Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Billings

Question for Fresno fans

Recommended Posts

I see you only have 5 home games this year. Is it worth it to play 2 BCS teams on the road and give up the 6th or 7th home game home game?

I know the Fresno athletic budget is in the red and in trouble, especially with educational cutbacks in California looking to be very ugly. Did the shortfalls play a role in this kind of schedule?

I like playing BCS teams as well but this schedule seems a bit over the top.

As a Fresno season ticket holder I would get to see home games with

Idaho

Hawaii

New Mexico State

Wisconsin

Nevada

Only Wisconsin and Nevada do anything for me on that list. IS there any grumbling?

not a flame I am just curious. Wyo fans would be really pissed with only 5 home games and that line up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see you only have 5 home games this year. Is it worth it to play 2 BCS teams on the road and give up the 6th or 7th home game home game?

I know the Fresno athletic budget is in the red and in trouble, especially with educational cutbacks in California looking to be very ugly. Did the shortfalls play a role in this kind of schedule?

I like playing BCS teams as well but this schedule seems a bit over the top.

As a Fresno season ticket holder I would get to see home games with

Idaho

Hawaii

New Mexico State

Wisconsin

Nevada

Only Wisconsin and Nevada do anything for me on that list. IS there any grumbling?

not a flame I am just curious. Wyo fans would be really pissed with only 5 home games and that line up

Great question Billings. I can only speak for myself, but a lot of it depends on how we as Dog fans feel about Coach Hill's scheduling philosophy. Personally I love it. If we did have a 6th home game it would likely have been against a 1AA (forget what the new acronym is) opponent. No Thanks. On top of that, we had a chance to schedule Rutgers who is an up and coming program (much how I see my DOGS) and it appeared that there was a decision to be made, Play Rutgers in NJ (with a return game I believe) or play a Portland State or a Weber State or the like at home. That was a no-brainer in my opinion. And unlike other schools, Fresno State does NOT schedule Bodybag games. Coach Hill and his team go into every game with the belief that they can WIN every game on the schedule.

Also, we have a great team this year, and if we are able to run the table, we WILL be in a BCS game, no doubt about it. I personally have no problem with having 5 home games, if it means we get another shot at a solid BCS game on the road. We've been getting a good vibe from Rutgers fans feeling pretty excited about the game, and also playing in New Jersey will give Fresno State more EXPOSURE, which I believe all of us nonAQ schools want in the long run.

I really do not see our scheduling as a budget issue at all. Having a 6th Home game would have made more money I believe as any game at the beginning of the year is usually a sellout or very close. Yes California is having budget problems, but I do not see us playing a Rutgers, a UCLA, or a Wisconsin as a money grab. These games are scheduled withe the belief that they are winnable games and will help the DOGS play in a BCS game. Coach Hill wants to be the best team out there, in order to for you to be the best, you need to play and beat the best teams out there. There is no "smoke and mirrors" about Coach Hill's scheduling philosophy.

Oh and also, just a reminder that K-State pulling out of a HOME game against the DOGS put us in a scheduling bind to begin with. I like Coach Prince at KState, but he needs to have some balls and play. We've had many KStaters on the Barkboard stating that they are ashamed of their school for buying out a HOME game against us.

Bulldog Football! Putting in Work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would much rather play the extra AQ Conference team on the road than an FCS school at home -- but then I'm not in town and looking at the season as a potential season ticket holder. Unless and until we can get better home competition, what it is is what it is and you either go to the games or you don't. Our season ticket count and attendance generally are hurt by the quality of our home schedule, however, nobody is denying that. But if we can't get the name schools to come to town, we have to play them on the road.

Fresno's OOC schedule has nothing to do with our athletic budget, however, and that budget is not in nearly as bad a shape as you think. Our AQ road games are not "body bag" games -- we'd net more money playing the FCS school at home. "Body bag" games are big money games for schools that don't expect to have a chance to win AND that don't draw well enough at home that an extra home game would generate as much as a road game. Don't forget, even with this schedule, we outdraw most MWC schools.

We play the road games for the television exposure and the boost to recruiting; recruits like Hill's bravado and "anywhere, any place, any time" is a big part of that. Start scheduling FCS schools and dropping an AQ school just so you can make more money and it would hurt recruiting in a big big way.

Yoda out...

____________________________________________...

After deleting some of my posts and closing the offending SteveAztec thread, a couple of elites have been able to open it long enough to respond to me anyway.  And since I can’t respond on a closed thread, here is my response…

Other than the initial inquiry, this has never been about letting Steve post again; I doubt that he even wants to post here.  My complaint is about his treatment on this board and the failure of admins to control attacks on him – and worse, to sometimes participate in those attacks.

