Ashley Hodge said:

---

we will see how it plays out. We obviously don't want to be partners with someone who's first instinct is to sue us instead of working things out. We were blindsided by this. We've gone 8 years with very little communication from him.

---

Isn't he gobears? He was on BF

Dia del DougO said:

---

I can't even remember a lot of the names of the usual posters over there. I kinda wish I could go back and review the olden days, but then again probably best to not go there.

---

Several of us migrated over and are still here, often with the same usernames.

historian said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

I can't even remember a lot of the names of the usual posters over there. I kinda wish I could go back and review the olden days, but then again probably best to not go there.

---

Several of us migrated over and are still here, often with the same usernames.

---

Yeah we had to keep up our personas, after all.

I miss Back2Jack.

Did txkypreacherskid pass away?

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

I miss Back2Jack.

Did txkypreacherskid pass away?

---

I think both have passed

Was on BF for a long, long time with this username. Don't even live there any more but never changed. BF was way more interesting than 365.

CorsicanaBear said:

---

Was on BF for a long, long time with this username. Don't even live there any more but never changed. BF was way more interesting than 365.

---

Agreed. I feel like it was a better site to chat on opinions about football (Baylor or in general) without everyone trying to one up your knowledge, act like they knew more than you, say you can't have an opinion because you didn't play college ball, or act like they had the "inside" information either via the pay side or because they had the "connections."

historian said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

I can't even remember a lot of the names of the usual posters over there. I kinda wish I could go back and review the olden days, but then again probably best to not go there.

---

Several of us migrated over and are still here, often with the same usernames.

---

Yup. I did.

As I said earlier in the thread I think the majority of posters came over initially but then even the active posters over there started to lose interest here.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

I can't even remember a lot of the names of the usual posters over there. I kinda wish I could go back and review the olden days, but then again probably best to not go there.

---

I was Judge on those boards. Lots of great arguments with BUBEAR the shower guy. There was a good poster from Tech whose user name escapes me and the guy who played the piano and had a talk show in Houston lol.

I wished Jason would post the user names. Blast from the past. Those boards were hot during the Kevin Steele years.

---

Was the Tech guy Zebby?

---

Zebbie disappeared from the board when we won the BIGXII in football in 13 and 14

JP1037 said:

---

Maybe the solution is to revive Baylor Fans as a free site. Since you guys lose money and have been up front you would prefer not to do it anymore. Maybe a win/win.

---

Yep. It was a better site. The premium boards here are all group think. Even last year, low IQ individuals were still giving people grief for thinking Aranda should go. Emotions and quasi loyalty over logic and reason. I miss Baylorfans, it was fun.

I always felt Zebbie was around just to pat us on our little heads...until we started winning titles! Then he was just sour grapes.

I could be misremembering though hehe. It was so long ago....

BluesBear said:

---

I can see the reasoning for making everything subscription.

---

I suspect that over the next year you are going to see dark ages levels of detachment from Baylor football as the losses pile up, particularly if they whiff on the next AD.

An environment in which people are checking out and letting season tickets go for the actual product probably isn't conducive to a pay only model to discuss the product. Particularly in a social media world.

Just curious if you have any demographic data on the age of posters here?

RightRevBear said:

---

As a free side person that was on Baylorfans, I am thankful to Ashley and the rest of the Sic'em crew for giving us a place to post.

---

Ditto and ditto.

Hotsauce said:

---

I always felt Zebbie was around just to pat us on our little heads...until we started winning titles! Then he was just sour grapes.

I could be misremembering though hehe. It was so long ago....

---

So true - a true Tech fan.

Realitybites said:

---

BluesBear said:

---

I can see the reasoning for making everything subscription.

---

I suspect that over the next year you are going to see dark ages levels of detachment from Baylor football as the losses pile up, particularly if they whiff on the next AD.

An environment in which people are checking out and letting season tickets go for the actual product probably isn't conducive to a pay only model to discuss the product. Particularly in a social media world.

