Jump to content

TrueAg

Members
  • Posts

    2,433
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by TrueAg

  1. Yes, those are the %'s full of the stadium capacity.
  2. Stadiums and facilities are built for the community populations they exist in. If you want to know how much your team/school is supported by the community it exists in, then shouldn't you be concerned how full your facility is?
  3. No, that is a more accurate way to look at attendance and know what it means. Looking at total numbers is not apples to apples. If the Aggies average a sellout, would that mean that our attendance sucks because we only got 25k to the game?
  4. Put into terms that are reflective of community support: Frenso St. - 80.6% full Hawaii - 78.1% full SJSU - 43.1% full
  5. nvspuds, you can't honestly believe anything you write can you? Any of the WAC schools were free to leave at any time before the MOU if they gave proper notice. Nevada was free to leave anytime they saw fit, but reality was there was nowhere for them to go. You seem to completely dismiss the point of why all the WAC presidents all of a sudden got together and hatched the project in the first place. It's not odd to you that all of a sudden all the presidents get together and sign an agreement to have to pay some outrageous fee if they want to leave now? To say that the MOU was anything other than an agreement to stay together and that it was a specific measure only put in place for the purpose of giving BYU assurance that the conference members would stay together and that no one would bail when the MWC and Thompson came calling is a blatant lie. You're the only person I've ever heard that puts this spin on it by looking at the results of what ended up happening and draws unfounded conclusions from it. Of course the WAC was BYU's first choice. The WCC had not even talked to BYU or fathomed the idea of BYU joining until they sent out feelers after the WAC-stabbing occurred. BYU left the MWC anyway because once the FSU and UNR were invited they were told by Thompson that they would not be allowed to be independent in FB and only house their Olympic sports in the MWC, it was all or nothing according to Thompson. He tried to strong-arm them into staying by extending the invites to FSU and UNR and also by making it known that they would not be allowed to be independent FB members and stay in the MWC. It didn't work because they had already made up their mind that they were going to go independent and low and behold the WCC commish swooped in to offer a way out...really their only way out. It's honestly baffling to hear someone try and spin this as if BYU backed out of something. BYU was not a signing member of the agreement therefore they did not have anything to break. The MOU was not contingent an any action by BYU. Now had every WAC school honored the agreement and BYU not joined, then we could start to point some fingers. As has been explained, they never even got the chance to join because the deal had been torpedoed from the inside and they were left scrambling for a solution since an unstable WAC was not the best of options anymore.
  6. Phishing or not....there is a LOT of truth to this list. If there weren't, we wouldn't be headed for 100+ page thread on the matter. BTW, who is this LPH-10 that started this entire b!tchfest? 5 total posts and disappears like spit in the rain? talk about your ultimate planted post of epic troll proportions....bastard!
  7. So because the settlement was for less than the 5M, then the original agreement must never have been valid or "binding"? What kind of backward logic is that? Settlements outside of court are made every day for much less awarded than what could have been had if the involved parties pushed for a trial. The penalty was never 5M each, the agreement read that the penalty was 5M to any school breaking the agreement and if anyone broke the agreement, the agreement was then null and void. You don't remember UNR immediately trying to claim that they owed nothing because they were not the first ones to say they were leaving? FSU and UNR even got together after and had talks about sharing the 5M fee and having the MWC help them with a portion as well. All of this doesn't even matter, but paying a reduced fee certainly doesn't make the original MOU a non-binding agreement.
  8. You can argue 'till your blue in the face with nvspuds on this but he has convinced himself of completely made up facts on the matter. Mainly that BYU needed to come on board before the MOU was in effect. Yet, the entire purpose of the MOU was to serve as a binding agreement set in place prior to BYU joining so as to give them the peace of mind that no one would jump ship should Hair Thompson attempt to torpedo their move move by calling up some WAC schools and saying "hey, what do you think about joining the MWC?" The MOU was not contingent on any action by BYU and yes, they had already made up their mind that they were joining, it was not "in limbo" or TBD. They had done everything in preparation for it, including schedule the press conference to announce it. The time and date had already been released to the media when they suddenly had to cancel it after the WAC-stabbing occurred. In the end, BYU had burned the bridge down and Thompson made it clear to them that it was all sports or nothing. They ended up reevaluating their options, which were obviously limited, and the rest is history.