Steve was first banned on the SDSU board.  When he was banned, it was a sufficiently controversial that they started what became an 8 page thread on the topic to justify the decision (https://aztecmesa.proboards.com/thread/9747/steve-aztec-longer-member-board).  It is clear that Steve had support in the community and there was some criticism for the Board Administrators for having failed to “expel the dozens of people who've been taunting him.”  (And take a look at the thread that I bumped; initially it was supporters happy about Steve getting a radio show.  Then the haters arrived.)

I can’t say if Steve took it too far in response, but I will say that he denies most of various accusations and adds important missing context to others.  But I wasn’t a party to any of the events and can’t say who is in the right and who is in the wrong.  And I have to admit that if half of what has been said about him is true, depending on context, I might well have banned him too.  Or more likely I might have banned those who were taunting him.  (Steve had lost a brother-in-law to suicide and there have been a number of memes of people blowing their brains out, as well as posts blaming Steve or his sister for the suicide – and admins apparently let it go.)

I am in no position to evaluate the truth or falsity of the laundry list of claims made on this board about how Steve responded to all this.  My complaint, however, is about his treatment on this board.  I may be wrong, but his banning on this board at least appears to have been less about what he did on this board and more a carryover from the SDSU banning.  The same taunting continued – more suicide memes – apparently ignored by the admins. Utenation supposedly posted the first and it is explained away because he didn’t know about the suicide.  But was the post taken down?  Was an apology issued?   Indeed, for years, admins on this board have allowed Steve to be vilified based on little more than anecdotal hearsay.  This is a privately owned board, but it is not a private board – anyone can join.  And more than that, It’s not an anonymous board; people know who Steve.  You have a duty to protect your posters from libelous statements and unproven allegations -- especially when, having been banned themselves, they have no ability to defend themselves.

Even Retrofade (who says he’s not a mod but can post to closed threads) put up a “blowing his brains out” meme several years ago.  He knew that Steve lost his brother-in-law to suicide, and he now says that “Steve is a mentally disturbed individual”, which is libelous by the way, but excuses his meme as nothing more than being in “poor taste”.  Apparently it is okay with the board's current admins to taunt a "mentally disturbed person" because the post has never been taken down.  The poster has never been admonished.  And there has been no apology, unless you consider "he deserved it" to be an apology.

In my view, you owe Steve an apology for the treatment that you have tolerated and, in some cases, engaged in.  A former Aztec board went out of business when sued (not by Steve).  It won’t be the last one.  You need to fix this.  You need to administer your board and prevent libelous and incendiary attacks -- hearsay-- on posters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would much rather play the extra AQ Conference team on the road than an FCS school at home -- but then I'm not in town and looking at the season as a potential season ticket holder. Unless and until we can get better home competition, what it is is what it is and you either go to the games or you don't. Our season ticket count and attendance generally are hurt by the quality of our home schedule, however, nobody is denying that. But if we can't get the name schools to come to town, we have to play them on the road.

Fresno's OOC schedule has nothing to do with our athletic budget, however, and that budget is not in nearly as bad a shape as you think. Our AQ road games are not "body bag" games -- we'd net more money playing the FCS school at home. "Body bag" games are big money games for schools that don't expect to have a chance to win AND that don't draw well enough at home that an extra home game would generate as much as a road game. Don't forget, even with this schedule, we outdraw most MWC schools.

We play the road games for the television exposure and the boost to recruiting; recruits like Hill's bravado and "anywhere, any place, any time" is a big part of that. Start scheduling FCS schools and dropping an AQ school just so you can make more money and it would hurt recruiting in a big big way.

Yoda out...

So why can't Fresno State get name teams to play there? Wyoming has been able to and they're located in a non-directional city just as you are. Forget about comparing attendance to the MWC. The idea is to max it and bringing in those kind of teams does it and potentially brings TV to Fresno. Hill's program is supposed be at the level to demand it instead of caving in to road games only. And don't give me this bunk about they're afraid to lose there. The top tier of the MWC gets their share of AQ teams for their home games, win or lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Our last two AD's were incompetent nincompoops. For quite awhile, we were accepting buyout amounts of $50,000 (or so I've heard) and schools were bailing out of the return games. We'd end up having to fill out the schedule with FCS schools.

2. Fresno has a reputation as being a "giant killer" -- Wyoming does not. We are a much tougher road win and more than that, there are a lot easier road wins out there to be had for more or less the same money. So why schedule us? If and when we expand the stadium, we can offer more money and I'm sure that the money will make up for the added risk -- at least for some AQ conference schools. But for now, we offer much greater risk of losing but offer no significant offsetting monetary differential.

