Warbow Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Another Done deal....? http://bleacherreport.com/articles/407042-the-pac-10-would-be-wise-to-add-hawaii-not-utah-as-12 Standing by for my rankulator prediction.... Quote Disclaimer: Any views or opinions presented by this poster (Warbow) are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Univesity of Hawaii or it's loyal fans. All quotes and opinions from Warbow are valid for 30 days following the date of post transmission and are subject to change at any time. All information published herein by Warbow is gathered from his own opinions or sources which are thought to be reliable, but the reader should not assume that the information is official or fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogueStout Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Keep hittin the ice pipe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nocoolnamejim Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Not a chance of happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalsean Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Keep hittin the ice pipe Well if Hawaii geographically fits in any conference, it's P10. Plus they can deliver their whole island, which is a pretty good population. Unfortunately things like finances, academics and athletic success come into play which is where the fall short. And the reasoning against Utah is absurd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSUTOP25 Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Bleacherreport.com ... there's some credibility for ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Bauer Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Not to mention, Hawaii has the most embarrassing mid major performance in college football history in a big game. Most undeserving BCS bowl team ever. And it's not close. 10-2 BYU would have put up a better showing that year. Nobody give a crap about Hawaii. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mysfit Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Can we have a negative chance? Quote One of the Final Five.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Closer Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Keep hittin the ice pipe I got a great laugh out of it actually.... good stuff! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Guessing, the MWC stays at 9 -- mostly because there is no compelling reason to go above 9. Nobody brings any points and recall that some of the points are weighted by conference size so adding a team that doesn't bring points would actually hurt your AQ chances. Guessing, you sit tight until you know whether or not you got your AQ status. At that point, you add anywhere from one to three. Yoda out... Quote ____________________________________________... 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 More sharing options...
NotalentU Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Well, his arguments against adding Utah make perfect sense to me, and I tend to agree on all accounts. Adding Utah seems like it would only be marginally beneficial to the Pac. Realistically the SLC market doesn't have much chance of increasing Pac 12 revenues all that significantly. Just for point of reference, whereas the SLC market (the entire state of Utah) is the 32nd ranked market in the country, the San Diego market (geographically MUCH, MUCH smaller, but much more heavily populated) ranks around 27th or 28th. SLC has a population base, according to the article, of 2.8 million people spread out over a very large geographical area. San Diego adds over 3 million people. It can be argued, however, that the Pac can already claim the San Diego market as its own. But then again, we don't get a couple of the Pac 10 networks down here (Prime Ticket, which carries a lot of the UCLA and USC games, and the Fox College Sports channels), so their games are not as widely available; we get virtually NONE of their basketball games here. I'll readily admit that from an academic standpoint--particularly from the research aspect of it--Utah is a much better fit than SDSU. That's really through no fault of SDSU's; the Cal St. system has long intentionally held us back in that regard, and things are rapidly changing. But if you look at all of the economic arguments specifically, it would appear that SDSU would be the better choice. The Hawaii argument, though, is totally and completely ridiculous. Hawaii is an awful fit academically. And you really need look no further than their commitment to their athletics program: Their facilities are so abysmal and their willingness to pour resources into the programs are so pathetic that they couldn't keep a football coach who was DESPERATE to stay! It really wouldn't have taken much for them to keep June Jones, yet they refused to give him even the most modest of requests. Couple that with the travel difficulties, and their inability to compete at just about everything else......Hawaii just isn't happening. Quote "Once an Aztec, Always an Aztec" CSU Fresno: Accepting SDSU's sloppy seconds since 1911. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mysfit Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 It gets them to a CCG Quote One of the Final Five.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSUTOP25 Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Guessing, the MWC stays at 9 -- mostly because there is no compelling reason to go above 9. Nobody brings any points and recall that some of the points are weighted by conference size so adding a team that doesn't bring points would actually hurt your AQ chances. Guessing, you sit tight until you know whether or not you got your AQ status. At that point, you add anywhere from one to three. Yoda out... Still would like to have Fresno in the MWC to continue the rivalry. JMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotalentU Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 It gets them to a CCG Which is not a priority for them and will not bring them a huge boost in revenues. That is not a reason to jump to 12. Adding the Denver market, though, is a VERY good reason to expand. Quote "Once an Aztec, Always an Aztec" CSU Fresno: Accepting SDSU's sloppy seconds since 1911. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mysfit Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Which is not a priority for them and will not bring them a huge boost in revenues. That is not a reason to jump to 12. Adding the Denver market, though, is a VERY good reason to expand. That was the line when they were going after 6 teams to make a superconference CCG is no doubt a fall back position and it brings added revenue even if it isn't texas sized. Quote One of the Final Five.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mysfit Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Still would like to have Fresno in the MWC to continue the rivalry. JMO. given the antipathy towards Fresno from the MWC I don't see that happening Quote One of the Final Five.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k5james Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texas Frog Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 It gets them to a CCG I thought the rumor was that the PAC 16 wasn't going to have a championship game. Was that just a baseless rumor? If not, then I'm not sure why a PAC 11 would be so desperate to hold one. Quote 2005, 2009, 2010 & 2011 MWC Football Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superdeluxe Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Another Done deal....? http://bleacherreport.com/articles/407042-the-pac-10-would-be-wise-to-add-hawaii-not-utah-as-12 Standing by for my rankulator prediction.... Bleacher report lol. Quote The Pac-12 - Conference of Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 given the antipathy towards Fresno from the MWC I don't see that happening Perhaps not but what do we really know about apathy toward Fresno State on the part of the people who matter? Do we really know who likes us and who doesn't? I've heard that BYU likes us -- the Cleveland connection having helped and that Utah didn't like us -- although I don't know why. I can't imagine that TCU wants to bring in Houston to compete with them for recruits. Boise seems to like us and their addition, together with Utah's subtraction, might mean that has stock has risen with the changes in conference membership. If it's true. Or might not. Nobody really knows anything. Yoda out... Quote ____________________________________________... 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 More sharing options...
k5james Posted June 16, 2010 Share Posted June 16, 2010 Perhaps not but what do we really know about apathy toward Fresno State on the part of the people who matter? Do we really know who likes us and who doesn't? I've heard that BYU likes us -- the Cleveland connection having helped and that Utah didn't like us -- although I don't know why. I can't imagine that TCU wants to bring in Houston to compete with them for recruits. Boise seems to like us and their addition, together with Utah's subtraction, might mean that has stock has risen with the changes in conference membership. If it's true. Or might not. Nobody really knows anything. Yoda out... If any of the powers that be in the MWC really liked Fresno, you'd think they'd schedule you, it's not like MWC teams don't play WAC teams. I think there's a reason you've only played CSU since the incident in Fresno in '02. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
