(03-25-2013 11:07 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 10:37 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 10:20 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 10:07 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 07:37 AM)TerryD Wrote:  I don't think that realignment will be as extensive as most or many people do.

I think that ND will either join the ACC in full (before or after realignment) or stay affiliated with the ACC after realignment is done.

I think that 4x16 and those conferences breaking off from the NCAA is a pipe dream and will not happen.

I think that the alliance of ND, Texas, the ACC and ESPN will stop or limit conference realignment.

Either way, I think that there will always be room for an independent ND in any post-realignment universe. I don't think that ND will be forced to join a conference or be "left behind".

But, what the hell do I know? I am just scratching my ass and guessing, just like everyone else on realignment message boards.

Terry, you avoided the question. You admit you are in the minority on the realignment issue and we know what you think or hope will happen.

So assuming the majority are correct and realignment continues with the poaching of the ACC and as a result Notre Dame has to join a conference......the question is, which conference will they want to join?.

BTW I stand by my original statement, (that some of you Notre Damer's took exception to) that "IF" Notre Dame ever joins a conference it wil be the Big 10..... because in that event I believe their only choices will be The BIG, SEC, Big12 or PAC.

I didn't avoid the question. I said that ND will either remain an independent affiliated with the ACC or will join the ACC as a full member.

I think that will be the case no matter what happens with expansion.

I believe that ND made its choice, twice. The first time last September when it announced it was moving to the ACC and again a couple of weeks ago when it announced it was moving there this coming July.

I think that those were pretty clear indications of ND's long term intentions.

Now, if you are limiting ND's only choices to the Big 12, the Big Ten, the SEC or the Pac 12, then my best guess is that the Irish will team up with its buddy, Texas.

The question was based on the premis, that as most seem to believe, the ACC will be poached and no longer a power conference.

So your answer is, you think the Irish would join the Big12.
That is interesting. Thanks.

No, you misunderstand my answer or I misunderstood your question.

My answer to the question as illustrated by the highlighted portion of your post (a weakened but not destroyed ACC) is that ND will remain an independent and be affiliated with the ACC.

If the ACC is totally destroyed, gonzo.....out of existence entirely...then my opinion is that ND will team up with Texas as a counterweight to an expanded Big Ten.

Then you are agreeing with my original statement..... that if Notre Dame ultimately must join a conference, it will likely be the Big10.

Certainly Notre Dame will remain Indy as long as possible, whether that is being affiliated with the ACC or not. However, if the situation develops as I suggested and they have to join a conference, I think we agree their first choice will be the Big10.

(03-25-2013 12:53 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 11:07 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 10:37 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 10:20 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 10:07 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  Terry, you avoided the question. You admit you are in the minority on the realignment issue and we know what you think or hope will happen.

So assuming the majority are correct and realignment continues with the poaching of the ACC and as a result Notre Dame has to join a conference......the question is, which conference will they want to join?.

BTW I stand by my original statement, (that some of you Notre Damer's took exception to) that "IF" Notre Dame ever joins a conference it wil be the Big 10..... because in that event I believe their only choices will be The BIG, SEC, Big12 or PAC.

I didn't avoid the question. I said that ND will either remain an independent affiliated with the ACC or will join the ACC as a full member.

I think that will be the case no matter what happens with expansion.

I believe that ND made its choice, twice. The first time last September when it announced it was moving to the ACC and again a couple of weeks ago when it announced it was moving there this coming July.

I think that those were pretty clear indications of ND's long term intentions.

Now, if you are limiting ND's only choices to the Big 12, the Big Ten, the SEC or the Pac 12, then my best guess is that the Irish will team up with its buddy, Texas.

The question was based on the premis, that as most seem to believe, the ACC will be poached and no longer a power conference.

So your answer is, you think the Irish would join the Big12.
That is interesting. Thanks.

No, you misunderstand my answer or I misunderstood your question.