3. At best, we're likely to get two OOC games at home anyway. Last year, one of them was Kansas State; this year we get Wisconsin. I think we'll be doing a little better in the future. We've raised the buy out amounts that we will accept, so hopefully we will have fewer schools pulling out in the future.

4. We'd love to improve our conference schedule as well but, as you well know, the PAC 10 wouldn't ever consider CSU schools.

Yoda out...

____________________________________________...

After deleting some of my posts and closing the offending SteveAztec thread, a couple of elites have been able to open it long enough to respond to me anyway.  And since I can’t respond on a closed thread, here is my response…

Other than the initial inquiry, this has never been about letting Steve post again; I doubt that he even wants to post here.  My complaint is about his treatment on this board and the failure of admins to control attacks on him – and worse, to sometimes participate in those attacks.

Steve was first banned on the SDSU board.  When he was banned, it was a sufficiently controversial that they started what became an 8 page thread on the topic to justify the decision (https://aztecmesa.proboards.com/thread/9747/steve-aztec-longer-member-board).  It is clear that Steve had support in the community and there was some criticism for the Board Administrators for having failed to “expel the dozens of people who've been taunting him.”  (And take a look at the thread that I bumped; initially it was supporters happy about Steve getting a radio show.  Then the haters arrived.)

I can’t say if Steve took it too far in response, but I will say that he denies most of various accusations and adds important missing context to others.  But I wasn’t a party to any of the events and can’t say who is in the right and who is in the wrong.  And I have to admit that if half of what has been said about him is true, depending on context, I might well have banned him too.  Or more likely I might have banned those who were taunting him.  (Steve had lost a brother-in-law to suicide and there have been a number of memes of people blowing their brains out, as well as posts blaming Steve or his sister for the suicide – and admins apparently let it go.)

I am in no position to evaluate the truth or falsity of the laundry list of claims made on this board about how Steve responded to all this.  My complaint, however, is about his treatment on this board.  I may be wrong, but his banning on this board at least appears to have been less about what he did on this board and more a carryover from the SDSU banning.  The same taunting continued – more suicide memes – apparently ignored by the admins. Utenation supposedly posted the first and it is explained away because he didn’t know about the suicide.  But was the post taken down?  Was an apology issued?   Indeed, for years, admins on this board have allowed Steve to be vilified based on little more than anecdotal hearsay.  This is a privately owned board, but it is not a private board – anyone can join.  And more than that, It’s not an anonymous board; people know who Steve.  You have a duty to protect your posters from libelous statements and unproven allegations -- especially when, having been banned themselves, they have no ability to defend themselves.

Even Retrofade (who says he’s not a mod but can post to closed threads) put up a “blowing his brains out” meme several years ago.  He knew that Steve lost his brother-in-law to suicide, and he now says that “Steve is a mentally disturbed individual”, which is libelous by the way, but excuses his meme as nothing more than being in “poor taste”.  Apparently it is okay with the board's current admins to taunt a "mentally disturbed person" because the post has never been taken down.  The poster has never been admonished.  And there has been no apology, unless you consider "he deserved it" to be an apology.

In my view, you owe Steve an apology for the treatment that you have tolerated and, in some cases, engaged in.  A former Aztec board went out of business when sued (not by Steve).  It won’t be the last one.  You need to fix this.  You need to administer your board and prevent libelous and incendiary attacks -- hearsay-- on posters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cowboy Junky

1. Our last two AD's were incompetent nincompoops.

2. Fresno has a reputation as being a "giant killer" -- Wyoming does not. We are a much tougher road win and more than that, there are a lot easier road wins out there to be had for more or less the same money. So why schedule us? If and when we expand the stadium, we can offer more money and I'm sure that the money will make up for the added risk. But for now, we offer much greater risk and no significant monetary differential.

Yoda out...

That's a load of hogwash. If that is the case then why does Wyoming have a better record over our last seven games against the BCS then Fresno? We're 4-3 in our last seven. Fresno is 2-5. In our last 10 vs. the BCS, we're both 4-6. Maybe we should compare all time home winning percentages. I know we're sitting at about 70 percent wins in War Memorial, and we haven't been inflating our record with wins against Idaho, NMSU, Nevada, and the rest of the Big West. We've definitely played a tougher home slate than Fresno has. We've been playing BYU, Utah...etc...

I just don't see that Fresno is a tougher road venue than Laramie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a load of hogwash. If that is the case then why does Wyoming have a better record over our last seven games against the BCS then Fresno? Maybe we should compare all time home winning percentages. I know we're sitting at about 70 percent wins in War Memorial, and we haven't been inflating our record with wins against Idaho, NMSU, Nevada, and the rest of the Big West. We've definitely played a tougher home slate than Fresno has. We've been playing BYU, Utah...etc...