  9. Holy! this thing is still going? Still arguing over why the Aggies are here? Still making statements about "small markets", even though it is the 3rd or 4th largest in the conference? But, but, but, you don't "deliver" your market....Really? we've already shown you the number of eyeballs we deliver in comparison to other MWC schools. But, but, but you can't look at TV ratings, they don't tell the whole story....after all, you are located in Logan. Yes, the merry-go-round is still going strong!
  10. That's not quite the magic he was aiming for to follow in his idol's footsteps. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weS8U5zLXHs
  11. Uh oh, now you just sound like the bitter local media guys with secret man crushes on BYU. We really can't look at the facts because there are too many variables for them to be compared? Is that what you are going with on this one? Sounds eerily similar to the typical Zoob excuses after losing where we hear "we didn't really care about this game" or "this was their Super Bowl". Take a look in the mirror, USU was your best win last season. For two years in a row it has been at your house and for two years in a row it is the game your players and fans got up for the most. I just pointed out that the opponents were all relatively similar in these bowls; are you trying to say that Ohio, Toledo, Temple, So. Miss., Tulsa, Rice, SMU, and Bowling Green are vastly different? As for the date/day of the week of the game...remember that same argument made by BYU fanboy Scott Pierce in the Salt Lake Tribune? BAHAHAHA.... first he writes this snobby article stating how the Coogs were screwed the year before by time and date and how the ratings had nothing to do with the teams involved. Of course the point of his article is to say that there is no way BYU's bowl will not have better ratings and how history will not repeat itself. He then wrote this short follow up admitting he was wrong about the whole thing. I forgive BYU fans, I'm sure most of them had no clue about their bowl game either year and are still baffled why they didn't see their team when they tuned into the national championship game.
  12. Yes, we keep hearing the small market argument over and over yet USU is in the same DMA as Utah and BYU (that DMA is ranked #33, 5 spots below San Diego and 7 spots ahead of Las Vegas). We then hear how USU doesn't deliver that market or have nearly the following of the other two schools in Utah. Better yet, we get to hear how BYU has a "national" fan base with millions of fans everywhere. If this were so wouldn't TV ratings support such a notion? Look at TV ratings for the bowls the past two seasons: 2011-12 Bowls: USU vs. Ohio scored a 1.65 Nielsen rating. By comparison: San Diego St. vs. La-Lafayette = 1.63 Wyoming vs. Temple = 1.54 Air Force vs. Toledo = 1.50 Nevada vs. So. Miss. = 1.44 BYU vs. Tulsa = 1.43 (but, but, but there are millions of BYU fans with a "national" audience) These are all MWC (or former MWC) teams that played relatively similar level opponents in a similar setting so we can throw our the argument that anyone was tuning in to see a Nebraska or Michigan play in any one of these. 2012-13 Bowls: USU vs. Toledo scored a 1.9 Nielsen rating By comparison: Air Force vs. Rice = 2.3 Nevada vs. Arizona - 1.8 SDSU vs. BYU = 1.5 (but, but, but..."national" fan base vs. huge market? this can't be! ) Fresno St. vs. SMU = 1.4 SJSU vs. Bowling Green = 1.3 The point is just because USU's campus is located in a smaller city, doesn't mean the Aggies don't draw the same or better attention on a national level, in a similar setting, versus similar opponents in comparison to other MWC teams. I know....who cares about reality or actual facts, let's get back to talking about "POTENTIAL" and "BIG MARKETS". SJSU has ridden that pony for decades. Sorry to Spartan fans in advance, but you have to admit that if SJSU's campus was in South Dakota or say, Logan Utah you would have to question whether they would find themselves in this conference. That #6 DMA has done more wonders than nearly any accomplishment in any sport.
  13. Nah, beating a ranked team on the road that had only suffered a single 2 points loss to Texas A&M at that point does not count. afacademydad, please don't count this as one of the "MANY" USU fans that think we are going to run roughshod over the conference. I, like most Aggie fans, am happy to be a part of the MWC and feel like bowl eligibilty is an attainable goal this year. Do I feel like we are capable of 9 or 10 wins? yes, but I certainly don't expect it and I feel the same way about several MWC teams this year.
