Southern Conference invites 3 new members

[rimrockgriz]

Where can I jump on the UNC (pathetic) basher boat. I'll bring my own mallet. However, I can remember UNC coming into Bozeman state about 10 years ago and beating the scats like 14-7.I think Tampa bay Buc Vincent Jackson dropped the guillotine for the final curtain that day. :egriz:

 

[Hammer]

Where can I jump on the UNC (pathetic) basher boat. I'll bring my own mallet. However, I can remember UNC coming into Bozeman state about 10 years ago and beating the scats like 14-7.I think Tampa bay Buc Vincent Jackson dropped the guillotine for the final curtain that day. :egriz:

Not as fun as the Danny Woodhead led charges from Chadron (DivII) who walked out of state colleges stadium with smiles on their faces but my all time favorite was humbolt st winning in the litterbox the week after losing to Tech!!!!! :lol: :lol:

 

[Silvertip]

NDSU is the exception to FCS not unlike Boise St. is to FBS (which really gives you heartburn should someone point out how moving up can be successful). EWU has been FCS for 30 years; nice example. What have the others done that is so notable? Why not include UNC in your defensive comment?

EWU came from D-II and NAIA, and joined the Big Sky in 1987. The question wasn't how long they've been in FCS; it's where they came from and have far they've come, i.e. a national championship. Boise St's success doesn't give me heartburn. I think it's great that they've done so well. They're an exception. They were well-funded from early on, kept after it, and had some luck., by It's people like you who ignore all of the unsuccessful and languishing teams that have moved uppointing out Boise St and maybe a few others. People like you who ignore the cost of moving up, and who refuse to look at reality. Now that gives me heartburn.

Hey, Mr PR, you want to talk about unsuccessful programs moving up? Here's a question you may find uncomfortable answering. Of the current BSC membership number, however successful or unsuccessful, how many of them didn't move up from DII or elsewhere - but actually moved down not just once, but twice :?: The answer: ONLY ONE. The University of Montana...and BTW, MSU moved up from the old DII Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference when the BSC was formed.

Try again...

Hey Mr. Tip, what relevance does that have to the discussion? Why do so many of you have to create the straw man, and attack it, instead of sticking to the discussion at hand?

The relevance is that there are numerous examples of "moving up" beyond your narrow interpretation ascribing it only to schools going from FCS to FBS...and of course moving down isn't something you see every day...moving down usually means moving out - all the way out...

 

[kemajic]

You clearly don't understand how good FCS has been for years, and how cool the playoff system is. Things may change, but to say FCS hasn't been relevant is just plain silly, in my view. I actually don't have an agenda on moving up or not, but you clearly do and have had for many year. For you, it's been move up at all costs, and ignore the facts.

Feel free to describe my supposed agenda on moving up, or not, and why I have that agenda.

The (highlighted) is a joke, right?

That's easy; your agenda is clear to anyone - status quo so you can keep your nose brown with the existing cast that you have so invested. Don't challenge the program, favor the Pan Handle St games, and don't disrupt PR's ability to name drop and suck up. So to protect that agenda denegrate the Idahos, mid-major FBS in general and bowl games. Call BSU lucky. Claim Fullerton is a genius and his 13 team conf. with badly unbalanced schedules, is sweet. Glorify FCS playoffs which only the participants watch. And which is now watered down to include the Bethune-Cookmans and God help, the auto-bid from the new Southern Conf. And react to any suggestion that UM's current position and FCS is eroding. Will defend the reduction of FCS schollies to 50 or less when it comes. Dodge the question why teams move up but never down if FCS is so much better than mid-major FBS. Likely anxious about next year's Wyoming game, which could stir up some move-up talk when we finally kick their butt.

I have consistently said FCS was once relevant and dynamically competitive, but inch by inch it has regressed over the last 20 years with the good teams leaving and playoff expansion after expansion to include losers that have no chance of winning. It will lose even more money. And status quo for Montana is an inch by inch move down.

 

[PlayerRep]

You clearly don't understand how good FCS has been for years, and how cool the playoff system is. Things may change, but to say FCS hasn't been relevant is just plain silly, in my view. I actually don't have an agenda on moving up or not, but you clearly do and have had for many year. For you, it's been move up at all costs, and ignore the facts.

Feel free to describe my supposed agenda on moving up, or not, and why I have that agenda.

The (highlighted) is a joke, right?

That's easy; your agenda is clear to anyone - status quo so you can keep your nose brown with the existing cast that you have so invested. Don't challenge the program, favor the Pan Handle St games, and don't disrupt PR's ability to name drop and suck up. So to protect that agenda denegrate the Idahos, mid-major FBS in general and bowl games. Call BSU lucky. Claim Fullerton is a genius and his 13 team conf. with badly unbalanced schedules, is sweet. Glorify FCS playoffs which only the participants watch. And which is now watered down to include the Bethune-Cookmans and God help, the auto-bid from the new Southern Conf. And react to any suggestion that UM's current position and FCS is eroding. Will defend the reduction of FCS schollies to 50 or less when it comes. Dodge the question why teams move up but never down if FCS is so much better than mid-major FBS. Likely anxious about next year's Wyoming game, which could stir up some move-up talk when we finally kick their butt.

I have consistently said FCS was once relevant and dynamically competitive, but inch by inch it has regressed over the last 20 years with the good teams leaving and playoff expansion after expansion to include losers that have no chance of winning. It will lose even more money. And status quo for Montana is an inch by inch move down.

As I said, I don't have an agenda regarding this subject. Here are two of my posts in the last couple years. Is this your idea of having an agenda for status quo? And, my assessment of the Big Sky currently being stable and fairly strong, and Fullerton's role in that, is absolutely correct.

1. "Given UM's situation and economics, and being realistic, UM is doing the right thing by trying to stabilize economics, improve facilities, and continuing to keep a close [eye] on the changing landscape. If FBS is eventually not a viable level or alternative, then UM will have to consider Plan B (and to be ready for it). Currently, FBS is fine (with many good teams, viable economics for most schools (compared to the bad economics of FBS) and the developed playoff system), and the Big Sky conference is stable and fairly strong. However, things could, of course, change, as FBS continues to change and realign and/or other headwinds develop.

2. "All this being said, it's good for UM to keep its eyes open, as realignment continues to occur and cause changes in the college football landscape."

 

[rimrockgriz]

As I watch key and pr debate this I can't help but think of the polar opposite of Rolls Rank...Gordon Gee. asked to leave OSU post nicely :roll: A jokester who quipped" I hope Jim Tressel doesn't fire me." Then there's our captain who thinks sports is ice field in the north atlantic 100 yrs ago. Both representing the far edge of the spectrum which is almost "ALWAYS" f....d. They got rid of their clown...so........ :egriz: