 1: certain big conferences, it's true that it would put a
Speaker 1: ton more money on the table. And then the follow
Speaker 1: up theory is that that waterfall would absolve a lot
Speaker 1: of the financial crises that currently face college athletics. Notice
Speaker 1: I didn't say it would put out all the fires.
Speaker 1: I said it would alleviate a lot of the crises.
Speaker 1: But beyond all that, I want to ask you guys
Speaker 1: a simple, very selfish question tonight, because this is really
Speaker 1: where my head's on this, and with all due respect,
Speaker 1: I would advise your head to be in a similar
Speaker 1: place on this. It's kind of a play on that
Speaker 1: Nick Saban question from like a decade and a half ago,
Speaker 1: only he was talking about offense and I'm talking about
Speaker 1: the overall sport. The only thing you ought to really
Speaker 1: be asking yourself, as a fan of college football when
Speaker 1: it comes to this Senate bill, is what do you
Speaker 1: want college football to be? Not a guy on Twitter,
Speaker 1: not a lawyer on TV, not your buddies, not anyone else.
Speaker 1: Just be selfish for a second. Everyone else is Why
Speaker 1: don't you just be selfish for a second, and you're
Speaker 1: sitting in Des Moines, Iowa, Fresno, California, Valdosta, Georgia, wherever
Speaker 1: you're watching the show tonight or listening to the show,
Speaker 1: and just look in the mirror and ask yourself self,
Speaker 1: what do I love about college football? Me and only me?
Speaker 1: Just look out for number one? What do I love
Speaker 1: about college football? What appeals to me? What draws me
Speaker 1: to it? Why am I so passionate about this game?
Speaker 1: Why do I love it more than any other sport
Speaker 1: in the world? And then ask yourself, what are we
Speaker 1: lacking now that we could gain from the wording of
Speaker 1: this bill? An imperfect bill. It's the very nature of
Speaker 1: bipartisanship is no one gets everything they want. But ask yourself,
Speaker 1: what do you want? So I'm going to tell you
Speaker 1: what I want. I'll tell you what I want out
Speaker 1: of college football. I would love to see structure. Therefore,
Speaker 1: I would love to see rules that make sense and
Speaker 1: that are enforceable so it doesn't really have a Wild
Speaker 1: West feel to it. I would love to, at least
Speaker 1: for the time being, stop worrying about the constant financial
Speaker 1: cliff that seems to be in the mere distance. And
Speaker 1: that is the fault of many, many people, mostly just
Speaker 1: the adults in the room, well, the people who are
Speaker 1: of adult age in the room. But whoever's fault it is,
Speaker 1: I'd love to take care of that. I would love
Speaker 1: for a track and field student at Iowa State to
Speaker 1: not feel that their scholarship may one day not exist
Speaker 1: anymore because people screwed football up for a long time.
Speaker 1: I would love that. I'd love to live in that world,
Speaker 1: and I would love fans and players to win both.
Speaker 1: I would love both fans and players to win. And
Speaker 1: so if you tell me that you have things like
Speaker 1: five years to play five in this bill, if you
Speaker 1: have one penalty free transfer unless your coach leaves, in
Speaker 1: which case you know you have the addendum language in there.
Speaker 1: If you tell me that, then that to me means, Wow,
Speaker 1: the transfer portal's not out of control anymore. In this structure,
Speaker 1: people aren't playing for four or five schools. Full grown
Speaker 1: adults twenty eight years of age are not threatening to
Speaker 1: come back and play college football. I love that. I
Speaker 1: love what it does to the value of a commitment
Speaker 1: out of high school. I love what it does to
Speaker 1: completely reignite what high school recruiting used to mean and
Speaker 1: feel like, because there's a much much higher percentage chance
Speaker 1: that a guy who commits to South Carolina out of
Speaker 1: high school will be there three years from now. I
Speaker 1: love what it does to reinforce the G five rosters
Speaker 1: because you will have far less total and complete rating
Speaker 1: of those rosters. But more importantly, if you can only
Speaker 1: move once, think about how much more strategic you have
Speaker 1: to be on that. And I also I look at it,
Speaker 1: especially from the second part of this, the revenue piece
Speaker 1: of it, and I think to myself, how awesome could
Speaker 1: a viewing experience be for a fan if they were
Speaker 1: to ever pool media rights. Now, there's a long way
Speaker 1: to go on this, and the SEC and the Big
Speaker 1: Ten are diametrically opposed to it. But I don't think
Speaker 1: we've seen the last of that story. But I'm asking myself,
Speaker 1: I'm being selfish for a second. I think about an
Speaker 1: Ohio State fan, a Michigan fan, a Penn State fan.
Speaker 1: I think about fans of major schools in the Big Ten.
Speaker 1: You guys live in a world right now where you
Speaker 1: know if you've got a big game on the calendar.
Speaker 1: Ninety percent chance it's gonna kick off at noon Eastern,
Speaker 1: and your boy here does not mind a noon kickoff.
Speaker 1: But I'm in the vast minority, and I know that
Speaker 1: like Ohio State just never gets to play major primetime
Speaker 1: games at home, which is just stupid. But that's the
Speaker 1: world we live in right now because everyone's locked into
Speaker 1: one network. The SEC's got a great deal with ESPN
Speaker 1: because they can just stack them triple header style, and
Speaker 1: so all the big games are in primetime. But that's
Speaker 1: not the way it is for the Big Ten. And
Speaker 1: forget which conference you're in. Think about this. Think about
Speaker 1: a world where everyone's making more money in the aggregate.
