OkaForPrez
Really Popular Poster
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 5,204
- Reaction Score
- 26,697
You don't have an answer, do you?
Can't we leave the old arguments behind and focus on what is really important here? Panic and delusion.
You don't have an answer, do you?
In all of this "let's be boise" talk, has anyone actually looked at what conference they are in or what bowl games they have gone to? what exactly has being boise gotten boise? boise is the poster child for inequity built into the oligopoly.
Again, answering a question with a question. A sure mark of someone hiding something.You don't have an answer, do you?
Again, answering a question with a question. A sure mark of someone hiding something.
Give up ZLS. CL82 owns you in this argument. If BC didn't exist Uconn would be in the ACC. Period.Again, answering a question with a question. A sure mark of someone hiding something.
Boise State went FBS at around the same time as us, four years earlier. They had the fortune of having the Potatos Bowl in their backyard.Because Boise started before Uconn. It took them a decade+ to get to where they have respect year after year.
Boise State went FBS at around the same time as us, four years earlier. They had the fortune of having the Potatos Bowl in their backyard.
For some reason this makes me angry though in reality nothing has changed. The B1G or SEC still gets any ACC team it wants.
No, they have had coaches that bailed before bowl games. Boise became who they are by winning big in a weak conference and being fun to watch OOC and in bowl games because they surprised their opponents. They played on TV any chance they could and the went the JUCO route to get the players to run a fun, run and gun O. Add in a fan base that does not bail on them, ever, and they keep themselves relevant for the past 5-6 years running.And a QB that didn't throw 2 pick sixes against OU in the Fiesta Bowl, nor a coach that bailed minutes after the final whistle.
The boneyard could be a dangerous place for the next couple hours.
For some reason this makes me angry though in reality nothing has changed. The B1G or SEC still gets any ACC team it wants.
Last fall the ACC announced that their increase in departure fees (to triple one year's revenues) was unanimous. It appears that the ACC has a different definition of unanimous than the rest of the world.Well, it's not the first one.
Reports say it was unanimous (which it needs to be). Means that FSU, UNC, UVA and Clemson are on board.
Give up ZLS. CL82 owns you in this argument. If BC didn't exist Uconn would be in the ACC. Period.
Didn't Boise beat OK in a major bowl? Doesn't the highest ranked non big 5 get a playoff spot? Thats my point.
It's physically impossible to get owned in an argument when the other side doesn't present any actual evidence.
It's not a theory - it's a statement of fact.
I doubt they specifically set out to do it, but that's the end result.
Either way, doesn't change the outcome.
THIS!In all of this "let's be boise" talk, has anyone actually looked at what conference they are in or what bowl games they have gone to? what exactly has being boise gotten boise? boise is the poster child for inequity built into the oligopoly.
Give up ZLS. CL82 owns you in this argument. If BC didn't exist Uconn would be in the ACC. Period.
I have some friends who work for ESPN and the general impression I've gotten from them is that while ESPN has had influence, they don't control conference realignment. Like most decisions between powerful entities, there are a few different vying interests all competing with each other. For instance, I don't know that ESPN is really in a position to tell the B1G or SEC what to do or who to take.
But I could be wrong, just my two cents.
You mean other than the statement of a witness with first hand knowledge? To sum up, BCU's AD admits that:Why would the ACC listen to them? Or Gene? On anything?
It's physically impossible to get owned in an argument when the other side doesn't present any actual evidence.
I can't present any evidence to contradict that conclusion, it's mostly an argument about perception but it's possible some people at BC or in the ACC offices still harbor grudges... but my personal hunch is that whatever weight those grudges have would have been outweighed* if we had simply demonstrated our superiority to Louisville in FB and as an overall product. We didn't do that, and perhaps even if we had canned Hathaway we wouldn't have been able to make enough of a case to overcome a) geography b) national sentiment from ESPN and other media opinionmakers that UConn>>UL.I repeat what I have posted several times over the years. If, at the urging of the former CT AG, the original law suit had not named university presidents, AD's and conference officials as individual defendants, we would be in the ACC this Fall. That move poisoned the well for more then just the individuals named. Rightly or wrongly UConn is given the credit/blame for that particular move.
All the board drama queens do. None of this means an end to CR.Thought you didn't believe in conspiracy theories?
I can't present any evidence to contradict that conclusion, it's mostly an argument about perception but it's possible some people at BC or in the ACC offices still harbor grudges... but my personal hunch is that whatever weight those grudges have would have been outweighed* if we had simply demonstrated our superiority to Louisville in FB and as an overall product. We didn't do that, and perhaps even if we had canned Hathaway we wouldn't have been able to make enough of a case to overcome a) geography b) national sentiment from ESPN and other media opinionmakers that UConn>>UL.
*hunch based on the prevailing belief that Swofford, or someone else in the ACC offices, supposedly had us higher up on their board before BCU cawkblocked us for Syracuse, and before Maryland left and we got cawkblocked by UL.