Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the College Football Apostles, where we love college football,
and we're gonna break things down in a very simple
way for you, the way you understand what's going on
in the world college football. So I'm George Reister, He's
(00:24):
Ralph Amsden. It makes sure that you guys like subscribe,
tell a friend about the show, make sure that you
share so we can keep bringing this dope content to you.
We're gonna be talking about a couple things today. So
the NCAA antitrust lawsuits are like, there's obviously a settlement
two point eight billion dollars, almost two point seven seven
(00:45):
and that is going to like the details of it,
or the lack of details of it, are coming out,
and I think that the system is more broken now
than it even was prior to this. That the new
trand for rules are gonna give you some seventh eighth
year players, it's it's wild.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
And of course these.
Speaker 1 (01:07):
New kickoff times are being announced for the first three
weeks of the season, and of course we got to
deal with those. But we'll start though with the antitrust lawsuit, Ralph,
because of course this is a thing, right, two point
seven seven billion dollars money's going back. I'm not getting
any money because they're only going to go back about
(01:28):
six years and a But at the same time, this
looks like on its face, yes, this is a great
thing and all of this, But Ralph, I believe that
the system is now more broken because they don't have
answers to any of the questions that they need answers
to to be able to move forward. They just agreed
(01:50):
on a number that that the Power five conferences would
agree with, Like even though the Board of Governors already
agreed on it for the NC five people opposed it,
and you got the other twenty two to twenty seven
conferences saying oh yeah, no, no, no, we object to
(02:10):
the payment where where we're gonna be responsible for nine
hundred and ninety million dollars in payments while the other
while the other schools are while the Power five schools
are only responsible for six hundred and sixty four million
dollars despite them making like ninety percent of the money.
(02:35):
So we we have more problems then we have answers
at this point in time. That's why we're here to
break this down for you. And it also is you
don't know what you're doing with title nine. You don't
know any of this stuff, Ralph, So how is this
a good thing?
Speaker 3 (02:54):
Well, I mean the first step to your destination, like
the journey begins with a step, right, I I don't know.
I don't necessarily know if I agree that it's more
confusing now than it was before they announced the terms
of the settlement. At least they know that they're going
to have to move in this direction that they should
have moved into twenty five years ago when they started
(03:17):
getting these massive television checks. Had they just realized that
the invitation of unlimited money was going to cause the
labor force to say, where is my part in that?
And the NCAA should be forced to answer that question?
And now they have been. Now the amount that they
(03:38):
came up with, like there was no unionization of players
or former athletes being able to set those terms. You
have to imagine a lot of that money is going
to go to lawyers, which I absolutely hate that that's
the case, as in any settlement. But to set up
a structure moving forward where players get to participate in
the revenue they produce, it's not necessarily a bad thing.
(03:59):
You know, the destination when you know the destination. That's true, North,
that's what they're going to be moving to.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
But Sore, this is just a band aid, Like I
think that people are looking at this like that this
is the solution, but it is putting a band aid,
and this is not going to prevent further lawsuits.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
More lawsuits are coming.
Speaker 1 (04:23):
Like That's the thing is that this settlement was the
accumulation of three lawsuits and they decided to settle, you know,
in one and one big pie. All they cared about
was the number, that the number felt palatable to them,
rather than having like twenty million dollars in damages, which
could bankrupt the NCAA, bankrupt athletic departments, all of these things.
(04:48):
So there's an inherent problem there is that this is
a band aid and now they're and hold up, let
me give you a few more of the get give
the people a few more of the details, because that's
the part that bothers me, is that so there's the
backwards payment six years backwards, and then going forward. They
(05:10):
don't even know whether they're going to handle the back
payments and the forward payments as the same way. But
that's probably the smallest of the issue. There's the title
nine issue, where where should this money be going? Because
Title nine says one thing, but reality says that the
men have generating about ninety percent of his money, So
that's probably where the money should be going.
Speaker 3 (05:31):
Can I ask you a question that I've never understood,
What does revenue have to do with what schools kick
in as far as the trade of your presence at
my university and your participation in extracurricular sports in order
for the tools to do that job, because that's always
(05:52):
been the exchange. Is the scholarship, the room, the board,
all of it is tools so that you can do
your job to promot the university. Some of that comes
at a loss. In fact, it always came at a
loss until the television money came into place, until there
were revenue generating sports. But if a sport is generating revenue,
why do people who do not generate revenue, whether you're
(06:17):
on the rowing team or fencing or whatever it is,
why do they get to participate in a completely separate thing.
