Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

[CL82]

You're not mad though.

Lol, why would I be? It's kind of entertaining watching you get all salty trying to defend a position that's literally undefendable.

 

[John]

Lol, why would I be? It's kind of entertaining watching you get all salty trying to defend a position that's literally undefendable.

I'm right because I said so; always a winning strategy.

 

[CL82]

I'm right because I said so; always a winning strategy.

Often not, which is why you're still failing away on this. It's probably a better approach just to state the facts, and let people draw their own conclusions.

As an example, in this thread people have asserted that being a plaintiff in the Big East lawsuit against the ACC somehow disqualifies a school from ever joining the ACC. I've pointed out the fact that both Pittsburgh and Virginia Tech were in fact, plaintiffs in that lawsuit and are in fact members of the ACC. Those facts show that the original premise was wrong. Yet, astonishingly, people are still flailing away.

Honestly, it surprises me that a couple of posters are so upset about it. But in the end, having hurt feelings, doesn't change the facts.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The master of false equivalence and bad faith arguments.

Says the guy who posted a link to an article that repudiates the entire case you are making in this thread.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

What does broke mean. The Cal State system is the largest in the country. I mean I suppose UConn is broke too since it runs a deficit


Sac State is very affordable. you know they aren't going to whack students with a huge increase, nevermind a few thousand dollars

I'm sure the finances are very bad initially but regarding the Cal State system, most people probably think of SDSU and Fresno because of their athletics. This brings more attention to Sacramento. Luke Wood seems optimistic

Conceptionally, upgrading seems like a terrible idea for Sacramento State, but it seems like a bad idea for every school. I don't know why the entire G5 doesn't just get off the hamster wheel and create a new level that is more cost efficient. What do they know that we don't?

 

[Chuck]

Conceptionally, upgrading seems like a terrible idea for Sacramento State, but it seems like a bad idea for every school. I don't know why the entire G5 doesn't just get off the hamster wheel and create a new level that is more cost efficient. What do they know that we don't?

How awesome would FCS be if a chunk of the G5 dropped. I wouldn't be surprised if that's coming.

What does a lower level G5 league really get out of FBS? We just lost a couple bowls that had G5 teams playing a P4. I'd be shocked if we didn't lose more bowls in the future. Less P4 teams are going to play non-playoff bowl games with players sitting out for the portal and draft. Is anyone really excited to watch a random game between the 3rd place MAC and AAC teams?

 

[Kolumbo]

Conceptionally, upgrading seems like a terrible idea for Sacramento State, but it seems like a bad idea for every school. I don't know why the entire G5 doesn't just get off the hamster wheel and create a new level that is more cost efficient. What do they know that we don't?

G6. I don't know if having 10 FBS conferences is a bad idea but I understand the benefits of being an FBS program. It makes sense for the G6 conferences to become more regional rather than less regional. The G6 aren't going to voluntarily split off from the P4 but the P4 or P2 may split off.

 

[CL82]

G6. I don't know if having 10 FBS conferences is a bad idea but I understand the benefits of being an FBS program. It makes sense for the G6 conferences to become more regional rather than less regional. The G6 aren't going to voluntarily split off from the P4 but the P4 or P2 may split off.

Exactly right. The forces that have pushed conferences into crossing time zones, if they are real at all, only apply to the P4. It makes no sense for a G* conference to follow that model because the potential rewards that the P* conferences may reap don't exist for the G conferences. It's better for them to go with a Regional model. It's logistically less expensive, easier for fans to travel to away games, and has a greater potential to maintain or build rivalries.

 

[ZooCougar]

I'm right because I said so; always a winning strategy.

And that's literally his argument, despite pages of evidence presented otherwise. He's always a special one. You should see how big mad he gets about playing games in Hartford. It's stupefying.

 

[ZooCougar]

Says the guy who posted a link to an article that repudiates the entire case you are making in this thread.

How come you want UConn to go back to the AAC?

 

[UConnJim]

View attachment 117158

That's funny! I was a BC basketball season ticket holder for years when they were in the Big East and have family that attended BC. When BC went to the ACC, I decided I would never attend a BC athletic event ever again. I am good friends/business associates with some BC alums/donors and a couple of them invited me to the BC/Virginia Tech football game on November 17, 2012. They knew I had sworn off going to BC games, but one of them told me, based on his BC sources, it looks like UConn is going to get an invite to the ACC so I decided to go. At the game, I got a notification on my phone that Louisville was going to get the invite.