Speaker 1: But for us as fans, if I am a Michigan fan,
Speaker 1: I may be playing on Fox one week at noon,
Speaker 1: I may be playing on ABC in primetime the next week.
Speaker 1: I may be a mid afternoon kickoff on NBC the
Speaker 1: next week. And so all the networks are invested in
Speaker 1: all the leagues instead of this silo and tesstuous marketing
Speaker 1: approach that you see right now, where it's like one
Speaker 1: conference and one network locked arm in arm and basically
Speaker 1: you might as well fuse the two logos. That world stupid,
Speaker 1: but it's the one we live in right now. The
Speaker 1: NFL did away with this a long time ago, so
Speaker 1: if you ever want to know about a category, I
Speaker 1: think we should copy the NFL in it's that it's
Speaker 1: the way media rights work now. Networks don't like that
Speaker 1: because they got to pay a lot more money in
Speaker 1: that kind of world. But I'm not a network executive.
Speaker 1: I'm a fan of college football, so I love a
Speaker 1: world where all of the networks are invested in all
Speaker 1: the leagues because they cover all the leagues. And I
Speaker 1: also love that all networks theoretically are invested in the
Speaker 1: college football playoff, although that's a tirely separate argument here.
Speaker 1: We're just talking about media rights right now. But I
Speaker 1: love that as a fan. Okay, I would argue most
Speaker 1: of you probably agree with that. But the tough part
Speaker 1: about supporting this bill is I agree with like sixty
Speaker 1: percent of the opposition's viewpoints on it. Because if you
Speaker 1: oppose this bill, I'm not so much talking about the
Speaker 1: people who say, oh, this victimizes the player. Screw that.
Speaker 1: No it doesn't know it doesn't at all. No, it
Speaker 1: does not. And if you really want to get a
Speaker 1: real worldview of this, just go campus to campus, Go
Speaker 1: talk to college football players, not the ones who are
Speaker 1: sent out there from organizations. I mean just normal everyday
Speaker 1: college football players and college athletes, but specifically college football players,
Speaker 1: and go look at their day to day lives. I
Speaker 1: do all year, I'm around them all year, and I
Speaker 1: can tell you there is none. I don't think, Jesse,
Speaker 1: I've ever heard any major arguments about quality of life
Speaker 1: and about being victimized. It's all. It's all adults that
Speaker 1: are speaking on behalf of players, almost without the player's
Speaker 1: involvement in it, And so I don't buy that part
Speaker 1: of it. The part I do by is you guys
Speaker 1: are pushing back on this bill and saying this is
Speaker 1: essentially bailing out terrible decision making. The adults who screwed
Speaker 1: it up are getting bailed out, And you're not wrong.
Speaker 1: You and I are locked arm in arm on that.
Speaker 1: If you want to talk about how administrative spending has
Speaker 1: been out of control, if you want to talk about
Speaker 1: how buyout structures have been out of control because it's
Speaker 1: monopoly money and they know that, Oh, don't worry, someone
Speaker 1: will take care of us. Well, we'll get bailed out
Speaker 1: one way or the other. Yeah, it's pathetic. It's pathetic.
Speaker 1: Those people ought not be in charge of anything, but
Speaker 1: it's the best we can do. If you guys could
Speaker 1: show me a magic lever where I could pull it
Speaker 1: and all of those people are flushed out during the process,
Speaker 1: I'd love to pull it right along with you. That'd
Speaker 1: be a bipartisan lever pull. I'd love to do that.
Speaker 1: It's not the world we live in. So in an
Speaker 1: idealistic world, I'd be happy to have that conversation with you,
Speaker 1: because you're right about it, even though you're opposing the
Speaker 1: viewpoint I have, I agree with you. But in a
Speaker 1: more realistic world, a lot of these folks are going
Speaker 1: to be around for a long time. They're just their
Speaker 1: career collegiate bureaucrats. Basically, this is all they have. They
Speaker 1: never built anything in their lives, so they got to
Speaker 1: leach on to what someone else built, or a bunch
Speaker 1: of people built a long time ago, and just ride
Speaker 1: it as long as they can. Realistically, they're going to
Speaker 1: be here. So is the bill a net positive or
Speaker 1: a net negative. It is a supreme net positive, supreme
Speaker 1: net positive. If selfishly I'm looking to get what I
Speaker 1: want out of college football, because it returns a lot
Speaker 1: of what's been missing in college football the last few years.
Speaker 1: Keep an eye on the SEC in the Big Ten
Speaker 1: in this. They opposed it, they currently oppose it. They
Speaker 1: lobbied hard against it, and I understand why. I understand
Speaker 1: why I disagree with them. This was the fun part, Jesse.
Speaker 1: I told you for like a month when we were
Speaker 1: talking to about this stuff and the comments, certain people
Speaker 1: in the comment section kept saying, Oh, man, you're just
Speaker 1: an SEC shill, or you're just a Big Ten shill.
Speaker 1: You're just shilling for the power to conferences. Me knowing
Speaker 1: all the while these people are in Washington lobbying hard
Speaker 1: against the bill that when it comes out I'm going
Speaker 1: to voice support of. And so now I'm taking a
Speaker 1: stance against the SEC in the Big Ten. I hope
Speaker 1: they don't get their way on this. They tend to
Speaker 1: get their way on it, but I hope they don't.
Speaker 1: What I do hope is I hope that, especially when
Speaker 1: it comes to the revenue sharing piece of all this,
Speaker 1: which is really the key, pretty much everyone wants rules
Speaker 1: that are enforceable. You got consensus on that. They don't
Speaker 1: want to have restrictive language placed on them, I e.