I just don't see that Fresno is a tougher road venue than Laramie. Our last game against the BCS we beat a top 25 team. Remind me again what Fresno did in your last game against the BCS.

Are you kidding me Crack Junky? You dont honestly believe Wyoming and Fresno State are thought of as equals do you?

Wyoming is nothing more than a mid level mid major, with 6-6 season being the norm with very few big wins. Wyoming has an overall losing record to WAC teams for crying out loud. Fresno has WAY BETTER wins than Wyoming does vs BCS teams over this decade.

You think playing BYU and Utah at home is tougher than BSU and Hawaii? LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BYU has been total garbage for quite awhile now, finally coming along the last 2 years. BYU STILL HAS ZERO WINS VS RANKED BCS TEAMS. Even La Tech has beat a ranked BCS team. Utah was nothing before Urban Meyer, and has been nothing since they left. Good teams dont lose to UNLV. BSU has biggers wins than either BYU or Utah over the last few years, and Hawaii has beat BCS bowl teams such as Arizona St, Purdue, etc...... BYU beats nobody, and Utah is a has been.

Wyoming does NOT play a tougher schedule than Fresno. Besides, Wyoming is just going to get worse as the years go by. Trying to get top notch talent from Cali to come to the barren, frozen, boring land of Wyoming just isnt going to happen. Location is killing the Cowboys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. Fresno has a reputation as being a "giant killer" -- Wyoming does not. We are a much tougher road win and more than that, there are a lot easier road wins out there to be had for more or less the same money. So why schedule us? If and when we expand the stadium, we can offer more money and I'm sure that the money will make up for the added risk -- at least for some AQ conference schools. But for now, we offer much greater risk of losing but offer no significant offsetting monetary differential.

You know I hear Fresno fans and WAC fans say this but I never hear it on ESPN or read it anywhwere else for that matter. what makes you giant killers? Was it because you beat colroado 5 or 6 years ago when they were a legit top 10 team? who else have you beaten? I don't see it. your record vs BCS teams is good, but TCU and Utah have better records. you do have the best win this decade for nonbcs teams but that was one time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you kidding me Crack Junky? You dont honestly believe Wyoming and Fresno State are thought of as equals do you?

Wyoming is nothing more than a mid level mid major, with 6-6 season being the norm with very few big wins. Wyoming has an overall losing record to WAC teams for crying out loud. Fresno has WAY BETTER wins than Wyoming does vs BCS teams over this decade.

You think playing BYU and Utah at home is tougher than BSU and Hawaii? LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BYU has been total garbage for quite awhile now, finally coming along the last 2 years. BYU STILL HAS ZERO WINS VS RANKED BCS TEAMS. Even La Tech has beat a ranked BCS team. Utah was nothing before Urban Meyer, and has been nothing since they left. Good teams dont lose to UNLV. BSU has biggers wins than either BYU or Utah over the last few years, and Hawaii has beat BCS bowl teams such as Arizona St, Purdue, etc...... BYU beats nobody, and Utah is a has been.

Wyoming does NOT play a tougher schedule than Fresno. Besides, Wyoming is just going to get worse as the years go by. Trying to get top notch talent from Cali to come to the barren, frozen, boring land of Wyoming just isnt going to happen. Location is killing the Cowboys.

The only WAS teams that UW has loosing records against is the donks and Utah State. All time against the current WAS members is 54-53, and only because Utah State was once good. Football didn't begin 10 years ago as so many WAS fans seem to think.

UW has had some pretty bad years as of late, but if you think that it will be that way forever, you are retarded.

"They're a bunch of jealous little dicks who use the anonymity of the internet to insult people who're doing what they wish they were doing." ~ Holden McNeil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cowboy Junky

Are you kidding me Crack Junky? You dont honestly believe Wyoming and Fresno State are thought of as equals do you?

Wyoming is nothing more than a mid level mid major, with 6-6 season being the norm with very few big wins. Wyoming has an overall losing record to WAC teams for crying out loud. Fresno has WAY BETTER wins than Wyoming does vs BCS teams over this decade.

You think playing BYU and Utah at home is tougher than BSU and Hawaii? LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BYU has been total garbage for quite awhile now, finally coming along the last 2 years. BYU STILL HAS ZERO WINS VS RANKED BCS TEAMS. Even La Tech has beat a ranked BCS team. Utah was nothing before Urban Meyer, and has been nothing since they left. Good teams dont lose to UNLV. BSU has biggers wins than either BYU or Utah over the last few years, and Hawaii has beat BCS bowl teams such as Arizona St, Purdue, etc...... BYU beats nobody, and Utah is a has been.