Just curious if you have any demographic data on the age of posters here?

---

I think you're right. I think the transfer portal and NIL is going to exacerbate the apathy. Back in the last Dark Ages, recruiting was a big deal and we all "skipped work" in February to watch signing day. Then even when we were awful, you "knew" those kids and enjoyed cheering for them from signing day to their first start - so you were engaged even if the team was a joke. It's harder to pull for highly paid mercenaries.

Zebbie always got a lot of crap for being a Tech guy posting on a Baylor board. But he seemed like a decent guy and poster, and generally supported Baylor otherwise.

Dia del DougO said:

---

Zebbie always got a lot of crap for being a Tech guy posting on a Baylor board. But he seemed like a decent guy and poster, and generally supported Baylor otherwise.

---

he is (or was, last I logged in) alli....

- uncle fred

D!

Go Bears!!

Dia del DougO said:

---

WA Jim said:

---

I think what Ashley said is that they lose money on the free side with their "current agreement" - that implies to me that that the old BaylorFans owner(s) may still have some sort of revenue share or something? I click on the ads once in a while here just to help drive a little revenue this way. So, maybe the current agreement needs to be revised somehow?

---

Likely something along those lines.

I know that Baylorfans still has a facebook presence of its own.

It's just unfortunate that there is now a narrative by a lot of users that it's the "poors" that are dragging down 365, and a certain segment just says good riddance.

But I don't think that's what the lawsuit is about.

I would be surprised of the free side was the primary reason the overall site is losing money. Likely it hit a peak of membership a few years ago, partially driven by new paying members from the free side. But mostly because of interest in Baylor football when things were going well.

Now there is a lot of frustration with college football in general in the new era, and more recently, fatigue from Baylor fans on the trajectory the last couple of years.

---

Yep, I know the lawsuit isn't about sicem threating the poors, but the narrative is there. Of course the free board has a cost, we all know that, but boards like this need a free section. They know this. They bought BaylorFans precisely because it had the traffic, and that's what they wanted. They lose the free board, and they lose the future traffic. Perhaps they have enough of a loyal base where that isn't as important now, but if the cost of "free" users is so great that it's a financial drain, then they clearly made really bad hosting, platform, and revenue sharing decisions very early on that they can't undo. And if they lose the free board, then they will create an instant competitor again because the reality is, lots of fans don't care enough to pay annual subscriptions just to get their two cents out there in digital space. Sure, right now, that free site would remain small, but if or as soon as BU starts doing well in football again the free site will grow immensely. And if it is good enough, it won't drive traffic here.

And, a free board has to be built into the cost structure of a site like this, and if it's not, then that's on them. My hope is they get it worked out, because I like this site, I like the people that run it, but at this point, I'd be very glad for the old BaylorFans to come back because the "hey poors, you're costing us money" bit is really getting old. Like they keep throwing that out there as a fear device, Poe's swinging Pendulum of Death - if you don't spend, we'll cut you off.

BUGWBBear said:

---

Ashley Hodge said:

---

we will see how it plays out. We obviously don't want to be partners with someone who's first instinct is to sue us instead of working things out. We were blindsided by this. We've gone 8 years with very little communication from him.

---

Isn't he gobears? He was on BF

---

gobears20 or something like that. i know there was a 20 in it.

Dia del DougO said:

---

Zebbie always got a lot of crap for being a Tech guy posting on a Baylor board. But he seemed like a decent guy and poster, and generally supported Baylor otherwise.

---

Wonder what happened to him.

If he's still around, he's got to be having a great time this year.

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

WA Jim said:

---

I think what Ashley said is that they lose money on the free side with their "current agreement" - that implies to me that that the old BaylorFans owner(s) may still have some sort of revenue share or something? I click on the ads once in a while here just to help drive a little revenue this way. So, maybe the current agreement needs to be revised somehow?

---

Likely something along those lines.

I know that Baylorfans still has a facebook presence of its own.