Speaker 1: Telling them who they can and can't add to their conferences,
Speaker 1: because really, there are a lot of folks in those
Speaker 1: leagues that love the super conference idea, that love the
Speaker 1: idea of just breaking away entirely, and I absolutely hate it,
Speaker 1: just at my core. I hate it. Everything you can
Speaker 1: do does not mean you should do so. A lot
Speaker 1: of people in these two leagues cried for a long time,
Speaker 1: we want help from congress Man. We want rules that
Speaker 1: are enforceable, and man, we want to back away from
Speaker 1: this financial cliff. We're all headed towards. Well, a bill
Speaker 1: just landed in your lap that gives you both of
Speaker 1: those things. And now you're about to be called. Your
Speaker 1: bluff's about to be called. Because if you meant what
Speaker 1: you said about the greater interest of college athletics, and
Speaker 1: a lot of you were on record, by the way,
Speaker 1: as saying you care about the greater good of college athletics,
Speaker 1: then this bill serves those interests. It gives you the
Speaker 1: enforcement piece, and it gives you the revenue piece. But
Speaker 1: you still fight it behind the scenes. Why Well, it's
Speaker 1: because it may not put you in the most pristine position.
Speaker 1: And that's okay. If you openly claim that you're only
Speaker 1: looking at for yourself, But that's not what you guys claim.
Speaker 1: You guys claim that you wanted what was best for
Speaker 1: the overall greater good of college athletics. Did you mean it?
Speaker 1: If you meant it, then you'll take a good hard
Speaker 1: look at concepts that would serve the greater overall interest
Speaker 1: to college athletics. But look, no one's asking the SEC
Speaker 1: in the Big Ten to go full charity case. Here.
Speaker 1: Here's what's going to end up happening. And this is
Speaker 1: why we're still very early in this game. I know
Speaker 1: the SEC came out immediately and said, yeah, we're totally
Speaker 1: opposed to this concept of pooling media rights. You just
Speaker 1: give that some time. Here's what the SEC is opposed to.
Speaker 1: The SEC as opposed to pooling media rights, not on
Speaker 1: their terms, the Big Ten as well. Now, the networks
Speaker 1: that are behind those two leagues, mainly Disney and Fox,
Speaker 1: they're against it full stop because it would cost them
Speaker 1: more money at the end of a day. But again,
Speaker 1: I don't run those networks, so I don't have to
Speaker 1: think like that. I think like a fan. But as
Speaker 1: for Greg Sanki or Tony Pittt for that matter, here's
Speaker 1: what that's going to end up looking like. They take
Speaker 1: a stand and say, yeah, we're not on board with that,
Speaker 1: and then those other conferences are going to have to
Speaker 1: suck it up and say, all right, well, what if
Speaker 1: we negotiate with you? And then the SEC in the
Speaker 1: Big ten will come to the table, or at least
Speaker 1: they should. It doesn't cost anything to listen. And what
Speaker 1: should end up happening is there should be a negotiation
Speaker 1: that arrives at a revenue split that makes sense for
Speaker 1: the SEC in the Big Ten, the same way they've
Speaker 1: done the playoff deal. It's the only way you got
Speaker 1: them to sign off on that. Is that idealistic to me?
Speaker 1: No it is not. But that's the only realistic way
Speaker 1: that you're ever going to get the SEC or the
Speaker 1: Big ten to listen to any conversation about pooling meteorites.
Speaker 1: And they may still not, but I imagine there's going
Speaker 1: to be a conversation on that front. And university presidents
Speaker 1: and chancellors ought to think long and hard, because that
Speaker 1: is who mister Petiti and Sinking answer to. Ultimately, they
Speaker 1: ought to think long and hard about what your role
Speaker 1: in all this is now? I mean, do you really think,
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, your role as the
Speaker 1: president or chancellor of a major university is just to
Speaker 1: make sure that the conference whose sticker is on your
Speaker 1: chest sucks every dime out of a sport you had
Speaker 1: no part in creating, by the way, but that should
Speaker 1: be your mission statement, if that's what you think your
Speaker 1: spot in this whole game is, and that's what you
Speaker 1: really think your role is as a university president. I
Speaker 1: fundamentally disagree. I think there's got to be some part
Speaker 1: of you that says, you know, maybe it's on me
Speaker 1: holding the position I hold to maybe waive a little
Speaker 1: bit of my influence for the greater overall good of
Speaker 1: collegiate athletics, which, by the way, is a gravy train
Speaker 1: that has made all of you a boatload of money
Speaker 1: and will in the future, by the way, if you
Speaker 1: play your cards right. So this is going to pass.
Speaker 1: This bill is going to pass, okay, And it may
Speaker 1: happen pretty quickly by quickly and senate to I mean,
Speaker 1: over the next three or four months. But I think
Speaker 1: there's a shot that's done before the college football season.
Speaker 1: So I know that a lot of people who disagree
Speaker 1: on that. I'm I'm happy to bookmark that statement. But
Speaker 1: the real piece I'm interested in is the revenue piece,
Speaker 1: the pulling of the media rights and how flexible in
Speaker 1: the end the SEC or the Big ten end up
Speaker 1: being willing to be on that front. They're watching us
Speaker 1: in Speedway, Indiana, They're watching us in Seaside, Florida. They're
Speaker 1: watching us in a home or Alaska. Jesse, Alaska checked in,
Speaker 1: is it true that we're still the number one college
Speaker 1: football show in Alaska? Well, there is no OPO researcher
Speaker 1: on that. Just say yes, yeah, absolutely, Okay, let's move on.
