Jump to content

Archived

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

utenation

Boise AD comes clean on Scheduling and throws

Recommended Posts

King Karl got caught with his pants down and now his top dog is trying to rid themselves of his spew. Benson's statement also sends a bad message for future negotiations.. Who knows, maybe those schools that turned Boise down already have 2011 booked or have a waiting list?

Benson didn't say anything that was factually wrong, Bleymeier just wants to take the high road on this and distance himself from Benson who is calling out bunch name schools for being chicken ++++. As you said, it sends a bad message for future negotiations. Our AD doesn't want every BCS AD in the country mad at him so he is washing his hands of this.

As a fan, I don't need to take the high road. There is a lot of schools with open dates in 2011 and they are ducking Boise State. Starting with Nebraska.

       

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BSU and Benson constantly seem at odds with each other. Is it just me?????

Hey, thanks for starting another WAC thread, utenation.

I wouldn't say that they are at odds. But clearly, there has to be some stresses in the conference with Boise so public about their desire to move to the BCS and the Commissioner having to address the issue all the time -- both internally and externally. Looks like this one spilled out a little.

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

Don't forget, Benson was interviewed at the half of the Fresno or Tulsa game, can't remember.

He said Boise "strategically" scheduled 1 BCS team this year.

Boise fans were outraged. They knew the real story line is that it's hard for Boise to schedule BCS teams on a fair basis.

After that, you saw the WAC hire the PR firm for Boise, and Benson starting talking about Boise's scheduling problems.

Now this reaction from the Boise AD. Very interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think 2 for 1's will be a popular option going forward.. I think the P10 and B12 will still do well with us on home and homes, we have some good relationships...

And there is a reasonable amount of teams in that pool that we could see go 2 for 1 vs. Utah, BYU, TCU and Boise. Those who have done and can do (again in some cases.)

-Texas Tech

-Texas A & M

-Oklahoma State

-Kansas

-Kansas State

-Missouri

-Oregon

-Oregon State

-California

-Stanford

-UCLA

-Arizona

Those who I think would be teams that I see can play at RES, LES, AGCS and the blue turf in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this part interesting.

It also looks like Boise doesn't like Benson speaking on behalf of Boise.... It's clear to me, Boise is just starting to get into the big boy scheduling business.. One that our schools have been doing for years now and have established relationships with..

Their price tag demand for a one and done seems reasonable but that also leaves out many quality up and coming mid level BCS teams that would love to knock off Boise with their offer...

It seems Boise is only interested in Big money deals or home and homes... There's nothing wrong with 2 for 1's, especially if you're tired of getting ripped on in the media for your schedule..

Wyoming is certainly keeping up it's end of the bargain...

2001 Texas A&M

2003 Kansas

2004 Ole Miss

2007 Virginia

2009 Texas

Future home opponents include Nebraska, Missouri and Oregon.

So BSU, what's the problem?

PokeNation: Internet Society of Wyoming fans everywhere

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this part interesting.

It also looks like Boise doesn't like Benson speaking on behalf of Boise.... It's clear to me, Boise is just starting to get into the big boy scheduling business.. One that our schools have been doing for years now and have established relationships with..

Their price tag demand for a one and done seems reasonable but that also leaves out many quality up and coming mid level BCS teams that would love to knock off Boise with their offer...

It seems Boise is only interested in Big money deals or home and homes... There's nothing wrong with 2 for 1's, especially if you're tired of getting ripped on in the media for your schedule..

It is really not that difficult. BSU has done a lot of work to expand it's budget. BSU still doesn't have the money Utah and BYU have. It also doesn't have the alumni or recruiting for teams looking to promote their college in an area like TCU. And it isn't the destination location like Las Vegas, Reno or Hawaii.

I have done the numbers. BSU ends up on the road playing BCS teams at a higher percentage than every other top non-AQ outside of Fresno. It's not even a debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget, Benson was interviewed at the half of the Fresno or Tulsa game, can't remember.