 

[uchusky32]

That's funny! I was a BC basketball season ticket holder for years when they were in the Big East and have family that attended BC. When BC went to the ACC, I decided I would never attend a BC athletic event ever again. I am good friends/business associates with some BC alums/donors and a couple of them invited me to the BC/Virginia Tech football game on November 17, 2012. They knew I had sworn off going to BC games, but one of them told me, based on his BC sources, it looks like UConn is going to get an invite to the ACC so I decided to go. At the game, I got a notification on my phone that Louisville was going to get the invite.

So you’re telling us, after all this time, your the reason we didn’t get the invite? Am I reading this correctly?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

G6. I don't know if having 10 FBS conferences is a bad idea but I understand the benefits of being an FBS program. It makes sense for the G6 conferences to become more regional rather than less regional. The G6 aren't going to voluntarily split off from the P4 but the P4 or P2 may split off.

The G6 or whatever it is doesn't even need to make it official. They can still sell games to the P4, which the P4 like, but they should do their own 8 team playoff rather than silly bowls that are expensive and poorly attended. I think they should also require a minimum roster payroll that is audited. Why let a Sacramento State, which is almost certainly going to be a bare bones program, get the same guaranty money as Memphis? I am certain the CFP will still cut the G6 in on the revenue split because that is simply a shakedown by the G6 not to sue the P4 for anti-trust violations.

 

[CL82]

And that's literally his argument, despite pages of evidence presented otherwise. He's always a special one. You should see how big mad he gets about playing games in Hartford. It's stupefying.

Lol, and in the end, you still can't explain why schools that were plaintiffs on the big east lawsuit against the ACC are now members of the conference, if being a plaintiff was disqualifying from being a member of the ACC.

I have to admit, though, the longer this goes on seeing how butthurt you are about being wrong on this is getting really funny.

 

[UConnJim]

So you’re telling us, after all this time, your the reason we didn’t get the invite? Am I reading this correctly?

Ha! I'm just saying my BC friends thought we were in based on what they were hearing and they were just as surprised by the Louisville news as I was.

 

[CL82]

Ha! I'm just saying my BC friends thought we were in based on what they were hearing and they were just as surprised by the Louisville news as I was.

I think the tobacco road schools were as surprised as we were by FSU and Clemson's power-play. They were upset because they perceived that the Syracuse and Pittsburgh additions were "basketball schools" and they wanted a "football school" in the next round of additions. Ironically, we beat Louisville in football days before the announcement that they would be joining the ACC.

 

[JVN]

I think the tobacco road schools were as surprised as we were by FSU and Clemson's power-play. They were upset because they perceived that the Syracuse and Pittsburgh additions were "basketball schools" and they wanted a "football school" in the next round of additions. Ironically, we beat Louisville in football days before the announcement that they would be joining the ACC.

IIRC they also wanted the next addition to be a southern school, as they were not happy with the ACC's northward expansion.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Not a tweet but you have Sun Belt Conference schools dropping $13M on marching band facilities.

USA Marching Band

 

[BullDawg]

Not a tweet but you have Sun Belt Conference schools dropping $13M on marching band facilities.

USA Marching Band

It’s a named facility, so donor dollars.

 

[JVN]

 

[UConnTrumbull]

 

[Fishy]

If anyone is claiming that the lawsuits had no bearing on why UConn has been kept out of the ACC, they really, really, really need to stop. They're wrong.

"But Pitt and Syracuse and Virginia Tech and..."

It was our lawsuit - we let Blumenthal make us the face of this thing and when it was dismissed the first time, he refiled it in Rockland or Vernon or whatever the town is called and he made the decision to add various ACC and school officials personally.

Surprisingly, they did not get over having processor servers pound on their doors, seeing their names in headlines and having to hire attorneys to answer the suit. It's almost like they were human or something and they remembered what we did.

 

[CL82]

If anyone is claiming that the lawsuits had no bearing on why UConn has been kept out of the ACC, they really, really, really need to stop. They're wrong.

"But Pitt and Syracuse and Virginia Tech and..."