Speaker 1: The Truth Teller series is continuing in about two weeks ago.
Speaker 1: We were going to do the truth about the ACC
Speaker 1: on the show and then what did we do? We
Speaker 1: just forgot. I think we bumped it and then we
Speaker 1: never got around to it. So the piece of paper
Speaker 1: is like a month old. But here it is. What
Speaker 1: is the truth about the Atlantic Code Conference? Now with
Speaker 1: multiple member institutions who can see the Pacific Ocean out
Speaker 1: of their window, what is the truth about this conference?
Speaker 1: I think it's a conference with an identity crisis. That's
Speaker 1: what I think it is. I have viewed the ACC
Speaker 1: as a supreme disappointment for a long time, because I
Speaker 1: think the ACC should be a powerhouse conference. I have
Speaker 1: looked at the ACC for a long time and said,
Speaker 1: it is inexplicable that you guys have struggled like you
Speaker 1: have the Big twelve. I get they're in the middle
Speaker 1: of the country, and outside of Texas being a pipeline
Speaker 1: for everyone, there's not a huge talent footprint there. This
Speaker 1: is a conference that has the Carolinas, the Virginia's, Georgia,
Speaker 1: Florida all in its conference footprint, and you've looked in
Speaker 1: with the exception of clums and carrying the entire thing
Speaker 1: for a decade. There was some Florida state early in
Speaker 1: the twenty teens and Miami as of late, but there's
Speaker 1: never been a sustained period where there's like a Big three,
Speaker 1: Big four, Big five, and there's no reason for that.
Speaker 1: That grant of rights deal in twenty twelve looked good,
Speaker 1: and it ended up being an albatross, and it may
Speaker 1: very well be what sinks the conference. Some people think
Speaker 1: it's already sunk. It's not already, but it very well
Speaker 1: could end up being that way. Because I am a
Speaker 1: believer that conference realignment is not done. But that's another
Speaker 1: show that's not tonight. But it's not just the media
Speaker 1: rights thing. It's not just the grant of rights because
Speaker 1: Florida State in Miami failed to ever put together what
Speaker 1: we thought they'd put together. If you're seventeen and you're
Speaker 1: watching now, you don't recall when Florida State in Miami
Speaker 1: first got put in the same conference. The thought was, oh, dude,
Speaker 1: they're just gonna dominate every year. It's just gonna be
Speaker 1: them every single year. And it hasn't been at all.
Speaker 1: And it's mind boggling that one of them couldn't get
Speaker 1: out of their own way while the other one was good,
Speaker 1: and then there were both bad for a little then
Speaker 1: vice versa, and all the while, Virginia Tech fell off
Speaker 1: and Virginia has never got it ziged together. North Carolina
Speaker 1: has been a perennial underachiever. North Carolina State has not
Speaker 1: been able to put together any kind of run, although
Speaker 1: it has not been a bad football program, but it
Speaker 1: hasn't risen above just good. It's been merely good. It's
Speaker 1: not a crime. And you've just you'd had outside of
Speaker 1: Clemson again, you had perennial under achievement as a conference,
Speaker 1: and Miami has now taken the place of Clemson. So
Speaker 1: you look at Miami and you think that's a bona
Speaker 1: fide national championship threat every single year. At least that's
Speaker 1: the current status of Miami. But now Clemson's fallen off
Speaker 1: a little bit. And so you just never have this
Speaker 1: period where you look at the ACC at the beginning
Speaker 1: of the year and say there are multiple teams in
Speaker 1: that league that could win it all this year. You
Speaker 1: just don't feel that way. The conference champion this league
Speaker 1: was seven and five last year. I kid you not, Jesse.
Speaker 1: We didn't even do a Duke Virginia pre did we.
Speaker 1: We never even previewed the conference title game. That's how
Speaker 1: that was mainly a tiebreaker issue that they had. And
Speaker 1: I still don't know if they fixed that rule. We
Speaker 1: just assume they're going to fix that rule. But that's
Speaker 1: what screwed the playoff up last year too, So we
Speaker 1: didn't even preview the game. I don't think we broke
Speaker 1: down the game on the back end. Congrats to Duke,
Speaker 1: congratulations sincerely in Virginia for making the game, But it
Speaker 1: was an afterthought and so inexcusable for this conference to
Speaker 1: be in this position because of what it should be.
Speaker 1: And I have never convinced myself that I'm just wrong
Speaker 1: in what this conference should be. I think I'm right
Speaker 1: in what it should be. It just has not been.
Speaker 1: The future's very uncertain here, And that's the ultimate truth
Speaker 1: about the ACC Like I judge it very harshly only
Speaker 1: because I know what it is capable of and hasn't achieved.
Speaker 1: And now you look out on the horizon, and if
Speaker 1: I told you at any given point over the next
Speaker 1: three years, you're gonna wake up one morning and Ross
Speaker 1: Dellinger is gonna have this big breaking story that there's
Speaker 1: major conference realignment. Which conference would you think it is?
Speaker 1: You all know which conference that would emanate from. Everyone's
Speaker 1: been sitting on pins and needles about Florida State or
Speaker 1: North Carolina or Clemson Miami, And it's been varying degrees
Speaker 1: of rumors for like four years. Now. Those aren't going anywhere.
Speaker 1: They haven't gone anywhere. Now, guys, they're happening right now.