He said Boise "strategically" scheduled 1 BCS team this year.

Boise fans were outraged. They knew the real story line is that it's hard for Boise to schedule BCS teams on a fair basis.

After that, you saw the WAC hire the PR firm for Boise, and Benson starting talking about Boise's scheduling problems.

Now this reaction from the Boise AD. Very interesting.

The real story was we had Oregon and Oregon State scheduled this year. Oregon State had to reschedule to next year for some reason, thus we had to replace a BCS team with UCD (D1AA) on a short time frame.

bsu%252520mwc%252520logo.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done the numbers. BSU ends up on the road playing BCS teams at a higher percentage than every other top non-AQ outside of Fresno. It's not even a debate.

Just out of curiosity I just ran the numbers, and Boise doesn't seem to go on the road that often;

This decade only 9 road games at BCS schools, one of the lowest of the non-AQs (AFA only mwc team with less):

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=2000&thy=2009&ncnf=on&curr=on&away=on&major=on&tnonmajor=on&tIA=on&sortby=GP

Last five years:

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=2005&thy=2009&ncnf=on&curr=on&away=on&major=on&tnonmajor=on&tIA=on&sortby=GP

Last three years;

http://www.sportslinknetwork.com/cfbtrivia/record.php?fry=2007&thy=2009&ncnf=on&curr=on&away=on&major=on&tnonmajor=on&tIA=on&sortby=GP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just responding to the story without trying to read between the lines and develop conspiracy theories; Boise is willing to go to someone else place in 2011 to play a game. What does that has to do with playing games at Boise or two for ones?

They are merely looking to play a quality opponent on that opponent's turf in 2011 and so far no takers. That's tells me that BCS schools are even scared to have Boise come to their place to play them. And this is so stupid to me. OU lost to Boise and I don't see OU suffering an image hit. Alabama lost to Utah and I don't see the Tide taking an image hit.

This is what is wrong with college football. But yet we got folks clamouring for their schools to be a part of this F'd up BCS bulls*it. Arguing about who is more worthier than the other to be part of the corrupt and unfair BCS system.

Priceless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wyoming is certainly keeping up it's end of the bargain...

2001 Texas A&M

2003 Kansas

2004 Ole Miss

2007 Virginia

2009 Texas

Future home opponents include Nebraska, Missouri and Oregon.

So BSU, what's the problem?

The problem is, all those schools view (oftentimes wrongly) that playing Wyoming is a low-risk proposition. Playing Boise State is very much a high-risk proposition. BYU can't schedule anybody on even terms. When we were struggling, we had no trouble at all getting most BCS schools to visit Provo. Beyond Washington next season, we don't have a single BCS AQ team scheduled to visit Provo because they're all saying no. Utah's Chris Hill said he was lucky to get freaking Pitt to agree to visit RES.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just responding to the story without trying to read between the lines and develop conspiracy theories; Boise is willing to go to someone else place in 2011 to play a game. What does that has to do with playing games at Boise or two for ones?

They are merely looking to play a quality opponent on that opponent's turf in 2011 and so far no takers. That's tells me that BCS schools are even scared to have Boise come to their place to play them. And this is so stupid to me. OU lost to Boise and I don't see OU suffering an image hit. Alabama lost to Utah and I don't see the Tide taking an image hit.

This is what is wrong with college football. But yet we got folks clamouring for their schools to be a part of this F'd up BCS bulls*it. Arguing about who is more worthier than the other to be part of the corrupt and unfair BCS system.

Priceless.

A little bit of comparing apples to oranges...It didn't hurt Oklahoma or Alabama because it was at the end of the season. Look at it from Oregon's perspective this year: If they hadn't played Boise State the first game of the season and played New Mexico State instead, they would have been very involved in the National Title game discussion up until the Stanford game.

And they never would have found out how good LaMichael James is!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a fan, I don't need to take the high road. There is a lot of schools with open dates in 2011 and they are ducking Boise State. Starting with Nebraska.