Wyoming does NOT play a tougher schedule than Fresno. Besides, Wyoming is just going to get worse as the years go by. Trying to get top notch talent from Cali to come to the barren, frozen, boring land of Wyoming just isnt going to happen. Location is killing the Cowboys.

What has Fresno done, beat up on a bunch of Big West teams for 40 years? I think everyone in the old Big West, the old Wac, the new Wac, and the MWC will acknowledge which schedule was tougher. We have the same amount of conference championships in the last 15 years. At least we're not playing 5-7 games a year against teams in the 80-120th category of college football. Fresno has been for 40 years.

Fresno may have had a reputation of being a BCS beater 6 years ago. Since 2004 Wyoming is 4-3 vs the BCS and Fresno is 2-5. Spin that how you want, but it's the facts. We've done it with a .500 team. Fresno has done it with a better winning percentage based on a candyass, bubble gum schedule known as the Big West. Since 2004, Fresno hasn't done a damn thing. I doubt BCS teams are cowering in fear of playing Fresno anytime or anywhere.

You really have to be a complete homer, toolbelt moron to even try to compare anything the BigWest/New Wac has done to the Old Wac/MWC. We owned your +++ then. We own the Wac now. If you don't believe me follow the links to the head to head for both conferences. We've completely dominated the Big West and New Wac. That's just the way it is. So has Boise. Congratulations on accomplishing something that the majority of teams in our league have been doing since 1950.

BYU had a down time. Utah had a down time. Wyoming has had a down time. AFA has had a down time. CSU has had a down time. The difference between our leagues, they've all had up times in the last 50 years as well. The Old Wac dominated the Big West. The MWC dominates the Wac. That's just the way it is.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_i....php?confid=203

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a load of hogwash. If that is the case then why does Wyoming have a better record over our last seven games against the BCS then Fresno? Maybe we should compare all time home winning percentages. I know we're sitting at about 70 percent wins in War Memorial, and we haven't been inflating our record with wins against Idaho, NMSU, Nevada, and the rest of the Big West. We've definitely played a tougher home slate than Fresno has. We've been playing BYU, Utah...etc...

I just don't see that Fresno is a tougher road venue than Laramie. Our last game against the BCS we beat a top 25 team. Remind me again what Fresno did in your last game against the BCS.

Learn to read, CJ -- which of those seven games of yours were against "giants"? Answer: 1 (Florida) -- and you lost big time . They were the only AQ Conference team (of those seven) that you have even played that finished in the top 30 of the season ending Sagarin rankings. You're apparently counting the first game of the season against Virginia as a win over a Top 25 team but they finished the season at #41 in the Sagarin rankings. Needless to say, a loss to Wyoming kind of puts a damper on your ranking.

Let's see, in your last seven AQ conference games, you've played AQ conference teams with an average Sagarin ranking of 58.86 and an average rating that was only 62.27. In that same period, we've played teams with an average Sagarin ranking of 38.14 and an average rating of 78.99 -- almost 17 points higher. And loser you try to take advantage of that little omission to prove you are better? You're laughable -- Wyoming is not even worthy of being allowed to carry our jock straps bucko -- much less of being considered our equal.

And why did you stop at the last 7 games? Perhaps it is because you lost all dozen of your immediately prior games against non-AQ teams. You have to go back to 1997 to find a win and, at that, it was against Iowa State -- themselves such a "giant" that you could beat them but lose to Fresno State (before we were any good) by 17 in the same season. Some giant killer. The only win against a team in the season ending top 40 in at least the last 10 years -- that's as far back as I went -- was a 3 point win over a school with a season ending Sagarin ranking of #34. You have exactly ZERO "giant killer" wins in the past ten years.

Go back ten years for Fresno and you will find wins against Colorado (the year they won the Big 12), preseason #1 (and clearly over ranked) Oregon State, a ranked (until they played us) Virginia, and several others.

And you don't just get the giant killer label for winning -- sometimes you get it for coming close against top ranked schools. In our case, we have the famous scare that we threw into USC a couple of years ago as well as a couple of three point losses to top 10 teams -- all road games

I feel like I'm having a battle of wits with a totally unarmed man here. Oh wait. I am. Please quit before you hurt yourself.

Yoda out...

____________________________________________...

After deleting some of my posts and closing the offending SteveAztec thread, a couple of elites have been able to open it long enough to respond to me anyway.  And since I can’t respond on a closed thread, here is my response…

Other than the initial inquiry, this has never been about letting Steve post again; I doubt that he even wants to post here.  My complaint is about his treatment on this board and the failure of admins to control attacks on him – and worse, to sometimes participate in those attacks.

