Jump to content
Did I hear a WOOSH?

Conference Realignment thread

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, e-zone99 said:

Boise St had a logistic study if you will about moving to the ACC with in the last year before the AAC was raided (in other words before their media rights take a big hit) and I believe it was clear it would cost them money by moving to the AAC because of travel costs (Boise St can correct me if I'm wrong).  Now with their 3 of their top schools moving to the Big12 they think the MWC schools are interested in moving to the AAC now when they would not before...

 

Exactly my point, the AAC lost alot of leverage and $$ by losing 3 of their best teams to the Big 12. Would make 0 sense for any MWC to make the move. The best thing the AAC can hope for is raiding the C-USA, Independents and maybe the Sunbelt but it seems the Sunbelt is potentially in the process of ensuring they won't get raided. If the JMU, So Miss, ODU and Marshall plan works I'd argue they'd be a better overall Conference then the American.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

Your selective/short term memory is bad.  Your mixing up the two vs four team add.  

The Big12 has made it very clear BYU was their top target.  Bowlsby also said he didn't see how BYU would have not got an invite in 2015 if the Big12 would have expanded (aka, top choice then also).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

I don’t see how that is an issue, moderator.  That means there’s legs to it.   Don’t be like those people.

It means he’s regurgitating what he read. 

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NorCalCoug said:

It’s clear BYU was always school #1 you donkey.

BYU was always the crown jewel of schools that were available to the B12.  Anybody who says otherwise is delusional.  

  • Like 2

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who cares anyways? I would love SDSU to be the 4th school in.

  • Like 1

"Make like a tree and scram" - Rosegreen

 

Your administration is the reason why our basketball league is bleeding out currently. If you didn't insist on San Jose being in the MWC, so you guys would have someone that votes similar to SDSU, every team in the MWC wouldn't have to play 2 games vs. a team with a 330 RPI ranking EVERY season.

You guys are as stupid as you are desperate.   - Cowboy Junky

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ViAggie said:

the B12 is on the cusp of being the Big East Part II, it wouldn't take much for the P4 schools to decimate the B12.  The B12 could easily be the next AAC + byu.  

They lost their two best programs and replaced them with the best four programs available.  The B12 will be fine.  The only thing they lack is a blueblood type of program in FB.     

"Don't underestimate Joe Biden's ability to F@*k things up."

Barack Obama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

You’re making a couple inferences that convolutes the message a little but if you’re truly interested in clarification let me know.  
 

I can say that the guy I know is legit.  He’s the one that let me know the aac deal was done a week before it went public and was off by only ~1 million/year in his average estimate and told me rationale for length of the terms, he also told me about the BYU and Boise series months before they were announced.  He also was the one that said that UCF and big12 were already on the same page by July 28th.  He also was the one that called the the morning ou/t news hit, beat all the social media with the thread here. All of these things were posted here, all can be verified.  

So your clarification is...

Some person who posts on another fan board made some predictions (or "knew" something) which turned out to be true so therefore this person is legit and the real deal and he/she speaks for SDSU since he/she lives in SD.  

For this particular rumor this person told you that the AAC is interested in the front range schools and not in SDSU but SDSU has asked the AAC to consider them.  Is that correct?  

And you believe this to be true because SDSU is 'leaking' information through this person (that was your implication).  Why on earth would SDSU do that? 

 

What benefit is it of theirs to leak it to a person on a fan board?  Per your rumor they aren't even being considered.  And of course, as I have already mentioned, on numerous occasions SDSU's AD has indicated a football only deal would be a non-starter for them and that a full membership is also a non-starter because of travel costs associated with minor sports.

If you are not trolling (which I'm guessing you are), your entire premise is illogical.  You should change one of two things... either your source should be from one of the front range schools who are actually being 'considered' or rather the new rumor s/b that SDSU has reached out to some members of the AAC to get them to join some members of the MWC to form a new conference.  Either of those rumors would make far more sense.  

Alright, best of luck on being right with predicting the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Someone Else said:

If you are not trolling (which I'm guessing you are), your entire premise is illogical.  You should change one of two things... either your source should be from one of the front range schools who are actually being 'considered' or rather the new rumor s/b that SDSU has reached out to some members of the AAC to get them to join some members of the MWC to form a new conference.  Either of those rumors would make far more sense.  

Far more sense than the idiocy Did I hear a FART? has spouted but still not logical.

It's pretty well known that SDSU hasn't been happy about being in the MW for more than a decade. However, although formation of a new conference might have been considered by SDSU, and I've never heard a rumor of that, just which AAC leftovers would make any sense?