Again, stupid question here, why would Nebraska want to play Boise?

1) Ticket sales....they have like a 35 year soldout streak.

2) SOS....They won't be in the title running so what does it help?.(although it's hard to project out)

3) Risk a loss and damage their rebuilding psyche after the Callahan fiasco

4) Exposure....they aren't good and they still get a lot of exposure. HEck, they get exposure on when they will be relevant again.

5) 1 million price tag...pay N. Texas 700,000 in a bad economy

I may be wrong, but give me an example of how it helps Nebraska? Just because it makes sense for Boise does not mean it makes sense for Nebraska. And you know what? I can be wrong and Nebraska may announce that they set it up, but I'm just saying that there are reasons to deny it.

A little bit of comparing apples to oranges...It didn't hurt Oklahoma or Alabama because it was at the end of the season. Look at it from Oregon's perspective this year: If they hadn't played Boise State the first game of the season and played New Mexico State instead, they would have been very involved in the National Title game discussion up until the Stanford game.

And they never would have found out how good LaMichael James is!

Also, it can be argued that Oklahoma and Alabama were disinterested in their bowl games. Especially Alabama. That is another argument that is used.

In the end it just doesn't matter because my university will get whatever it wants and be on the inside on any incarnation of whatever conference it chooses and whatever incarnation of the NCAA or BCS that arises. Our ego only got bigger with the Pac-10, SEC and Big 10 trying to get us to join their conference.

Look, why don't you just be quiet before my university buys yours and closes it just for spite?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benson didn't say anything that was factually wrong, Bleymeier just wants to take the high road on this and distance himself from Benson who is calling out bunch name schools for being chicken ++++. As you said, it sends a bad message for future negotiations. Our AD doesn't want every BCS AD in the country mad at him so he is washing his hands of this.

As a fan, I don't need to take the high road. There is a lot of schools with open dates in 2011 and they are ducking Boise State. Starting with Nebraska.

Benson's story is fishy and has holes.. He didn't mention the "10" teams, nor the reasons why... The fact that BSU and Benson aren't on the same page shows a lot.. Gene didn't confirm his number either... Seems like Benson was more intent on the sizzle of the story rather than the detail.

I still find it interesting that teams like TCU and Utah are finding games.. You'd think BCS teams wouldn't be affraid to play BSU at their place considering BSU is 1-9 on the road..

Until one of you guys can provide us with more detail of these "scared" teams, I'll just go ahead and continue to call Benson a dirty ape that has no clue on how to promote his conference to better their situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, thanks for starting another WAC thread, utenation.

This story is crucial to the MWC.. We are in direct competition with Boise for a BCS Bowl.. Like me, I'm sure many fans wonder how and why BSU seems to get away with highway robbery in the schedule department...

While the MWC's quest against BSU has been successful so far, a 1 loss MWC team fighting through a much tougher conference could find themselves outside looking in, when BSU simply schedules pasties and destroys a horrible conference in hopes to outlast a stronger MWC team..

The odds haven't worked out for BSU so far, but it seems much more likely that a MWC team will have a loss compared to BSU... Maybe if one of your swamp dwellers would step up and knock off BSU, we wouldn't have to talk about their cupcake schedule and compare their path to our path to the same prize..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just responding to the story without trying to read between the lines and develop conspiracy theories; Boise is willing to go to someone else place in 2011 to play a game. What does that has to do with playing games at Boise or two for ones?

They are merely looking to play a quality opponent on that opponent's turf in 2011 and so far no takers. That's tells me that BCS schools are even scared to have Boise come to their place to play them. And this is so stupid to me. OU lost to Boise and I don't see OU suffering an image hit. Alabama lost to Utah and I don't see the Tide taking an image hit.

Why not look at if from an AQ point of view? I'm sure there will be some takes on more money games for BSU, but they just started that process, as clearly admitted by Boise's AD..