Speaker 1 (06:27):
That is a good question because basketball and football have
generated the majority of the money. Now, women's basketball they
have a tournament which generates money, so there should be
money there. Softball does some numbers on television. But swim,
but you're right, swimming, rowing, will crew, and all of
(06:48):
these other sports they do no numbers. They operate at
a net loss. And one of the things that people
don't always understand about the athletic department budgets is is
that they are use it or lose it budgets.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
So at the end of the.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
Year, they're like, oh, wow, the the training staff will say, damn,
we still got twenty grand left. Let's go buy new
cushions and repolster the and put new carpet in the
training room because we need it because it's time for
an update. So that's the reason why some of these
(07:28):
athletic departments don't operate in a surplus on some of
these levels, because it's to use it or lose it budget.
Because if the if they go line by line and
they're like, oh, the training staff they don't need that
twenty thousand dollars because they didn't use it. But then
the next year they actually do need to buy some
new piece of technology or something like that that is
(07:48):
going to cost that it's not going to then be
in their budget. So the heads of it are always
trying to spend up to the last dollar because they
want to be able to have that budget available for
the next season. And we are looking at so this
(08:08):
whole payment system is supposed to start in the fall
of twenty twenty five, and this agreement is supposed to
last ten years. The system is broken when the and
I'm talking about not even on just the paying the
player side, Ralph, I'm talking about, how are these athletic
departments when you have UCLA paying cal Cow not having
(08:32):
enough money already, UCLA not having enough money already, how
are they They're operating at a significant deficit, so they're
not being run like businesses, and they're not being run
like Arizona State. I think is doing a great thing
putting the athletic department as part of the entire university,
as opposed to trying to act like it's a separate entity.
(08:57):
So that's where I'm saying it's broken, is that if
you're trying to keep the athletic departments as a separate
part of the university, but then your subsidized, I don't
think it makes sense.
Speaker 3 (09:09):
Well, first of all, like amateurism was never real. It
was something that we invented and it greatly advantaged people
in administrative positions and the institutions as a whole. We
know this. Even if you believe that amateurism was correct,
even if you enjoyed it more, even if you're completely
(09:31):
turned off by the players finally getting their share, you
have to admit that we made it up and that
it greatly, greatly, greatly benefited the institutions and the administrators
because they were capitalists. Essentially, we are twenty seven years
removed from our first one million dollar ball coach that
was Steve Spurrier in nineteen ninety seven. The trajectory from
(09:55):
nineteen ninety seven to twenty seventeen not twenty years. If
we continued that from twenty seveneen to twenty thirty seven,
we're going to have a coach in twenty thirty seven
getting fifty million annually. Like they're Kevin Durant. It like
the trajectory that things are on cannot continue without benefiting
(10:19):
the people that the system is built around promoting. So
why can't sports that acted under the old system and
we're a lost lead for the university to promote itself.
Now you can blame colleges that maybe expanded athletics beyond
their capacity that's a conversation that we can We can
(10:40):
definitely have And if if a college this might seem callous, George,
and I wonder how you feel about this, if a
college expanded sports and what they offer beyond their means.
I don't have sympathy for them being in a situation
where they have to re tracked to get back into
(11:02):
a more financially responsible place. The sports is a privilege.
It's a privilege, and I don't think it comes at
the cost of you know, you can't blame basketball that
you don't have tennis anymore at your school. You can't.
If tennis doesn't generate revenue and the school does not
(11:23):
believe it worthwhile to continue with tennis because they've become
in the business of generating revenue, then that that's tough.
Breaks I I don't love it.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
I hate it, Ralph. I hate that because Number one,
Olympic sports matter. That's the that's the that's the first thing.
Olympic sports they do matter, right. I do think that
we it is an issue when we look at not
(11:56):
just the Olympic sports part of part of it, but
when we look at at I guess the the the
entire way that that the system and has been you know,
put put together because if you're gonna lose, like those
other sports are kind of feel like the fabric of
(12:19):
the of the school. But here's the here's the other
part you brought up. You know that it should be
run like a business and all of that. That brings
up two words private equity, which has been talked about.
