dssl

FWIW, this Florida gator article thinks TX could get Florida as one of its annual games. https://www.gatorsports.com/story/sports/college/sec/2023/05/26/sec-needs-to-make-a-call-on-future-football-schedules/70249787007/

Saban has previously been supportive of 9 conference games. I believe this is his attempt to complain about the proposed 3 Alabama annual games and not be totally ignored I suspect the financials of a 9 game SEC schedule are going to be quite compelling. The coaches that don't like it will be from schools that are concerned about bowl eligibility.

Seems inevitable, I'm good with it. If Sark doesn't like it he could pull a Saban and threaten to pull his support for the 9 game scheduling model to try to get it changed.

That's the first I have heard of that, but in general that sounds like a great thing. I know they do that with players that can no longer play because of injuries. Seems like they could make that available to all scholarship athletes whos athletic scholarship aren't renewed. Most of the players pushed into the portal at Texas would be unlikely to take advantage of this, since they are likely to be able to pursue their dreams elsewhere. For lower tier schools requiring scholarships for surplus athletes could put additional stress on their budgets.

The main difference is Sanders is pushing out most of his players vs a handful or two like most other top schools. My reading of the article says he is against pushing players into the portal because it hurts the student athletes life plans. Well for better or for worse that ship has sailed. Every coach that wants to win is going to optimize their roster in every way available to them. Only time will tell how this works out. If he is able to turn the program around within a short period then all the fans and the administration will be delighted. If he can't turn things around fairly quickly then this could be accelerate his demise.

I think his father played at Tech. I would guess if he has NFL aspiration that he would go to the school that he thought would best prepare him for that future. So in the end the fact that his dad played at Tech, and him likely growing up a Tech fan wouldn't be a determining factor, except maybe as a tie breaker.

The 2023 season has not occurred yet. Trying to compare potential with history seems silly to me. The chances that this team will end up being better then 2005 are not great, but also non zero.

Yeah Connecticut seems odd. It seems like they are considering lots of schools. Presumably this is a potential contingency plan for if the Pac 12 doesn't implode.

It's clear that if the PAC 10 can't get a media rights deal that's competitive with the BIG12 then it will fall apart. This seems like a very real possibility. The BIG12 would obviously take the four corners schools that they have been courting. I would also assume thay the BIG12 would take Oregon and Washington , if the B1G doesn't.

Rinse and repeat You can certainly understand Florida State and Clemson being frustrated, but if there was a reasonable way out if the GOR then the top ACC schools would already be gone. Florida State and Clemson will continue complaining until 2036, but nothing significant is going to change, since ESPN and the smaller schools have no incentive to fork over more money to the top tier ACC schools. When the GOR expires in 2036 it could get interesting. Everyone wants in to the SEC and B1G, but it's unlikely the big 2 will have an appetite for most of the "Magnificent 7" Maybe the top non big 2 schools will band together in 2036 and form a new conference that will be able to sign a better per school deal then any of the current non big 2 conferences. Obviously it would be a geographic mess, but with the exception of the SEC that seems to be the trend.

A decision is made based on available information and expertise. Not all well informed well reasoned decisions result in positive outcomes. That doesn't make them bad decisions in hind sight. We also have no way of knowing what would have happened had Worthy not played. Maybe the defenses would have been able to take advantage of a compressed field. Maybe whoever would have taken his place would have caught less passes. If he hurt or helped the team isn't knowable.

Hand(s) broken sounds bad, but it's hard to know exactly what bone was involved and how much of a problem it was for him. It sounds like it probably made it somewhat harder for him to catch the ball. What I find interesting is all the posters that think they have enough information and expertise to criticize the staff's roster decisions that are based on way more information and expertise.

Players want to play for sure. And playing injured with pain is definitely part of the deal. But when the nature of the injury is that playing is likely to create long term problems then the coaches definitely shouldn't allow the player to play, and if they did it could harm the player, the program and the coaches career. I would assume that given Worthy's potential NFL future he wouldn't play AGAINST medical advice, no matter how much he was wanting to play.

If the medical staff had ANY concerns that Worthy playing would cause long term problems , then it's very hard to believe that he would be willing to play or that the coaches would let him play.

Unless he was still the best option available, even at way under 100%