It's just unfortunate that there is now a narrative by a lot of users that it's the "poors" that are dragging down 365, and a certain segment just says good riddance.

But I don't think that's what the lawsuit is about.

I would be surprised of the free side was the primary reason the overall site is losing money. Likely it hit a peak of membership a few years ago, partially driven by new paying members from the free side. But mostly because of interest in Baylor football when things were going well.

Now there is a lot of frustration with college football in general in the new era, and more recently, fatigue from Baylor fans on the trajectory the last couple of years.

---

Yep, I know the lawsuit isn't about sicem threating the poors, but the narrative is there. Of course the free board has a cost, we all know that, but boards like this need a free section. They know this. They bought BaylorFans precisely because it had the traffic, and that's what they wanted. They lose the free board, and they lose the future traffic. Perhaps they have enough of a loyal base where that isn't as important now, but if the cost of "free" users is so great that it's a financial drain, then they clearly made really bad hosting, platform, and revenue sharing decisions very early on that they can't undo. And if they lose the free board, then they will create an instant competitor again because the reality is, lots of fans don't care enough to pay annual subscriptions just to get their two cents out there in digital space. Sure, right now, that free site would remain small, but if or as soon as BU starts doing well in football again the free site will grow immensely. And if it is good enough, it won't drive traffic here.

And, a free board has to be built into the cost structure of a site like this, and if it's not, then that's on them. My hope is they get it worked out, because I like this site, I like the people that run it, but at this point, I'd be very glad for the old BaylorFans to come back because the "hey poors, you're costing us money" bit is really getting old. Like they keep throwing that out there as a fear device, Poe's swinging Pendulum of Death - if you don't spend, we'll cut you off.

---

I mean let 'em do it. If that happens, I suspect Jason (or someone else) can crank up another one.

There are things about the old bfans I preferred, but at this point I'd rather not start over from scratch.

And you always take chances with a new moderator. Not many really know how to do it and keep a board fairly civil without over-moderating the hell out of it. I've seen too many internet heroes get power-drunk over running a goofy message board.

I felt like this site has its nose so far up Baylors ass compared to Baylorfans. I admit I was surprised when the came out to can Dave. Maybe us formers are starting to rub off on the Cinderella's.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

I felt like this site has its nose so far up Baylors ass compared to Baylorfans. I admit I was surprised when the came out to can Dave. Maybe us formers are starting to rub off on the Cinderella's.

---

Yep, it was definitely that way in the earlier years. The premies would send their self-appointed hall monitors down to the lowly poors to condemn their unsanctioned qualified opinions about the state of Baylor football.

Funny how things changed up there, to the point where they now seem much nastier towards Baylor leadership than us poors ever were.

Dia del DougO said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

I felt like this site has its nose so far up Baylors ass compared to Baylorfans. I admit I was surprised when the came out to can Dave. Maybe us formers are starting to rub off on the Cinderella's.

---

Yep, it was definitely that way in the earlier years. The premies would send their self-appointed hall monitors down to the lowly poors to condemn their unsanctioned qualified opinions about the state of Baylor football.

Funny how things changed up there, to the point where they now seem much nastier towards Baylor leadership than us poors ever were.

---

Pfft…seeing the homer content the staff puts up, I was always under the impression the snobs were subject to Pollyanna indoctrination.

I thought there were three owners of this site?

What happened to Brian Ethridge?

The_barBEARian said:

---

I thought there were three owners of this site?

What happened to Brian Ethridge?

---

He opted out a few months ago, but still posts once in a while.

They seem to have reduced staff, and the Smoak crew split off on its own, but sharing the same studio with some kind of deal. Seems like cost cutting, but also less content, especially on the video side. So I'm sure the issues with the site are complex. Then this lawsuit thing probably happened at the worse time.

Dia del DougO said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

I thought there were three owners of this site?

What happened to Brian Ethridge?

---

He opted out a few months ago, but still posts once in a while.