People are like, yeah, this is this is a potential option.
This is this Ralph. That is the nuclear button. That
(12:42):
is the button that people think that they want pushed,
and they do not want that button pushed. You do
not want private equity in the world of college football.
So I belong to private equity, private private equity, and
I have friends who are in that.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
That is their business.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
Private equity squeezes the life out of things. It is
about profit. It is not about the good of sports.
It is never going to be about doing what's right
for the sport. It is going to be doing what's
right for the budget. Like for instance, in the NFL.
(13:22):
Sometimes not all the time, but sometimes they have to
make decisions that are right for the sport even though
it's not right for the budget because they understand the
big picture of growing the sport, the optics, all of
this stuff. That's not what private equity does. Private equity
is going to look at these coaches contracts. They will
(13:45):
never look the same that trajectory of fifty million dollars.
It will never get their buddy, never under any circumstances,
because they will understand that that money can be best
used and other people who are qualified and will do
a good job will take that job for less well.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
And the age of the bag man will come to
an end, or you'll continue to have it outside the
bounds of what private equity has to offer, because who
is going to approve what. First of all, the whole
Jayden Rashata contract would have died on the vine.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
Yes, if somebody was actually responsible. Yeah right, if you
don't get out of get out of here. Here's how
much we there will become a base pay now that
part people will like, there will become a base pay
for five stars, four stars, three starts like. There will
become a base pay for that base pay for starters like.
That's what private equity will. It will organize it better.
(14:44):
But in terms of what happens to your athletic departments,
what happens to your non revenue generating sports. What happens
to all of that stuff? Oh, it is going to
get streamlined and squeezed.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
So here is my question, because I brought this up
last week, and I'm really curious as to your thoughts.
If instead of private equity, if instead of inviting investors
in because Brett or Mark from the Big twelve just
said that he's open to the idea of private equity
making an entrance into collegiate athletics, what if instead of
private equity, we had, like like we do with corporations,
(15:24):
the New York Stock Exchange, the Nasdaq, what if the
power for had a stock exchange and the the alumni
of those schools were allowed to invest. So it's not
just donations to name, image and likeness anymore, but the
the the private equity essentially becomes public trading of alumni.
(15:51):
You could actually buy into your program. You could you
could have a voice, you could elect leadership that gets
to be in meetings with UH with with athletic director
or you know, over certain matters of maybe setting a budget.
It'd probably all be like rubber stamp type stuff. But
what if what if there was an alumni network that
(16:11):
actually could be in an ownership position, sort of like
the Green Bay Packers right where.
Speaker 1 (16:16):
Yeah, but that but the difference between the packers is
that their people have that their owners quote air quotes
have no have no say, they have no like they
literally have no power. Whereas let's say I was buying
into the Oregon Ducks, right mm hmm, and but I
got a boatload of money. Now when when when shares
(16:38):
become available, I'm buying boot coool shares of it. So
now I am now a powerful person within this organization.
And what and what happens when in stocks and companies
and all of that stuff when somebody wants somebody ouse
to hostile takeovers.
Speaker 3 (16:59):
So now there you probably have to put a cap
on individuals to where no one person could go over
forty nine percent.
Speaker 2 (17:08):
Or something like that.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
But what if it's me and my three friends and
we and me Phil Knighton and and the Pepe's.
Speaker 3 (17:16):
We, and you're gonna get a voice, And you're gonna
get a voice because you're an investor seventy percent of
the company, and we decide that we want to change things.
Speaker 1 (17:26):
So you're going to open it up to hostile takeovers
of Athletic departments.
Speaker 3 (17:33):
There has to be a system in place where the
vote or the things that you're involved in are severely limited.
Athletic departments aren't even gonna enter into any situation unless
they can control it. And so, but opening it up
to opening it up to that of like becoming an
alumni of a university grants you the ability to buy
(17:54):
into owning stock in the athletic department. And then let's
say that you have ten percent of the purse for
bowl game appearances, college football playoffs, March Madness, things like
that all get kicked back as disbursements to the shareholders
of that school. So there's a financial incentive to own
(18:16):
stock in that you can actually be rewarded for your participation.