Steve was first banned on the SDSU board.  When he was banned, it was a sufficiently controversial that they started what became an 8 page thread on the topic to justify the decision (https://aztecmesa.proboards.com/thread/9747/steve-aztec-longer-member-board).  It is clear that Steve had support in the community and there was some criticism for the Board Administrators for having failed to “expel the dozens of people who've been taunting him.”  (And take a look at the thread that I bumped; initially it was supporters happy about Steve getting a radio show.  Then the haters arrived.)

I can’t say if Steve took it too far in response, but I will say that he denies most of various accusations and adds important missing context to others.  But I wasn’t a party to any of the events and can’t say who is in the right and who is in the wrong.  And I have to admit that if half of what has been said about him is true, depending on context, I might well have banned him too.  Or more likely I might have banned those who were taunting him.  (Steve had lost a brother-in-law to suicide and there have been a number of memes of people blowing their brains out, as well as posts blaming Steve or his sister for the suicide – and admins apparently let it go.)

I am in no position to evaluate the truth or falsity of the laundry list of claims made on this board about how Steve responded to all this.  My complaint, however, is about his treatment on this board.  I may be wrong, but his banning on this board at least appears to have been less about what he did on this board and more a carryover from the SDSU banning.  The same taunting continued – more suicide memes – apparently ignored by the admins. Utenation supposedly posted the first and it is explained away because he didn’t know about the suicide.  But was the post taken down?  Was an apology issued?   Indeed, for years, admins on this board have allowed Steve to be vilified based on little more than anecdotal hearsay.  This is a privately owned board, but it is not a private board – anyone can join.  And more than that, It’s not an anonymous board; people know who Steve.  You have a duty to protect your posters from libelous statements and unproven allegations -- especially when, having been banned themselves, they have no ability to defend themselves.

Even Retrofade (who says he’s not a mod but can post to closed threads) put up a “blowing his brains out” meme several years ago.  He knew that Steve lost his brother-in-law to suicide, and he now says that “Steve is a mentally disturbed individual”, which is libelous by the way, but excuses his meme as nothing more than being in “poor taste”.  Apparently it is okay with the board's current admins to taunt a "mentally disturbed person" because the post has never been taken down.  The poster has never been admonished.  And there has been no apology, unless you consider "he deserved it" to be an apology.

In my view, you owe Steve an apology for the treatment that you have tolerated and, in some cases, engaged in.  A former Aztec board went out of business when sued (not by Steve).  It won’t be the last one.  You need to fix this.  You need to administer your board and prevent libelous and incendiary attacks -- hearsay-- on posters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cowboy Junky

Let's review: in 2005 Fresno didn't beat anyone from the BCS. They we're 0-2 that year against the BCS.

in 2006 Fresno didn't beat anyone from the BCS. They were 0-2 that year against the BCS.

Last year Fresno was 2-2 vs. the BCS. You lost to A & M and Oregon and beat Ga. Tech in Boise and Kansas State at home. Ga. Tech and K State sucked balls last year.

You're not exactly inspiring fear as a giant killer. Get over yourselves. What have you done for anyone lately? You can't even win the Big West/Wac.

Wyoming 4-3 vs. the BCS in the last seven. Since 2004, Fresno is 2-6 against the BCS.

Keep spinning about the close victories. 2-6 is impressive.

That's exactly my point: Wyoming, a middle of the road MWC team is 4-3 against the BCS, with a 23-3 beat down of a team that finished in the top 25. Fresno, a Wac powerhouse, is 2-6 vs. the BCS, with wins against a miserable Ga. Tech team and a lousy KSU team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Little one, if Wyoming had played our schedule they'd be 0-7. And if we had played your wimpy-+++ schedule, we'd be 7-0. Well, 6-1 anyway -- @ Florida is a serious matchup.

Like it or not, the quality of the opponent matters.

Now I'm done with this thread as I've got work to do today.

Yoda out...

____________________________________________...

After deleting some of my posts and closing the offending SteveAztec thread, a couple of elites have been able to open it long enough to respond to me anyway.  And since I can’t respond on a closed thread, here is my response…

Other than the initial inquiry, this has never been about letting Steve post again; I doubt that he even wants to post here.  My complaint is about his treatment on this board and the failure of admins to control attacks on him – and worse, to sometimes participate in those attacks.

Steve was first banned on the SDSU board.  When he was banned, it was a sufficiently controversial that they started what became an 8 page thread on the topic to justify the decision (https://aztecmesa.proboards.com/thread/9747/steve-aztec-longer-member-board).  It is clear that Steve had support in the community and there was some criticism for the Board Administrators for having failed to “expel the dozens of people who've been taunting him.”  (And take a look at the thread that I bumped; initially it was supporters happy about Steve getting a radio show.  Then the haters arrived.)