It was our lawsuit - we let Blumenthal make us the face of this thing and when it was dismissed the first time, he refiled it in Rockland or Vernon or whatever the town is called and he made the decision to add various ACC and school officials personally.

Surprisingly, they did not get over having processor servers pound on their doors, seeing their names in headlines and having to hire attorneys to answer the suit. It's almost like they were human or something and they remembered what we did.

I love the one line dismissal of the fact that three of the plaintiffs of that suit are actually in the ACC. That pretty much directly were rebuts the presumption that being a plaintiff in that suit prevented you from being in the ACC.

Here's another fun fact, Connecticut was originally slotted to join the ACC with Syracuse and was only left out at Boston colleges request, not because they had a hissy fit over being named in that suit but because Boston College "wanted to beat the New England team."

Connecticut was also slated to join the ACC when Louisville got in. The switched to Louisville was only made after an FSU and Clemson power-play.

Those three statements are not speculation about people having hurt feelings over being served, but well documented facts.

But if you still think that the individuals named in the suit are actively preventing our admission to the ACC, maybe you will take some solace in the fact that of the eight people individually named in the suit, only two are actually still have any kind of active role in the ACC. One is BC president William Leahy, who is scheduled to step down this year and the other is Cecil Huey who's only affiliation with Clemson is as a professor, emeritus and engineering, and thus he not likely in a decision making capacity. So, if peoples hurt feelings over the lawsuit was really the impediment from our joining the ACC, I guess we'd be in this year.

Blumenthal is a generally unlikable blow hard, but he's probably not the reason that we aren't in the ACC.

 

[RSTuthill]

I love the one line dismissal of the fact that three of the plaintiffs of that suit are actually in the ACC. That pretty much directly were robots the presumption that being a plaintiff in that suit prevented you from being in the ACC.

Here's another fun fact, Connecticut was originally slotted to join the ACC with Syracuse and was only left out at Boston colleges request, not because they had a hissy fit over being named in that suit but because Boston College "wanted to beat the New England team."

Connecticut was also slated to join the ACC when Louisville got in. The switched to Louisville was only made after an FSU and Clemson power-play.

Those three statements are not speculation about people having hurt feelings over being served, but well documented facts.

But if you still think that the individuals named in the suit are actively preventing our admission to the ACC, maybe it'll take some solace in the fact that of the eight people individually named in the suit, only two are actually still have any kind of active role in the ACC. One is BC president William Leahy, who is scheduled to step down this year and the other is Cecil Huey who's only affiliation with Clemson is as a professor, emeritus and engineering, and thus he not likely in a decision making capacity. So, if peoples hurt feelings over the lawsuit was really the impediment from our joining the ACC, I guess we'd be in this year.

Blumenthal is a generally unlikable blow hard, but he's probably not the reason that we aren't in the ACC.

He might be one of the reasons UConn is not in the Big 12, however. The publicity it generated could not have been good and only emphasized the cultural mismatch.

 

[HuskyinWRNY]

I love the one line dismissal of the fact that three of the plaintiffs of that suit are actually in the ACC. That pretty much directly were robots the presumption that being a plaintiff in that suit prevented you from being in the ACC.

Here's another fun fact, Connecticut was originally slotted to join the ACC with Syracuse and was only left out at Boston colleges request, not because they had a hissy fit over being named in that suit but because Boston College "wanted to beat the New England team."

Connecticut was also slated to join the ACC when Louisville got in. The switched to Louisville was only made after an FSU and Clemson power-play.

Those three statements are not speculation about people having hurt feelings over being served, but well documented facts.

But if you still think that the individuals named in the suit are actively preventing our admission to the ACC, maybe it'll take some solace in the fact that of the eight people individually named in the suit, only two are actually still have any kind of active role in the ACC. One is BC president William Leahy, who is scheduled to step down this year and the other is Cecil Huey who's only affiliation with Clemson is as a professor, emeritus and engineering, and thus he not likely in a decision making capacity. So, if peoples hurt feelings over the lawsuit was really the impediment from our joining the ACC, I guess we'd be in this year.

Blumenthal is a generally unlikable blow hard, but he's probably not the reason that we aren't in the ACC.

Blow hard? Nah, just a jerk.