I would, I'm all I'm saying is, if you're introducing
outside money, make that outside money inside money. Let your
alumni participate in an iron ship. I do.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
I think that that's actually reasonable.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
I do the and it's probably more palatable than to
have the pressures of private equity money because private equity
is going to have a voice, It's going to have
a big, huge voice in those things.
Speaker 3 (18:50):
How long before an Ohio State fan would go get
a Michigan degree just so that they could buy a
bunch of shares in Michigan and try to ruin things
from the inside. Exactly, We'll find a way to break anything.
But I just I like that better than like mon
Santo owning part of Iowa.
Speaker 1 (19:08):
Football, Sequoia Capital owning part of Sequoia Capital owned Facebook,
and and Stanford Football.
Speaker 3 (19:19):
Speaking of outside corporate money, though, George, they are talking
about putting advertising jersey patches on college uniforms. As a
fan of the Los Angeles Lakers, brought to you by
wish dot Com, how do you feel about that?
Speaker 2 (19:36):
Oh, it's coming, It's coming.
Speaker 1 (19:39):
I I hated it with the power of a thousand
suns when they did it in the NBA. It's coming
because that's that's money. That's money there. Now you know
who's going to push back against.
Speaker 3 (19:56):
That, Nike Adidas uh uh huh.
Speaker 1 (20:04):
Now, granted, they couldn't fight against it in in those
They couldn't fight against it in the NBA. However, though
in the in college football, I don't know how much
they would be able to fight against it either. Even though,
Oh man, but that's I mean, that's literally a huge
revenue generator, right, there.
Speaker 3 (20:26):
Okay, So let's say that all right scenario. You're the
marketing director. You control the entire marketing budget. Entire marketing budget,
all right, for Summer's Eve. Do you know what Summer's
Eve is.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
Yes, yes, yes, of course, the the effeminine product maker.
Speaker 3 (20:47):
Yeah, so you control the entire budget. You are their
marketing manager. Uh. You have the opportunity to approach a
team that just appeared as the runner up in all
of college football last year and get some attention for
your brand. You, as the marketing manager of Summer's Eve,
do you go to University of Washington and say, this
(21:08):
is a worthwhile investment for my company to have Summer's
Eve on all of the University of Washington football jerseys. A.
So he you intentionally and you're ready to You're you're
(21:30):
ready to drop the whole budget.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Like you intentionally named the University of Washington in here
to make this more polarizing of a topic.
Speaker 2 (21:42):
But I'm gonna douse water.
Speaker 1 (21:45):
I'm gonna throw cold water on you right now, because
Summer's Eve is not going to throw the budget at
the University of Washington football team. They would probably have
thrown it at the University of Iowa with women's basketball
team last year because they want to market to and granted,
(22:05):
there are a ton of women who.
Speaker 3 (22:06):
Any company would have, any company would have.
Speaker 1 (22:09):
Yes, yes, So so I do think that that it's
got to make sense for their consumers more than more
than anything. And then also I think that there's gonna
be some like there has to be some brand co cohesion,
Like you can't just take any old money that walks
in the in the door just just because it's a
(22:30):
lot of money.
Speaker 3 (22:31):
Oh, oh, I'm gonna get I'm gonna give you a team,
You give me a company, all right? I was Iowa
State Cat okay, Uh.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
Miami, Oh, Tommy Bahama.
Speaker 3 (22:53):
Okay, okay, Texas Christian University.
Speaker 1 (23:02):
Texas Christian University. Uh, some some hospital, some like hospital system.
Speaker 3 (23:10):
Okay, last one, let's go with University of Colorado.
Speaker 1 (23:17):
University of Colorado. Oh, they need a fun sponsor.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
They need.
Speaker 1 (23:23):
Uh, They're gonna end up with somebody like Ali Ali
Baba or you know, Wish or somebody like that, some
some obscure company that like you don't normally shop at
and you're like, what the hell is this? And then
you find out that the company is huge overseas and
you're like, oh, okay, that makes sense.
Speaker 3 (23:42):
Do you think Dion could make Timu cool?
Speaker 1 (23:45):
Oh God, yes, Temu tamu or TB for the yes.
All right, So now on to the next thing. So
the there are new transfer rules. Ralph, can you explain
to the folks what's going on with the new transfer rules?
(24:07):
Because when I first saw it, I was like, hold up,
this is confusing because I'm out of fingers.