Speaker 1: I don't think there's been a major headline about it
Speaker 1: recently to my knowledge, I don't think there has. Oh,
Speaker 1: they're happening right now. Trust me. This time of year,
Speaker 1: especially all these people getting in the same rooms. They're
Speaker 1: happening right now. Just there's so much uncertainty, and I
Speaker 1: hate that. I hate that because I think the ACC
Speaker 1: could be a premier conference and it's never lived up
Speaker 1: to it in my lifetime. I don't remember it ever
Speaker 1: living up to a sustained run. I'm not saying they
Speaker 1: haven't had good endi years, but like I, sustained a
Speaker 1: stretch of greatness. Never been that way. Let's talk about games.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about the players on the field. Someone asked
Speaker 1: a question. Someone dared to ask a question about football players.
Speaker 1: Jesse Doug from Westminster, Colorado. Which players are you most
Speaker 1: excited to watch this year? Great question, Doug. Has nothing
Speaker 1: to do with the Senate bill, has nothing to do
Speaker 1: with conference versus conference. I am excited to watch Jeremiah
Speaker 1: Smith because I think he's the best player in college football.
Speaker 1: So this year, Jeremiah Smith I think will go off.
Speaker 1: We had a bold prediction the other night from one
Speaker 1: of you, and your prediction was, I think he's going
Speaker 1: to have eighteen hundred receiving yards and fifteen touchdowns. And
Speaker 1: I only rated that a nine and a quarter. On
Speaker 1: the Bowldines scale, because that's how capable I think he
Speaker 1: is as a player. He is the biggest potential game
Speaker 1: wrecker any given play in the sport. He easily would
Speaker 1: have been the top receiver in last year's draft. He's
Speaker 1: played alongside guys that have ended up being first round
Speaker 1: draft picks just by being associated with him. And so
Speaker 1: I guess my follow up question there really more so
Speaker 1: than questioning Jeremiah Smith, is who takes that role this year?
Speaker 1: Who falls in behind him this year? Brandon Ennis? Is it?
Speaker 1: His year is at Chris Henry as a freshman. I'm
Speaker 1: really high on him, But yeah, whoever's on the field
Speaker 1: with him him is Jeremiah Smith? Good t shirt idea
Speaker 1: there by the way, So that's one player. Darien Mensa
Speaker 1: at Miami Darian Mensa, I'm looking very much forward to
Speaker 1: watching because I think he's kind of of a blend
Speaker 1: of the best aspects of cam Ward and Carson Beck,
Speaker 1: and I think he's in a perfect situation. He gets
Speaker 1: to play in an offense that can really really mold
Speaker 1: itself around his full skill set, and man, he's not
Speaker 1: there alone. He brought bar Kate, who was his number
Speaker 1: one receiver from Duke. He brought him down to Miami
Speaker 1: with him. But also he just walks onto the same
Speaker 1: roster as Malachi Tony. They've got really really good tailback talent.
Speaker 1: It's an overall loaded roster, but just the wide receiver
Speaker 1: group that he's gonna throw to and the overall leadership
Speaker 1: piece that I think he walks in with. He walks
Speaker 1: in with a much different vibe about him than Carson
Speaker 1: Beck and he's not walking in just grabbing everyone by
Speaker 1: the throat like Cam Warre did. But it's a really
Speaker 1: really good blend of what's worked down there at Miami
Speaker 1: so far. He is one of the main reasons I
Speaker 1: think they could end up being a better team than
Speaker 1: the team that played for national title last year. Leadership
Speaker 1: plus fit plus overall talent roster. Dylan Stewart still at
Speaker 1: South Carolina. Looking forward to Dylan Stewart this year. It's
Speaker 1: kind of a regression last year on his stat sheet.
Speaker 1: He only had four and a half sacks last year,
Speaker 1: but that was kind of South Carolina's story as a team.
Speaker 1: They've got to have him explode. I remember watching him
Speaker 1: in person as a freshman and it's really it's amazing
Speaker 1: when you get that high level of player. It's you look.
Speaker 1: I remember Miles Garrett, like when Miles Garrett was at
Speaker 1: a and m seeing him in person as a freshman
Speaker 1: and saying that person looks different than everybody else in
Speaker 1: the field. Dylan Stewart's that way. Dylan Stewart just looks
Speaker 1: different than everybody else on the field. And he's six five,
Speaker 1: two forty five and he's entering his third year, and
Speaker 1: it's kind of him and Colin Simmons as those big
Speaker 1: time game wrecking edge presences. One of them, though, is
Speaker 1: at Texas where they're expected to do a lot. Dylan
Speaker 1: Stewart's at South Carolina where everyone's asking, I mean, can
Speaker 1: they make a Bowl game? Will they win seven games?
Speaker 1: If they win seven games, they go over the wind total.
Speaker 1: So I look forward to watching him. I just wonder
Speaker 1: is the context him going off and having a great
Speaker 1: year in the middle of South Carolina having a bad year,
Speaker 1: or does he go off as Leonora Sellers goes off
Speaker 1: and all of a sudden South Carolina is this surprise team,
Speaker 1: So there are two different compartments there. Leonard Moore at
Speaker 1: Notre Dame I think is the best corner in the
Speaker 1: country entering the season and you look at him like
Speaker 1: when they played USC last year, Jesse mkayle Lemon didn't
Speaker 1: do a whole lot against Leonard Moore. And you know
Speaker 1: what's gonna happen this year. They're gonna play Miami. They're
Speaker 1: gonna play Miami in Week ten in South Bend, and
Speaker 1: so Notre Dame schedule might not be loaded. So you
Speaker 1: might not see Leonard Moore against a ton of future
Speaker 1: first round draft talent, but you will see him in
Speaker 1: premier matchups when they end up playing Miami. That we
Speaker 1: can pretty much promise ourselves. Those are four names I
Speaker 1: just wanted to rattle some off. I could rattle off
Speaker 1: one hundred right now. We could probably go deeper than that,
Speaker 1: and maybe we will because we have a few more
Speaker 1: shows before the season starts, obviously, But yeah, Jeremiah Smith,
Speaker 1: Mensub Stewart More, those kind of players I'm looking forward
Speaker 1: to watching this year. Let's move along, merrily along, I
Speaker 1: would say, fairly good pace tonight. Woo man, it's small writing.