My answer to the question as illustrated by the highlighted portion of your post (a weakened but not destroyed ACC) is that ND will remain an independent and be affiliated with the ACC.

If the ACC is totally destroyed, gonzo.....out of existence entirely...then my opinion is that ND will team up with Texas as a counterweight to an expanded Big Ten.

Then you are agreeing with my original statement..... that if Notre Dame ultimately must join a conference, it will likely be the Big10.

Certainly Notre Dame will remain Indy as long as possible, whether that is being affiliated with the ACC or not. However, if the situation develops as I suggested and they have to join a conference, I think we agree their first choice will be the Big10.

Huh?

I said my guess in that ACC Doomsday Scenario is that ND would team up with Texas in an expanded Big 12 (3rd Tier rights and a digital Irish Network and all of that) as a counterweight to the Big Ten.

Where did you get that I agreed with you that ND would join the Big Ten?

Just curious as to why you think ND would have any interest at all in ever joining the Big Ten?

(03-25-2013 01:04 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 12:53 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 11:07 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 10:37 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 10:20 AM)TerryD Wrote:  I didn't avoid the question. I said that ND will either remain an independent affiliated with the ACC or will join the ACC as a full member.

I think that will be the case no matter what happens with expansion.

I believe that ND made its choice, twice. The first time last September when it announced it was moving to the ACC and again a couple of weeks ago when it announced it was moving there this coming July.

I think that those were pretty clear indications of ND's long term intentions.

Now, if you are limiting ND's only choices to the Big 12, the Big Ten, the SEC or the Pac 12, then my best guess is that the Irish will team up with its buddy, Texas.

The question was based on the premis, that as most seem to believe, the ACC will be poached and no longer a power conference.

So your answer is, you think the Irish would join the Big12.
That is interesting. Thanks.

No, you misunderstand my answer or I misunderstood your question.

My answer to the question as illustrated by the highlighted portion of your post (a weakened but not destroyed ACC) is that ND will remain an independent and be affiliated with the ACC.

If the ACC is totally destroyed, gonzo.....out of existence entirely...then my opinion is that ND will team up with Texas as a counterweight to an expanded Big Ten.

Then you are agreeing with my original statement..... that if Notre Dame ultimately must join a conference, it will likely be the Big10.

Certainly Notre Dame will remain Indy as long as possible, whether that is being affiliated with the ACC or not. However, if the situation develops as I suggested and they have to join a conference, I think we agree their first choice will be the Big10.

Huh?

I said my guess in that ACC Doomsday Scenario is that ND would team up with Texas in an expanded Big 12 (3rd Tier rights and a digital Irish Network and all of that) as a counterweight to the Big Ten.

Sorry but that is not what you said. You said "team up with Texas as a counterweight to an EXPANDED Big10"... and there was no mention of the Big12. It seemed to me you were saying Notre Dame would get Texas as a countgerweight (which means an equivalent) to Notre Dame and they would join an "expanded" Big10. You did say expanded Big10.

As for why I think Notre Dame would have an interest in the Big10 is because of geography and thier very long relationship with members of the conference

You misunderstood. I was talking Big 12 the whole time.

I thought you understood that when you posted this up thread:


"The question was based on the premis, that as most seem to believe, the ACC will be poached and no longer a power conference.

So your answer is, you think the Irish would join the Big12.
That is interesting. Thanks."


How did you go from that post to thinking that I was talking about the Big Ten???????

ND wants to escape that geography. ND has a long history with the Big Ten, mostly of antipathy.

(03-25-2013 02:15 PM)TerryD Wrote:  You misunderstood. I was talking Big 12 the whole time.

I thought you understood that when you posted this up thread:


"The question was based on the premis, that as most seem to believe, the ACC will be poached and no longer a power conference.

So your answer is, you think the Irish would join the Big12.
That is interesting. Thanks."


How did you go from that post to thinking that I was talking about the Big Ten???????

Because you said to an expanded Big10.