  14. You have debated this since Nevada followed Frenso out the door way back when. The increased exit fee was obviously supposed to serve as the deterent from any school bolting. This is how every conference operates, there is no binding agreement saying you have to be a part of a conference for "X" amount of years, there are simply high penalties/fees in place to help prevent schools from doing so and that is what the WAC was trying to do. Every president knew why they were meeting and the intended purpose behind the MOU. BYU had reviewed their move to independence from every angle and knew what Thompson's reaction would be beforehand, and that is why they wanted the assurance in writing previous to making their announcement that no current WAC school would leave if they were to join for OLY sports. The whole shebang depended on every WAC president keeping their word and honoring the psudo pact that was being made by signing the memorandum. BYU was not joining a conference suddenly minus 2 members and all of a sudden looking very unstable, that was the exact opposite of what they were seeking for.
  15. We keep hearing about this built in fan base everywhere and how BYU is a national brand. Yes, there is a built in audience at nearly every venue they play in due to ties to the church but a national brand or interest beyond those few church going supporters? Not exactly. If it were so we would see TV ratings support that theory. For two years running, the "small time program" has had higher ratings and viewership in their bowl than the mighty BYU.
  16. Wow. Just wow. Then you need to get educated....here's some reading for you so you can catch yourself up on what everyone else on the planet calls the project. Timeline of The Project
  17. The Project wasn't about having UNLV and SUDS join. It was about BYU joining and the WAC members staying together. Perhaps that would have made the remaining MWC schools, most notably BSU, second guess their membership there or perhaps it wouldn't have. Whether any of them would have joined in addition is just speculation and would have been gravy, but it would not have defined success. This is where 2010 MWC members see the project as something that was meant to bring down the MWC and the WAC members saw it as a way to solidify the conference. If UNLV, SUDS, or BSU would have never come back to the WAC then why did Thompson and the remaining MWC presidents make such radical and quick decisions to prevent it from happening?
  18. BAHAHA!! where do you get this stuff? Not only was BYU a part of the project, they were the ones who requested the paperwork be drawn up that would guarantee that no one would leave the conference if they were to join. They knew exactly what Hair Thompson was going to attempt in retaliation. We even know the exact day that BYU had scheduled to announce their move to the WAC...
  19. I've made this argument before. Had the project succeeded we would likely have this same collection of schools +BYU (sans football) under the WAC moniker and we would have been in a better position to negotiate a better TV deal much earlier. Initially there may have been a school or two left out, maybe even three or four. My guess is Wyoming and either UNM or CSU, but with what happened to C-USA I think the WAC would have eventually invited them as well in an effort to prevent C-USA from having options in the west. AF may have gone a different direction as well, perhaps accepting the invite to the current AAC, if they would have been one of the 2-4 teams left on the outside initially too.
  20. It's always interesting to read the opinion of 2010 MWC members and how "The Project" somehow became synonymous with USU. "The Project" was so named by Nevada's president Glick and the motion to vote on a pact between all the WAC schools was made by Fresno's president Welty. Of course since those two back stabbers jumped on the MWC ship at Thompson's invite, essentially saving the MWC at the time, they were viewed as schools that were worthy or next in line to join the MWC. Meanwhile, because USU's president Albrecht was the liason to BYU and because he said there was no interest from USU to join the MWC when contacted by Thompson, USU became viewed as the instigator and mastermind behind something that was put together by Mr. Peanut and all the president's of the WAC conference. If it weren't for our own beat writer helping to bring to light some emails by pres. Albrecht I have to wonder if USU would be viewed in such a negative light by our now MWC mates.
  21. Not sure it is so much the NCAA as it was a state, T&M Management, and UNLV decision. I think some people are getting confused by the fact that UNLV's budget now includes revenue generated from special events at T&M but it also now accounts for the operating costs associated with those special events. Their funds directly allocated for athetics did not change much at all from previous years. Reports show that the number is anywhere from 28.5M (as quoted in the article above) to 29.5M. All that changed from previous years is the operating budget of the T&M is now included into their athletic budget. It's not like UNLV now has an extra 20M-28M laying around from revenue generated from special events; that number is roughly balanced out by the cost to put on those events. My guess is you would find similar situations for other Univeristies that may own venues that are used as hosts for special events.
×
×
  • Create New...