Speaker 1: Don't worry. Don't worry. I'm gonna I'm gonna lean in.
Speaker 1: We bump my readers up. Jason submitted a question in
Speaker 1: the fandual discord, which means Jason's about to get one
Speaker 1: hundred dollars in bonus bets dropped into his account just
Speaker 1: for asking this question. He said, Alabama's loaded with talent,
Speaker 1: but they've lost their physicality and their reputation because of it.
Speaker 1: Can they fix it in time for the twenty twenty
Speaker 1: sixth season. Well, we all watched Alabama last year. I
Speaker 1: think we all agree. Alabama looked a little down physically,
Speaker 1: couldn't run the ball and struggled to stop the run
Speaker 1: at times. Not terrible, but it's not great. Defensively overall,
Speaker 1: they're pretty good. But can they find it? People talk
Speaker 1: about physicality and toughness like it's an easter egg, like
Speaker 1: you just go search for it. Once you find it,
Speaker 1: you got it. It's a lifestyle. It's not an easter egg.
Speaker 1: It's a lifestyle. You have to live it. Notre Dame
Speaker 1: does not play the way they play because they kind
Speaker 1: of just find it, and then other teams don't because
Speaker 1: they haven't found it. You have to live it, and
Speaker 1: so the question is not are they gonna find it?
Speaker 1: The question is are they living it? Are they living
Speaker 1: in an environment? Are they creating a culture? Do they
Speaker 1: have a DNA that exhibits that toughness. You don't find it,
Speaker 1: you just have it, You develop it, you live it.
Speaker 1: It isn't a talent thing either, because there are far
Speaker 1: less talented teams than Alabama that were far better running
Speaker 1: the ball than Alabama last year. So if it's not
Speaker 1: just a talent thing, then what does it come down to.
Speaker 1: It comes down to a lifestyle. It comes down to
Speaker 1: a belief system. It comes down to what you believe in,
Speaker 1: what you emphasize, what you tolerate, and you don't tolerate.
Speaker 1: That's the beautiful thing about the best teams in the
Speaker 1: country is the environment that you walk into Ohio State Practice,
Speaker 1: Miami Practice. When you go watch them and you you
Speaker 1: look around and you've got recruits there, and you realize, man,
Speaker 1: some of you, some of you probably need to look elsewhere.
Speaker 1: I don't think this place is for everybody.
Speaker 3: That's how practice should feel. That's how it feels to Georgia.
Speaker 3: That's absolutely how it should feel. There ought to be
Speaker 3: a bunch of five star recruits any given year that
Speaker 3: would fail miserably in your program because you're running it
Speaker 3: at such a high level, and the cultural filters are
Speaker 3: so fine on your program that they'd squeeze out even
Speaker 3: most of the premiere high school talent in the country. Now,
Speaker 3: you don't want them so fine that for the sake
Speaker 3: of making a point, you create an environment where good
Speaker 3: players don't.
Speaker 1: Want to play for you. But there's a fine line there,
Speaker 1: there's a balance. Your place ought not be for everybody,
Speaker 1: but the ones who do come in there, they ought
Speaker 1: to have a mentality that leaves very very little doubt
Speaker 1: whether your team collectively possesses the required physical nature, the
Speaker 1: required toughness. So if you don't have it, it's a
Speaker 1: gut check, it's a mirror look. It's a top down
Speaker 1: assessment of who are we, What are we accepting that
Speaker 1: we shouldn't be accepting, What are we tolerating that we
Speaker 1: shouldn't tolerate? And how long does it take to find out?
Speaker 1: So we're not in the building every day, you and
Speaker 1: I are just watching from the outside, how long does
Speaker 1: it take? Well, I'd say not very long. For this
Speaker 1: upcoming year, not very long. Now. I do think with Alabama,
Speaker 1: the element of the RPO in their offense this year
Speaker 1: is going to be a game changer for them, regardless
Speaker 1: of who starts at quarterback, but especially if it's Keilan Russell.
Speaker 1: The element of the RPO is going to open up
Speaker 1: their ground game. I think they will be very very
Speaker 1: much improved running the ball this year just because of that.
Speaker 1: And so that's one thing, and a lot works off
Speaker 1: of that. But there's no shortage of effort. I mean,
Speaker 1: I know that staff. We've been down there this spring.
Speaker 1: I've watched and practiced this spring. There's no shortage of
Speaker 1: effort being put in. They pretty much overhauled their entire
Speaker 1: offensive line. They went and got a new offensive line coach.
Speaker 1: They tried to get Hollywood Smothers out of the portal
Speaker 1: at tailback, and Texas took care of that, which is
Speaker 1: what it is. But they've got plenty good enough players there.
Speaker 1: They signed an incredible pair of freshmen. One of them's
Speaker 1: a five star and everyone knows about him, and the
Speaker 1: other one's not out of East Texas and everyone will
Speaker 1: know about him. But they got plenty good enough talent there.
Speaker 1: But they had good enough talent last year. Talent wasn't
Speaker 1: the issue there. Last year. It was it's a lifestyle.