Speaker 3 (24:15):
Okay, So there was a federal laws who filed in
West Virginia that was essentially saying that NCAA transfer rules
unjustifiably restrained the ability of college athletes to engage in
the market for their labor as D one athletes. When
this was filed, it caused back in December a restraining
(24:39):
order to be put on anybody who was being held
out for things like a double transfer, which we know
that football players at University of Colorado, Arizona State, Florida State,
North Carolina last year all were losing time to this
and had to go through multiple NC DOUBLEA appeals. Some
people never got their seasons back. In the case of
(25:01):
North Carolina, I think devontees Walker ended up getting to
play the last eight nine games or something. But this
lawsuit ended up being settled and now you are able
to transfer without any restriction, so you can go from
school to school without having to sit out. And anybody
(25:23):
who has sat out a transfer year and is still
in college is going to get a year back, which
means guys like Cam Rising, who is about to play
his sixth year in college football but technically has three
separate four separate red shirts mixed in there because last
(25:44):
year didn't play due to injury. His freshman year he
only had one snap. He had a transfer sit out
in his first year at Texas, I don't believe he played,
so technically he could play seven years of college footb
because he's going to get a year back and he's
eligible now due to injury.
Speaker 1 (26:04):
So dude, dude, if he goes back to college, and now,
mind you, that is a distinct possibility because let's say
if you're Cam Rising and you are not, so so
let's click this up for people. So people who sat
out in the nineteen twenty season, they can now get
(26:27):
a year of eligibility back. So that means that you're
gonna have that's nineteen twenty twenty twenty one, twenty one,
twenty two, twenty two, twenty three, twenty three, twenty four,
twenty four to twenty five. So yeah, so guys who
are getting had sixty years could potentially get a seventh year.
Speaker 3 (26:52):
Yes, absolutely. And then there's guys like Jake Smith who've
been held out for three years in a row because
he had to sit out transfer year, then he got hurt,
and then when he left without ever even practicing at USC,
the NCUBLEA called it a double transfer, so he got
held out last year at Arizona State. Jake Smith has
not played in three years. He's on its final year
of eligibility, but the NCUBLEA might give him one more
(27:15):
year back because of this. So I think some people
will be helpful for but h we we thought we
were at the end of guys four correct.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
So but if you're Cam Rising, you are obviously twenty
you know, like twenty four years old, and let's say
that you're not projected to be a first round pick.
Let's say that he comes back with like a fourth
round grade or a third round grade. Yeah, but but Utah,
(27:48):
because you guys have a great season makes college football playoff.
They're like ay yo, Cam you want to come come back?
Here's two million. What are you doing.
Speaker 3 (27:58):
Well?
Speaker 2 (27:59):
And stay in or are you going?
Speaker 3 (28:03):
It really depends to me on how loud all those
Big twelve schools boot him on the road. So if
I'm a if I'm a if I'm a Big twelve
fan in Utah comes to visit, I'm gonna be nice
because this man might come back. We want him going.
We want to I want you if if Cam Rising
came to my stadium I was a Baylor fan or
something like that, I'd be throwing roses on him. I'd
(28:24):
be a little golf clap every time he gets up
after taking a big hit. I don't want to see
him two more years. So but I mean, why if
you could? Why not? Why not? If you, you know,
let's say that you're not that interested in being an
NFL football player. Why not leave college with four degrees
and seven years of eligibility?
Speaker 2 (28:46):
Yeah, if they're gonna.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Let you, yeap.
Speaker 1 (28:49):
Hey, All right, now, let's get on to the kickoff times, Ralph,
because the kickoff times have started to be announced for
college football for this year and in the early season.
The funniest part about this is is that remember how
much that we talked about on the PAC twelve apostles
(29:12):
about the nine am kickoff games and how much.
Speaker 3 (29:16):
In order to save the conference we might have to
kick off at nine am.
Speaker 1 (29:19):
Yeah, and people hated it, push pushed back on it.
And now what's happening, Ralph.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
Well, they didn't save the PAC twelve. It broke up.
One of the schools that didn't find a home is
Oregon State, and I noticed that they've got themselves on
nine am kickoff time anyway, traveling too Boise State. The
fact that there's gonna be nine am kickoffs this year,
Number one, I feel bad for the fan bases that
(29:48):
are going to have to endure that, because that's tough.