I can’t say if Steve took it too far in response, but I will say that he denies most of various accusations and adds important missing context to others.  But I wasn’t a party to any of the events and can’t say who is in the right and who is in the wrong.  And I have to admit that if half of what has been said about him is true, depending on context, I might well have banned him too.  Or more likely I might have banned those who were taunting him.  (Steve had lost a brother-in-law to suicide and there have been a number of memes of people blowing their brains out, as well as posts blaming Steve or his sister for the suicide – and admins apparently let it go.)

I am in no position to evaluate the truth or falsity of the laundry list of claims made on this board about how Steve responded to all this.  My complaint, however, is about his treatment on this board.  I may be wrong, but his banning on this board at least appears to have been less about what he did on this board and more a carryover from the SDSU banning.  The same taunting continued – more suicide memes – apparently ignored by the admins. Utenation supposedly posted the first and it is explained away because he didn’t know about the suicide.  But was the post taken down?  Was an apology issued?   Indeed, for years, admins on this board have allowed Steve to be vilified based on little more than anecdotal hearsay.  This is a privately owned board, but it is not a private board – anyone can join.  And more than that, It’s not an anonymous board; people know who Steve.  You have a duty to protect your posters from libelous statements and unproven allegations -- especially when, having been banned themselves, they have no ability to defend themselves.

Even Retrofade (who says he’s not a mod but can post to closed threads) put up a “blowing his brains out” meme several years ago.  He knew that Steve lost his brother-in-law to suicide, and he now says that “Steve is a mentally disturbed individual”, which is libelous by the way, but excuses his meme as nothing more than being in “poor taste”.  Apparently it is okay with the board's current admins to taunt a "mentally disturbed person" because the post has never been taken down.  The poster has never been admonished.  And there has been no apology, unless you consider "he deserved it" to be an apology.

In my view, you owe Steve an apology for the treatment that you have tolerated and, in some cases, engaged in.  A former Aztec board went out of business when sued (not by Steve).  It won’t be the last one.  You need to fix this.  You need to administer your board and prevent libelous and incendiary attacks -- hearsay-- on posters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cowboy Junky

Little one, if Wyoming had played our schedule they'd be 0-7. And if we had played your wimpy-+++ schedule, we'd be 7-0. Well, 6-1 anyway -- @ Florida is a serious matchup.

Like it or not, the quality of the opponent matters.

Now I'm done with this thread as I've got work to do today.

Yoda out...

Right. Your only wins against the BCS since 2004 were against a 5-7 Kansas State team at home and a 7-6 Ga. Tech team in Boise.

We beat a 6-6 UCLA team in a neutral site. We beat a 4-7 Ole Miss team on the road. We beat a 3-7 Ole Miss team at home. We blew out a 9-4 Viriginia team at home, that finished the regular season in the top 25. The two things we have that you don't: a road BCS win and a win against a BCS team that finished the regular season in the top 25.

If you want to compare Sagarin ratings of your 5-7 KSU or 7-6 Ga Tech teams to Virginia's, we can do that too.

Giant Killers indeed!! I'm sure the BCS teams are shaking in their boots about coming to Fresno.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think playing BYU and Utah at home is tougher than BSU and Hawaii? LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BYU has been total garbage for quite awhile now, finally coming along the last 2 years. BYU STILL HAS ZERO WINS VS RANKED BCS TEAMS. Even La Tech has beat a ranked BCS team. Utah was nothing before Urban Meyer, and has been nothing since they left. Good teams dont lose to UNLV. BSU has biggers wins than either BYU or Utah over the last few years, and Hawaii has beat BCS bowl teams such as Arizona St, Purdue, etc...... BYU beats nobody, and Utah is a has been.

Wyoming does NOT play a tougher schedule than Fresno. Besides, Wyoming is just going to get worse as the years go by. Trying to get top notch talent from Cali to come to the barren, frozen, boring land of Wyoming just isnt going to happen. Location is killing the Cowboys.

You are kidding right Ianfortrolloftheyearaward? The last two years BYU has been more competaive vs. wyoming then BSU has, it hasn't even been close. Hawaii is the current joke of the mids at this point.

Though BYU was total garbage they have started to rise and I know that makes you insecure because you see your title as the best mid fluttering away all too fast. Get over it. Well you are right we have yet to beat a ranked BCs team but one could say BSU has yet to beat ANY BCS team in their house. Even UNLV and USU have beaten a BCS team in their house this decade now that is pathetic.