Speaker 1: They didn't live that lifestyle last year. You got to
Speaker 1: live the lifestyle. FanDuel right now is where you can go. Like,
Speaker 1: if you believe in Alabama, you go over there and
Speaker 1: bet them to win the national title. Right now, you
Speaker 1: get bet them to win the SEC right now. You
Speaker 1: could bet anything you want to over at fandual. They're
Speaker 1: the exclusive odds provider of the show. We appreciate them
Speaker 1: a whole lot. That question was just delivered to us
Speaker 1: via the FanDuel discord and the added bonus quite literally
Speaker 1: for you. If you ask a question for the show
Speaker 1: that winds up on the show, and you ask it
Speaker 1: in the FanDuel discord, you just get one hundred dollars
Speaker 1: in bonus bets dropped into your account. Like Jason, I
Speaker 1: think that's who it was that asked the question. Jason
Speaker 1: will check his account tomorrow morning and ask did I
Speaker 1: place a bet? I forgot? Did I win? No, you
Speaker 1: just got your question asked on the show. In this economy,
Speaker 1: that's a big deal.
Speaker 4: Must be twenty one plus and present in select states
Speaker 4: for Kansas in affiliation with Kansas Star Casino, or eighteen
Speaker 4: plus and present in DC first online real money wager.
Speaker 4: Only five dollars first deposit required. Bonus issued as non
Speaker 4: withdrawable bonus bets which expires seven days after receipt. Restrictions
Speaker 4: apply see terms at sportsbook dot FanDuel dot com. Gambling
Speaker 4: problem call one eight hundred gambler, or visitfanduel dot com
Speaker 4: slash rg call one eight eight eight seven eight nine
Speaker 4: seventy seven seventy seven, or visit CCPG dot org slash
Speaker 4: chat in Connecticut, or visit nd gambling heelp dot org
Speaker 4: in Maryland. Hope is here, visit gambling Helplinema dot org
Speaker 4: or call eight hundred three two seven fifty to fifty
Speaker 4: for twenty four to seven support in Massachusetts, or call
Speaker 4: one eight seven seven eight Hope, n y. Or text
Speaker 4: Hope and Why in New York.
Speaker 1: Let's wrap it up, bold predictions. What do you believe?
Speaker 1: Do you believe something that's bold enough to get a
Speaker 1: nine and a half or higher on the Boldness scale?
Speaker 1: Because if you do, and it hits chilive supremacy plural
Speaker 1: of chalice. Headed out to anyone that fits that description.
Speaker 1: First up, Tonight Connor from Rogersville, Alabama. He predicts half
Speaker 1: the college football playoff field this season will be made
Speaker 1: up of teams who were not in last year's playoffs.
Speaker 1: Hm hmm, all right, so we got twelve of them
Speaker 1: for now. I think that the two G five teams
Speaker 1: are highly likely not going to repeat. I don't think
Speaker 1: two Lane and JMU are going to be in the
Speaker 1: playoffs this year, So that's two newbies. So we got
Speaker 1: to find four more, at least now, the remaining teams,
Speaker 1: the remaining ten teams from last year, they all have
Speaker 1: top fifteen odds to make the playoffs. So there wasn't
Speaker 1: some team that made it last year, a lah like
Speaker 1: Auburn twenty ten that's expected to fall off a cliff
Speaker 1: the next year. All of them are expected to be
Speaker 1: back in the mix this year. So we got to
Speaker 1: find four more that made it last year that aren't
Speaker 1: going to make it this year. Now. I think Notre
Speaker 1: Dame in Texas are highly likely to make the playoff
Speaker 1: this year, so they got to be taking somebody's spot,
Speaker 1: or so one would think. But what if they take
Speaker 1: JMU and two lane spot, then we just did a
Speaker 1: straight two for two trade off Jesse. Really quickly we
Speaker 1: start having to ask ourselves, is Michigan going to make
Speaker 1: the playoff this year? Is Clemson gonna make the playoff?
Speaker 1: This year. Will Oklahoma or Alabama not make it? Could
Speaker 1: LSU make it? In? Is Ole miss gonna make it
Speaker 1: in again? If you're telling me, I got to find
Speaker 1: six of them, especially if two of them I think
Speaker 1: are already virtual locks. I think I can make it.
Speaker 1: I think the season could be that unpredictable. I'm only
Speaker 1: going to put a nine on the Bolden scale here.
Speaker 1: My number would be like four or five, but I
Speaker 1: think we can get up to six, So I'm only
Speaker 1: gonna put a nine on the Boldness scale. Next up, boy,
Speaker 1: things are going sideways for Oklahoma. Cody and Katie Texas
Speaker 1: not so ironically predicts Oklahoma will finish with a losing record.
Speaker 1: They're gonna fire Brint venables harsh. Nine and a quarter
Speaker 1: is my boldness rating for that. Oklahoma's win total of
Speaker 1: seven and a half, so for them to go five
Speaker 1: and seven would not be the biggest shocker in the world. Now,
Speaker 1: we assume that a losing season would be five and seven,
Speaker 1: but it could be four and eight, it could be
Speaker 1: three and nine. It's highly unlikely. But in this post
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four Florida State World of Ours, don't dismiss anything,
Speaker 1: but let's say they go five and seven. That's one thing.
Speaker 1: Then the other part is are they firing Print Venables
Speaker 1: over that? So you gotta have both of those things happen.
Speaker 1: And I think that's a nine and a quarter. Injuries
Speaker 1: could happen, Variants in schedule could happen because they play
Speaker 1: a tough one again. Now, this would be Venable's third
Speaker 1: losing season in five years. So six and seven, ten
Speaker 1: and three, six and seven, ten and three, another losing
Speaker 1: season here? Is that enough? Is that enough for him
Speaker 1: to get the acts? I don't know. I don't know, guys.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna put a nine and a quarter on it.