Their next proposition is to play home and homes. Besides the Oregon teams and Washington State, it seems no one want to go play in front of 30K on the smurf on an equal basis. Home and homes aren't all the same.. Some teams split down the middle on rev or use a scale to balance out demand and or travel cost... Bottom line, I doubt Boise can meet the demands of AQ teams that are willing to play home and homes with other quality Non Aq teams. BYU, Utah, TCU and even Fresno probably have more flexibility for deals..

The issue with 2 for 1's is, if they aren't able to get two BCS teams on their schedule each year with the above model, they need to look at 2 for 1 models which are highly successful as well and seem to align the revenue loss AQ teams take from going out on the road to 30K seat stadiums with programs that can't off set the risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, it can be argued that Oklahoma and Alabama were disinterested in their bowl games. Especially Alabama. That is another argument that is used.

It has been argued, over and over, that Alabama was disinterested in the Sugar Bowl. But those arguing it are wrong. There is a highlight video of the Sugar Bowl on Youtube that starts off with the commentators discussing how fired up and focused Alabama was during practice. Check it out. Alabama fans and coaches used the "not interested" excuse post-hoc. Prior to the game they were fired up. The problem for Alabama wasn't motivation, it's that Utah was faster and better-coached.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and yours is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wyoming is certainly keeping up it's end of the bargain...

2001 Texas A&M

2003 Kansas

2004 Ole Miss

2007 Virginia

2009 Texas

Future home opponents include Nebraska, Missouri and Oregon.

So BSU, what's the problem?

The problem is the blue turf! It's hard on the eyes and the brain. How can you stand to play on that crap for 4 hours? Why do you think that Oregon player went berzerk at the end of the game??.... That crazy electric blue turf made him do it!!

MWC Champions 1999, 2003, 2004, 2008

Fiesta Bowl Champions 2005

Sugar Bowl Champions 2009

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has been argued, over and over, that Alabama was disinterested in the Sugar Bowl. But those arguing it are wrong. There is a highlight video of the Sugar Bowl on Youtube that starts off with the commentators discussing how fired up and focused Alabama was during practice. Check it out. Alabama fans and coaches used the "not interested" excuse post-hoc. Prior to the game they were fired up. The problem for Alabama wasn't motivation, it's that Utah was faster and better-coached.

First, I didn't say that's how I feel, but an argument given about why Bama lost. So that it is used, and can contribute to why they didn't take a PR hit after the game.

Second, I'm sorry, but I don't believe that any video of people screaming and jumping up and down and practicing hard, means they were fired up. They jump up and down and scream because everyone does it. They practice hard cause they have a scholarship riding on it. Actions don't always explain motivation. Playing to win the Sugar bowl or playing not to lose their position on the depth chart? Also, motivation is dependent on the percieved worthiness of the prize. A BCS berth is well worth more to a non-AQ Utah, than a Alabama team that it's expected of it. They are coming off a deflating loss that keeps them from a NCG appearance, and Utah was not mentioned as a potential NCG contender until AFTER it took out Alabama. Plus you talk about Commentators talking about it. Not the best source. I mean talking heads never say things out of their a** or make up crap. Again, the comentators have a reason to hype Alabama....money... ESPN is really going to let their commentators say "Hey, Alabama doesn't care." ESPN is really going to say that the bowl games outside of the NCG game are irrelevant....but they are. It's brand protection.

That said, I don't know whether they were excited to be there or not......but neither do you. You can lay out info and I can and we will never know. Heck, no one will ever know because even a player will never slap the university in the face and say, "I didn't care to be there." It's not in the interest of the player to do so.

In the end it just doesn't matter because my university will get whatever it wants and be on the inside on any incarnation of whatever conference it chooses and whatever incarnation of the NCAA or BCS that arises. Our ego only got bigger with the Pac-10, SEC and Big 10 trying to get us to join their conference.

Look, why don't you just be quiet before my university buys yours and closes it just for spite?

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...