(03-25-2013 02:19 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:15 PM)TerryD Wrote:  You misunderstood. I was talking Big 12 the whole time.

I thought you understood that when you posted this up thread:


"The question was based on the premis, that as most seem to believe, the ACC will be poached and no longer a power conference.

So your answer is, you think the Irish would join the Big12.
That is interesting. Thanks."


How did you go from that post to thinking that I was talking about the Big Ten???????

Because you said to an expanded Big10.

No he didn't. He said as a counterweight to the Big Ten...

You need to start reading what is actually said, instead of reading into things what you want to see...

(03-25-2013 02:20 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:19 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:15 PM)TerryD Wrote:  You misunderstood. I was talking Big 12 the whole time.

I thought you understood that when you posted this up thread:


"The question was based on the premis, that as most seem to believe, the ACC will be poached and no longer a power conference.

So your answer is, you think the Irish would join the Big12.
That is interesting. Thanks."


How did you go from that post to thinking that I was talking about the Big Ten???????

Because you said to an expanded Big10.

No he didn't. He said as a counterweight to the Big Ten...

You need to start reading what is actually said, instead of reading into things what you want to see...

Sorry.. He said "to an expanded Big10". If he is not talking about Notre Dame and Texas to the Big10 then who will the Big10 be expanding with.... we are talking about the future. The Big10 already has 14 teams and if the Big12 added two they would have 12. Since counterweight means, the equivalent or to balance, how is that suppose to work.

Sometimes I wonder if there will be any more big conference realignment. Maybe we are just dreaming and wishing. I personally doubt that the ACC will lose any more teams. Maryland had unique issues. How many schools has the ACC gained and how many have they lost? The Big XII seems happy where they are at now. At least Texas is, and that's what's important. I think the PAC is finished at 12, missed a golden opportunity, and are now out of geographical and academic options. I doubt the B1G can't get anyone else from any other major conference. A southeastern school trying to play up north is, to me, a death sentence. Not on the field, but just because it doesn't appeal to the folks down here... If anyone attempts to move at all, it will be someone like Cincy or Uconn. Yep..that conference.

(03-25-2013 02:28 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:20 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:19 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:15 PM)TerryD Wrote:  You misunderstood. I was talking Big 12 the whole time.

I thought you understood that when you posted this up thread:


"The question was based on the premis, that as most seem to believe, the ACC will be poached and no longer a power conference.

So your answer is, you think the Irish would join the Big 10.
That is interesting. Thanks."


How did you go from that post to thinking that I was talking about the Big Ten???????

Because you said to an expanded Big10.

No he didn't. He said as a counterweight to the Big Ten...

You need to start reading what is actually said, instead of reading into things what you want to see...

Sorry.. He said "to an expanded Big10". If he is not talking about Notre Dame and Texas to the Big10 then who will the Big10 be expanding with.... we are talking about the future. The Big10 already has 14 teams and if the Big12 added two they would have 12. Since counterweight means, the equivalent or to balance, how is that suppose to work.

By "expanded Big Ten", I meant the Big Ten envisioned by your scenario. How does the ACC get devoured if the Big Ten isn't doing a big part of the devouring?

I said that I thought ND would join with Texas as a counterweight to an expanded Big 10.

That means a Big 12 anchored by Texas, ND and Oklahoma versus (counterweight to) an expanded Big Ten anchored by Michigan, Ohio State, Florida State? North Carolina, etc....

This board is devolving.

I agree. You have people who read into things what they want to see. People too ignorant to ignore people they don't want to listen to. And people too obstinate to realize they are backing a losing proposition. It doesn't bode well for the future of society...

(03-25-2013 02:54 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:28 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:20 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:19 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 02:15 PM)TerryD Wrote:  You misunderstood. I was talking Big 12 the whole time.

I thought you understood that when you posted this up thread:


"The question was based on the premis, that as most seem to believe, the ACC will be poached and no longer a power conference.

So your answer is, you think the Irish would join the Big 10.
That is interesting. Thanks."