Speaker 1: Next up, Bob from Jimmy Sorry from Austin, Texas. Indiana
Speaker 1: runs it back, no losses, undefeated season. Signetti puts himself
Speaker 1: in the Saban conversation with back to back national titles.
Speaker 1: That is a nine and a half. I respect the
Speaker 1: boldness because notice he didn't even say just Indiana's gonna repeat.
Speaker 1: He said they're gonna go undefeated, another perfect season and
Speaker 1: repeat his national champs. Back to back perfect season national champs.
Speaker 1: Who was that? It wasn't Nick Saban in Alabama? Who
Speaker 1: wasn't it was Nebraska ninety four, ninety five. So this
Speaker 1: is not easy to do. It's not easy to do.
Speaker 1: One time they do play Ohio State and USC at home,
Speaker 1: they play Michigan and Washington on the road. Then theoretically
Speaker 1: you would have the Big Ten championship game. Then you
Speaker 1: got to win three playoff games. It's just tough to do.
Speaker 1: New quarterback, got to have multiple new guys at wide receiver, workout,
Speaker 1: a lot of defensive production lost. Brian Haynes is still
Speaker 1: there though. Guys, I think even if they win the
Speaker 1: national title, they're doing it with at least a blemish
Speaker 1: this year. So that's a nine and a half on
Speaker 1: the boldness scale for me. And then lastly, what a world?
Speaker 1: What a change in our world? Kent believes in his
Speaker 1: predictions so much he sent the bet slip in. He said,
Speaker 1: energized by the events of the offseason, Dabbo leads Clemson
Speaker 1: back to the playoffs by winning the ACC. Now here
Speaker 1: is here's what I mean by what a world. Clemson
Speaker 1: has won eight of the last eleven ACC titles, and
Speaker 1: it is a bold prediction now to predict Clemson to
Speaker 1: win the ACC. I'm putting an eight and a half
Speaker 1: on it. They have the fourth best odds to win
Speaker 1: the conference, behind Louisville, SMU, and Miami. It should be
Speaker 1: noted Clemson is well behind SMU and Louisville, who themselves
Speaker 1: are well behind Miami. But this is the ACC. Okay,
Speaker 1: Duke played Virginia in the ACC title game last year.
Speaker 1: The winner of the league was seven and five. Crazy
Speaker 1: things can happen. Of course, you still got to make
Speaker 1: the playoff. That was part two of the prediction here.
Speaker 1: I think it just makes perfect sense from a script
Speaker 1: writing perspective to have Dabbo make a crazy run to
Speaker 1: a conference title the year after everyone expected him to.
Speaker 1: It seems like the most Dabbo sweenty thing in the world.
Speaker 1: And because of that, I'm only putting an eight and
Speaker 1: a half on this, because I will not be the
Speaker 1: poster child that he is finding at the end of
Speaker 1: the year to claim that no one believed in little o' Clemson.
Speaker 1: He has already referred to his roster multiple times as
Speaker 1: a bunch of nobodies. Okay, the plot is being set
Speaker 1: right now. I will not fall victim. I'm only putting
Speaker 1: an eight and a half on that. Appreciate you guys
Speaker 1: so much. Speaker series a lot of travel this week,
Speaker 1: a lot of travel. We're gonna set out Tomorrow night
Speaker 1: will be somewhere, Tuesday will be somewhere Wednesday. One of
Speaker 1: those somewhares is a first time trip. In fact, unlike Bradley,
Speaker 1: I've never even been to the state that we're gonna
Speaker 1: be in Wednesday. Bradley has inexplicably been to two states
Speaker 1: that he has no business being to, and so we're
Speaker 1: gonna go to one of them Wednesday. And I was
Speaker 1: in the other one the other day stormchasing. So if
Speaker 1: you really really star me hard by process of elimination,
Speaker 1: you just eliminated one. We will be back probably Thursday,
Speaker 1: unless I randomly make a trip to the Women's College
Speaker 1: World Series as UCLA game final yet do we even know?
Speaker 1: We'll go find it? Anyway, Stay tuned with socials at
Speaker 1: Josh Paint CFB. I'll let you guys know what's going
Speaker 1: on this week. Until then, let's have a great week
Speaker 1: for director Bradley, Producer Jesse. I'm Josh Pate, Take care
Speaker 1: and God bless.
Speaker 4: Must be twenty one plus and present in select states
Speaker 4: for Kansas in affiliation with Kansas Star Casino or eighteen
Speaker 4: plus and present in DC first online real money wager
Speaker 4: only five dollars first deposit required. Bonus issued as non
Speaker 4: withdrawable bonus bets, which expires seven days after receipt. Restrictions
Speaker 4: apply see terms at sportsbook dot FanDuel dot com. Gambling
Speaker 4: problem call one eight hundred gambler, or visit FanDuel dot
Speaker 4: com slash RG call one eight eight eight seven eight
Speaker 4: nine seventy seven seventy seven, or visit CCPG dot org
Speaker 4: slash chat in Connecticut, or visit nd Gamblinghelp dot org
Speaker 4: in Maryland. Hope is here, visit gambling Heelplinema dot org,
Speaker 4: or call eight hundred three two seven fifty fifty for
Speaker 4: twenty four seven support in Massachusetts. Or call one eight
Speaker 4: seven seven eight Hope n Y. Or text Hope n Y.
Speaker 1: In New York