You're gonna have to be there, like you know, especially
the people who work at the stadiums are gonn to
be there four thirty five in the morning. That part's tough.
But I will say that I'm reveling in it a
little bit because I want you to also be miserable, George,
because I moved to the East Coast three years ago
and college football kickoff times have been kicking my ass
(30:09):
for thirty six months, and it's time for you to
also be mad. Oh, I'm not.
Speaker 1 (30:15):
Gonna be mad because I am. I am. I'm up
and ready to go at that point in time.
Speaker 2 (30:24):
So I'm good. But check this out.
Speaker 3 (30:26):
You used to be able to run some errands, go
to depot, take some kids to practice.
Speaker 2 (30:31):
Nope, nope, f them kids. F them kids on Saturday.
Speaker 3 (30:36):
Oh all right, so don't you coach some of their sports? Hey?
Speaker 2 (30:41):
Did what did I just say? F them kids? Man?
Speaker 1 (30:44):
The scotsge football season. There there's commitment, Ralph, there's commitment.
Speaker 3 (30:51):
Sorry, guys, they're making me sit that They're making me
eat cereal and watch college for exactly.
Speaker 1 (30:56):
So here's the other part about these kickoff times is well,
these kickoffs that were announced, look at the Big twelve
just in week three alone, they're gonna have games on ESPN, Fox, ESPN,
two FS one, ESPN, U ESPN or ESPN, two, CBS
Sports and CBS all in the same week. So and
(31:22):
then when you look at the other conferences you're gonna have, Yeah,
you're gonna have a lot of SEC on the PAC
on ESPN. You got Fox with Fox has you know,
Big ten games, acc Big twelve, Big ten, a lot
(31:44):
of Big ten. They got Mountain West with Oregon State.
They got SEC with Alabama and Wisconsin, and then you
can think about the amount of games on Peacock and everything.
Speaker 2 (31:56):
So my takeaway from that is love it, Ralph.
Speaker 1 (32:00):
I love it because the more college football games on,
you can watch them anywhere. You can watch them all Peacock,
you can watch them on NBC ABC, like, there's so
much more inventory is available, and I'm here.
Speaker 3 (32:15):
For I'm excited too. I'm a little scared this year
because we put all our energy. For the most part,
we watched a lot of the big games, but all
my energy the last several years has been focused on
the PAC twelve. You know, I'm getting ready for an
eleven fifteen pm kickoff so I can watch Washington State
(32:37):
play Oregon State. And now, you know, I gotta I
gotta be paying attention to a lot more if we're
gonna not look like fools on this show. So I'm
I personally, I'm a little intimidated. I'm a little scared.
I am glad to not have to pay seven hundred
and twenty dollars a year for Sling anymore, just so
that I can have one channel. So I'm excited to
(32:57):
be saving that money and being able to watch watch
college football on all these networks that I do have. Yeah,
but I am a little bit intimidated by the amount
of college football that's going to be on and how
much it's spread out.
Speaker 1 (33:10):
Yeah, I'm excited to not have the Jimmy rigg My
like VPN. Make make sure it's on at home and
everything else to make sure I can watch.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
Weren't you watching? Weren't you watching PAC twelve games on
like YouTube EU? Yes?
Speaker 1 (33:23):
Yes, on the PAC twelve international feed. Hey man, listen,
I tried to get back twelve net network. It didn't work.
That's not my problem. Listen you you you should have
and that was the demise of the conference. They didn't
make it easily accessible. So that's not that I feel.
(33:45):
I feel no cares, I give no f's about it.
Speaker 3 (33:48):
Well, speaking of watching stuff, can I can I give?
Can I give you a little plug? Here? Go to
Unafraid show dot com. We got some videos up this week,
George Reister breaking down v ten college football quarterbacks that
will have the biggest impact on whether or not their
team appears in the College Football Playoff this year. We're
(34:08):
putting out content and shorts every single day on Afraid
Show on YouTube. Definitely, definitely check that out as we
gear up. We're one day away from June, which means
we're one month away from the Media Days, which means
we're two months away from some teams kicking off. It's
creeping up on us and we'll be putting a lot
(34:29):
of stuff up on Unafraid Show to get people ready
for the season.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
Damn right, and you guys, that's the Unafraid Show. Pack
twelve apostles today, peace out, Catch you guys next week.