How did you go from that post to thinking that I was talking about the Big Ten???????

Because you said to an expanded Big10.

No he didn't. He said as a counterweight to the Big Ten...

You need to start reading what is actually said, instead of reading into things what you want to see...

Sorry.. He said "to an expanded Big10". If he is not talking about Notre Dame and Texas to the Big10 then who will the Big10 be expanding with.... we are talking about the future. The Big10 already has 14 teams and if the Big12 added two they would have 12. Since counterweight means, the equivalent or to balance, how is that suppose to work.

By "expanded Big Ten", I meant the Big Ten envisioned by your scenario. How does the ACC get devoured if the Big Ten isn't doing a big part of the devouring?

I said that I thought ND would join with Texas as a counterweight to an expanded Big 10.

That means a Big 12 anchored by Texas, ND and Oklahoma versus (counterweight to) an expanded Big Ten anchored by Michigan, Ohio State, Florida State? North Carolina, etc....

Good enough. You may be correct about the Big12, but I just have a hard time thinking Notre Dame would pass on the Big10 for the Big12 especially with the Big10 pushing East with Rutgers, Maryland and as you mentioned North Carolina etc. So I will stand by my statement that I think it will be the Big10 for Notre Dame if they have to join a conference.

Anyway, time will tell and it has been a good debate.

(03-25-2013 03:07 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I agree. You have people who read into things what they want to see. People too ignorant to ignore people they don't want to listen to. And people too obstinate to realize they are backing a losing proposition. It doesn't bode well for the future of society...

True dat Bit. We could send society to school, but oh...that's right. The schools are spending their money on stadium upgrades...

(03-25-2013 03:07 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I agree. You have people who read into things what they want to see. People too ignorant to ignore people they don't want to listen to. And people too obstinate to realize they are backing a losing proposition. It doesn't bode well for the future of society...

Yeah, that's what happens when a famous baby doctor tells a generation that spanking their kids and telling them they are wrong is a bad thing. You wind up with three generations of adults who don't know how to differ, and can't admit when they've made a mistake, haven't been taught respect for anyone else, and have been given diplomas for showing up and paying the tuition. Then they turn a nice evening out with the wife after hours in an upscale restaurant into romper room when their brats that should be in bed are running from table to table and screaming. Welcome to the chaos of the new age, Bit. It kind of makes you appreciate those old obstinate guys who fight the battles they can't win but do so anyway because it's the only chance they have left to try to make a difference. If we all cave in it only gets worse. There are some days that the Alamo just makes sense and then there are those days when it just seems like suicide. I guess it's just a matter of perspective and how tired you are on that day.

(03-25-2013 04:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-25-2013 03:07 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I agree. You have people who read into things what they want to see. People too ignorant to ignore people they don't want to listen to. And people too obstinate to realize they are backing a losing proposition. It doesn't bode well for the future of society...

Yeah, that's what happens when a famous baby doctor tells a generation that spanking their kids and telling them they are wrong is a bad thing. You wind up with three generations of adults who don't know how to differ, and can't admit when they've made a mistake, haven't been taught respect for anyone else, and have been given diplomas for showing up and paying the tuition. Then they turn a nice evening out with the wife after hours in an upscale restaurant into romper room when their brats that should be in bed are running from table to table and screaming. Welcome to the chaos of the new age, Bit. It kind of makes you appreciate those old obstinate guys who fight the battles they can't win but do so anyway because it's the only chance they have left to try to make a difference. If we all cave in it only gets worse. There are some days that the Alamo just makes sense and then there are those days when it just seems like suicide. I guess it's just a matter of perspective and how tired you are on that day.

Considering that the folks at the Alamo were surrounded on all sides by Mexicans, leaving it would have been suicide. Staying there would have been the better option. Not by much, I'll grant you. But at least the walls gave you some hope...

As for the rest...

Well said JRsec.

(03-25-2013 05:48 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  Well said JRsec.

Amen...