Nice try but news flash Oregon was ranked higher in the PAC-10 then AZ St who had a padded OOC that year, colorado, northern AZ, and Nevada, add to that stanford and washington and you see why they were actually bowl elidgable. Purdue did have 8 wins because they had Ball St., Miami (OH), and Indiana st in their OOC. Add to that Indiana, Illinios, Michigan St., Northwestern, and Minnisota and you all their wins vs. teams that didn't even go .50. Nice example IanisaDonk that great Purdue team didn't beat one team with a winning record all year and only lost by 1 TD to Hawaii at Hawaii, huge win there buddy!! Ha HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you kidding me Crack Junky? You dont honestly believe Wyoming and Fresno State are thought of as equals do you?

Wyo and fresno are 3-3 overall seems pretty equal to me, on the field anyway. I do agree the public see fresno as a much tougher game and they have been better than wyo since Wyo made a bad hire and the program dived at about the same time the MWC formed.

I hope to see wyo get better and I think we are competitive again but not yet winning. I hope Fresno runs the BCS table but I think hill overshedules and kills his team. This year is an example. Play one or maybe 2 BCS teams and get one of them at home. Their schedule this year is enough or you kill your chances for something bigger.

Never short your ticket buying fans either. Fresno did that this year altough KState really screed them over and is a chickenshit program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think playing BYU and Utah at home is tougher than BSU and Hawaii? LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's see in the last 5 years: Cal, Oregon, Texas A&M, North Carolina, Arizona, and UCLA have all come to SLC and left with a loss, several of those losses were decided ones.

I think that list will compare favorably with BSU, Hawai'i or Fresno's list of scalps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. Your only wins against the BCS since 2004 were against a 5-7 Kansas State team at home and a 7-6 Ga. Tech team in Boise.

We beat a 6-6 UCLA team in a neutral site. We beat a 4-7 Ole Miss team on the road. We beat a 3-7 Ole Miss team at home. We blew out a 9-4 Viriginia team at home, that finished the regular season in the top 25. The two things we have that you don't: a road BCS win and a win against a BCS team that finished the regular season in the top 25.

If you want to compare Sagarin ratings of your 5-7 KSU or 7-6 Ga Tech teams to Virginia's, we can do that too.

Giant Killers indeed!! I'm sure the BCS teams are shaking in their boots about coming to Fresno.

Get your facts straight.

In 2004, Fresno State beat No. 13 Kansas State on the road. Granted they did not finish the season ranked, but they were ranked when we beat them. In that same year, we also beat No. 18 Virginia, who finished the season at No. 23 in the AP, and No. 18 in the BCS.

So, we also have a road BCS win and a win against a BCS team that finished the regular season in the Top 25. The difference is our road win came against a RANKED BCS team.

Also, you must take into consideration the over-quality of our opponents compared to yours:

Wyoming's BCS Opponents since '04:

Texas A&M

(10) Florida

Miss

Virginia X2

Syracuse

Fresno's BCS opponents since '04:

Washington

(13) KSU X2

(18) Virginia

(1) USC

(19) Oregon X2

(14) LSU

(23) Texas A&M

Georgia Tech X2

So, since '04 you guys have played ONE ranked BCS team. You've played SIX BCS teams, we've played ELEVEN.

No comparison.

1MXnKMV.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get your facts straight.

In 2004, Fresno State beat No. 13 Kansas State on the road. Granted they did not finish the season ranked, but they were ranked when we beat them. In that same year, we also beat No. 18 Virginia, who finished the season at No. 23 in the AP, and No. 18 in the BCS.

So, we also have a road BCS win and a win against a BCS team that finished the regular season in the Top 25. The difference is our road win came against a RANKED BCS team.

Also, you must take into consideration the over-quality of our opponents compared to yours:

Wyoming's BCS Opponents since '04:

Texas A&M

(10) Florida

Miss

Virginia X2

Syracuse

Fresno's BCS opponents since '04:

Washington

(13) KSU X2

(18) Virginia

(1) USC

(19) Oregon X2

(14) LSU

(23) Texas A&M

Georgia Tech X2

So, since '04 you guys have played ONE ranked BCS team. You've played SIX BCS teams, we've played ELEVEN.

No comparison.

What is it with WAC fans and research?

First of all, Wyoming has played 8 BCS teams since 2004. You missed Ole Miss (who we had a home and home with) and UCLA. Both of which were wins, giving us a record of 4-4 (2 home, 5 away, 1 neutral). None of the wins came against teams that finished ranked. One win, UVA, came against a team who played in a New Year's Day bowl.

Fresno, was 5-6 (you did get the number of BCS teams Fresno played correct). To Fresno's credit, 7 were away games, two neutral, and one home. How many of those wins were against teams that finished ranked (we all know that when you played them means very little)?

In addition, Wyoming played 4 of those games east of the Mississippi, Fresno none.

Thought I would at least provide some accurate information.

Go Pokes!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...