They seem to have reduced staff, and the Smoak crew split off on its own, but sharing the same studio with some kind of deal. Seems like cost cutting, but also less content, especially on the video side. So I'm sure the issues with the site are complex. Then this lawsuit thing probably happened at the worse time.

---

Thanks for the info!

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

I felt like this site has its nose so far up Baylors ass compared to Baylorfans. I admit I was surprised when the came out to can Dave. Maybe us formers are starting to rub off on the Cinderella's.

---

So true. In the early years right after merger you could not say anything negative about Baylor at all. They even admitted people from Baylor would look at the boards for things to remove.

Even providing facts like a coaches record could earn a ban.

After rhule left they seemed to loosen up a bit.

I was Plano Bear in that era and remember Grill Rat who created his screen name from watching a rat walk across a grill from his dorm room. My current screen name is a reference to a call in heckler who used to call into BackToJack's public radio call in show and call him Pea Weevil.

The_barBEARian said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

I thought there were three owners of this site?

What happened to Brian Ethridge?

---

He opted out a few months ago, but still posts once in a while.

They seem to have reduced staff, and the Smoak crew split off on its own, but sharing the same studio with some kind of deal. Seems like cost cutting, but also less content, especially on the video side. So I'm sure the issues with the site are complex. Then this lawsuit thing probably happened at the worse time.

---

Thanks for the info!

---

Just to clarify, Brian stepped away to focus on his new restaurant business. I don't think there was any bad blood or anything.

cowboycwr said:

---

CorsicanaBear said:

---

Was on BF for a long, long time with this username. Don't even live there any more but never changed. BF was way more interesting than 365.

---

Agreed. I feel like it was a better site to chat on opinions about football (Baylor or in general) without everyone trying to one up your knowledge, act like they knew more than you, say you can't have an opinion because you didn't play college ball, or act like they had the "inside" information either via the pay side or because they had the "connections."

---

There really was a very high-level of discourse over there, some really unique characters and some very, very intelligent and funny posters. I'm afraid this is just the perfect storm. A lesser site, a football team on life support, and changes in social media. The current owners, who seem like very nice guys, tout the inside information that you can get from the premium site. I was on it for quite a while, but it always seemed that all you got was information a couple of days earlier, and constant posts about how the team was going to be 9/3 or 10/2.

cowboycwr said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

I felt like this site has its nose so far up Baylors ass compared to Baylorfans. I admit I was surprised when the came out to can Dave. Maybe us formers are starting to rub off on the Cinderella's.

---

So true. In the early years right after merger you could not say anything negative about Baylor at all. They even admitted people from Baylor would look at the boards for things to remove.

Even providing facts like a coaches record could earn a ban.

After rhule left they seemed to loosen up a bit.

---

I don't think the timing of their acquisition was at all coincidental. baylorfans.com was wide open and was full of people hammering the board and the administration for its bungling of the #metoo media assault, especially for firing Briles.

The premium board (which was pretty much all that existed here) on this site was very pro BOR. If you were adamant that they completely screwed that up, you were persona non grata.

I would post criticisms on Baylorfans and generally get agreement, then post them here and mostly get disagreement. And these forums were more heavily moderated.

Then, interestingly, Baylorfans.com was acquired by sicem365. And all of a sudden, the free board that matriculated over here started becoming more moderated, along with people from the premium board parachuting in to try to enforce right thinking, and with apparent perusal of actual inside Baylor folks.

I was critical, and got called out, once with Ashley Hodge using my real life initials contrary to website terms. I thought that was a lot of bull***** I felt like my criticisms were reasonable and based in fact, and I did have a fair amount of sympathy for them I'm trying to run a Baylor message board in that difficult environment. But I was still gonna say what I thought.

I also had people send me the pro-BoR "inside information" plenty of times, which never had anything really new or different or particularly enlightening in it, especially compared to the stuff I was getting from all the people on the ground on both sides of the issue in Waco.

I dropped my premium subscription just because, frankly, the company groupthink enforced by peer pressure was flat out obnoxious and not particularly well argued.