Navy, Temple, USF and ECU are much too far away from SD. Too-lame? Lol! Both SDSU and Boise were none too happy about the prospect of being in the same conference with that athletic lightweight and weren't even told by Aresco about the vote to add them. So that would leave Tulsa, SMU and Memphis. No offense to Tulsa, which tries hard, but that school was only added to the AAC because of rivalries and SDSU hasn't even played Tulsa for more than two decades. So maybe SDSU might consider trying to create a new conference with SMU, Memphis, a couple other Texas schools not in the AAC and the members of the MWC West division in order to get out from under Hair Thompson's deal with Boise as well as separate from the Front Rangers. However, I'd say the odds of that are about 1 in 100. In contrast, the odds of Did I hear a FART? being FOS are more like 99 in 100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 818SUDSFan said:

Far more sense than the idiocy Did I hear a FART? has spouted but still not logical.

It's pretty well known that SDSU hasn't been happy about being in the MW for more than a decade. However, although formation of a new conference might have been considered by SDSU, and I've never heard a rumor of that, just which AAC leftovers would make any sense?

Navy, Temple, USF and ECU are much too far away from SD. Too-lame? Lol! Both SDSU and Boise were none too happy about the prospect of being in the same conference with that athletic lightweight and weren't even told by Aresco about the vote to add them. So that would leave Tulsa, SMU and Memphis. No offense to Tulsa, which tries hard, but that school was only added to the AAC because of rivalries and SDSU hasn't even played Tulsa for more than two decades. So maybe SDSU might consider trying to create a new conference with SMU, Memphis, a couple other Texas schools not in the AAC and the members of the MWC West division in order to get out from under Hair Thompson's deal with Boise as well as separate from the Front Rangers. However, I'd say the odds of that are about 1 in 100. In contrast, the odds of Did I hear a FART? being FOS are more like 99 in 100.

Yes.  I was just trying to help him come up with something better for his story if he plans to troll.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Someone Else said:

So your clarification is...

Some person who posts on another fan board made some predictions (or "knew" something) which turned out to be true so therefore this person is legit and the real deal and he/she speaks for SDSU since he/she lives in SD.  

For this particular rumor this person told you that the AAC is interested in the front range schools and not in SDSU but SDSU has asked the AAC to consider them.  Is that correct?  

And you believe this to be true because SDSU is 'leaking' information through this person (that was your implication).  Why on earth would SDSU do that? 

 

What benefit is it of theirs to leak it to a person on a fan board?  Per your rumor they aren't even being considered.  And of course, as I have already mentioned, on numerous occasions SDSU's AD has indicated a football only deal would be a non-starter for them and that a full membership is also a non-starter because of travel costs associated with minor sports.

If you are not trolling (which I'm guessing you are), your entire premise is illogical.  You should change one of two things... either your source should be from one of the front range schools who are actually being 'considered' or rather the new rumor s/b that SDSU has reached out to some members of the AAC to get them to join some members of the MWC to form a new conference.  Either of those rumors would make far more sense.  

Alright, best of luck on being right with predicting the future.

No, no across the board.  You are conflating board member with a message board member.  The people I talk to are on actual boards of their respective program.  And you’re still conflating different statements.  I don’t need to explain myself.  Your post didn’t age well since things I mentioned blew up enough today to start another thread.  It’s really hard for some of you to say, well, I don’t like this guy for some reason but he’s been right a lot.. more so than anyone else.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

No, no across the board.  You are conflating board member with a message board member.  The people I talk to are on actual boards of their respective program.  And you’re still conflating different statements.  I don’t need to explain myself.  Your post didn’t age well since things I mentioned blew up enough today to start another thread.  It’s really hard for some of you to say, well, I don’t like this guy for some reason but he’s been right a lot.. more so than anyone else.  

Sorry, friend you are not clear with your statements.

You speak to someone on the board?  At SDSU, what board is that?  Board of what? 

I am pretty familiar with California State schools so I'm looking for clarification of what you mean.  If you want people to believe you then perhaps you should explain yourself.

The other thing I questioned from your original post was that SDSU reached out to AAC... where in the articles that came out today does it say exactly that?  That SDSU reached out to the AAC?

It doesn't... the article says that the AAC is considering MW schools ... SDSU among them... and not that the AAC is interested in the front range schools only but not SDSU... your post actually said that the AAC wasn't interested in SDSU.  

So your board member from SDSU who you said was leaking information must have given you the wrong information.

I don't have a problem with anyone who gives accurate information.  Yours was not.

And I am very interested to hear what 'board' of SDSU your person belongs to ? I'll wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

No, no across the board.  You are conflating board member with a message board member.  The people I talk to are on actual boards of their respective program.  And you’re still conflating different statements.  I don’t need to explain myself.  Your post didn’t age well since things I mentioned blew up enough today to start another thread.  It’s really hard for some of you to say, well, I don’t like this guy for some reason but he’s been right a lot.. more so than anyone else.  

If by that you mean one of the contributors to AztecMesa, for the most part, I take what's said there with a grain of salt. In a few cases the grain is the size of Palomar Mountain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

This didn’t age well.  

Lol ok

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, mugtang said:

Lol ok

Most of Woosh's posts dont have an aging problem, because they are already DOA.

  • Haha 1

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...