(One aside that I find interesting, I give to Baylor at a pretty high level. I'm not a BMD. But I run with a lot of people that have given a Baylor for a long time, at reasonably high levels, and have a ton of family and friends that are Baylor peopl. The ones I know in person overwhelmingly agree that the way we handled that controversy, especially firing Briles, was an atrocious mistake. But interestingly, on the premium website here, the general current is to the opposite. I'm not sure why, but I could not tell you how many Baylor people I know, and I don't know a single one that will say they think firing Briles was a good idea. On this website, it's different.)

All in all, the acquisition did not completely kill the free board, but it wounded it severely. I think it also did a great disservice to robust debate surrounding Baylor issues. And I think there was probably a dynamic going on behind the scenes that made all of that intentional.

So I have little to no sympathy for the complaint that they are not making money on it. If that's a problem, spin it back out and let jason or his appointee run it again.

Robert Wilson said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

I felt like this site has its nose so far up Baylors ass compared to Baylorfans. I admit I was surprised when the came out to can Dave. Maybe us formers are starting to rub off on the Cinderella's.

---

So true. In the early years right after merger you could not say anything negative about Baylor at all. They even admitted people from Baylor would look at the boards for things to remove.

Even providing facts like a coaches record could earn a ban.

After rhule left they seemed to loosen up a bit.

---

I don't think the timing of their acquisition was at all coincidental. baylorfans.com was wide open and was full of people hammering the board and the administration for its bungling of the #metoo media assault, especially for firing Briles.

The premium board (which was pretty much all that existed here) on this site was very pro BOR. If you were adamant that they completely screwed that up, you were persona non grata.

I would post criticisms on Baylorfans and generally get agreement, then post them here and mostly get disagreement. And these forums were more heavily moderated.

Then, interestingly, Baylorfans.com was acquired by sicem365. And all of a sudden, the free board that matriculated over here started becoming more moderated, along with people from the premium board parachuting in to try to enforce right thinking, and with apparent perusal of actual inside Baylor folks.

I was critical, and got called out, once with Ashley Hodge using my real life initials contrary to website terms. I thought that was a lot of bull***** I felt like my criticisms were reasonable and based in fact, and I did have a fair amount of sympathy for them I'm trying to run a Baylor message board in that difficult environment. But I was still gonna say what I thought.

I also had people send me the pro-BoR "inside information" plenty of times, which never had anything really new or different or particularly enlightening in it, especially compared to the stuff I was getting from all the people on the ground on both sides of the issue in Waco.

I dropped my premium subscription just because, frankly, the company groupthink enforced by peer pressure was flat out obnoxious and not particularly well argued.

(One aside that I find interesting, I give to Baylor at a pretty high level. I'm not a BMD. But I run with a lot of people that have given a Baylor for a long time, at reasonably high levels, and have a ton of family and friends that are Baylor peopl. The ones I know in person overwhelmingly agree that the way we handled that controversy, especially firing Briles, was an atrocious mistake. But interestingly, on the premium website here, the general current is to the opposite. I'm not sure why, but I could not tell you how many Baylor people I know, and I don't know a single one that will say they think firing Briles was a good idea. On this website, it's different.)

All in all, the acquisition did not completely kill the free board, but it wounded it severely. I think it also did a great disservice to robust debate surrounding Baylor issues. And I think there was probably a dynamic going on behind the scenes that made all of that intentional.

So I have little to no sympathy for the complaint that they are not making money on it. If that's a problem, spin it back out and let jason or his appointee run it again.

---

This really prompted some thought. Like you, I've given plenty but nowhere near the BMD level. In my relatively large tribe of boomer age bears, it is exactly as you say. There is not a single one I know that thinks that the Briles matter was handled appropriately. I have very, very bright and incredibly successful friends, 3-5 of which ARE or at least were BMDs. and to a person they would take Briles in an instant, other than for his age. I'm trying really really hard, and literally can't think of a 1980s era alum that I've spoken to that believes he should have been fired.