(08-06-2013 10:11 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:02 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 09:56 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 09:45 AM)Cardinals Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 10:51 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I bought it hook, line, and sinker.

Like I've said about the ACC: BC, Syracuse, and Pitt want nothing to do with UConn because our athletic department knows how to field quality teams (men's BB, women's BB, soccer, baseball, FB ... although FB is still young and growing). BC is terrified of having UConn 90 miles away in the same conference. And now Penn State doesn't want us in the B1G because we're a threat?

The AAC will be fun, but I'm tired of UConn having doors slammed shut in our face because we're competent & competitive.

Yeah that's why the ACC picked Louisville over UConn, because UConn's overall sports program is so much more competent & competitive than ours. If it weren't for the fact that, since 2005, Louisville had won 17 more Big East championships in all sports, every word you say would be true!

Maybe you'd better find a different argument than the "Everybody's just too threatened by UConn's greatness" one.

Your knowledge of the politics between BC, UConn, and Syracuse, etc. is lacking.

You should spend your energy boosting Louisville's academics. Maybe someday they'll fit with the rest of the ACC.

They idea that two even three schools could keep someone out of a 15 team league is far fetched imo.

Maybe if it were the power schools I could buy it but new members who have little to no power? Highly doubtful.

It seems clear that there are other reasons to UConn not being invited that having nothing to do with Syracuse or BC.

The undisputed fact is UConn was targeted to go to the ACC with Cuse. BC raised an issue with that as a member of the ACC expansion comittee and the ACC moved on to Pitt. That seems pretty cut and dry to me. I realize as a Syracuse fan you are surely enjoying the damage CR has done to UConn's image, but the fact is we were the first choice along with your school. Those nagging reasons you keep referring to seem to be laid out pretty clearly by a national media member and point directly at BC.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...ppo-espn/1

There is a difference between not wanting you and having the power to do something about it. If FSU or UNC wanted UConn I have do doubt BC would have been told to STFU and go sit in the corner.

I know it is easier to point to BC than it is too look in the mirror and see that UConn's lawsuit against the ACC was a really bad idea and that folks in the ACC are holding a grudge.

As for what I want if you read any of my posts on the ACC board I have been pretty clear about wanting UConn as the 16th team. It was a mistake for the ACC to pass on Rutgers and it will be an even larger mistake to pass on UConn.

(08-06-2013 09:56 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 09:45 AM)Cardinals Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 10:51 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I bought it hook, line, and sinker.

Like I've said about the ACC: BC, Syracuse, and Pitt want nothing to do with UConn because our athletic department knows how to field quality teams (men's BB, women's BB, soccer, baseball, FB ... although FB is still young and growing). BC is terrified of having UConn 90 miles away in the same conference. And now Penn State doesn't want us in the B1G because we're a threat?

The AAC will be fun, but I'm tired of UConn having doors slammed shut in our face because we're competent & competitive.

Yeah that's why the ACC picked Louisville over UConn, because UConn's overall sports program is so much more competent & competitive than ours. If it weren't for the fact that, since 2005, Louisville had won 17 more Big East championships in all sports, every word you say would be true!

Maybe you'd better find a different argument than the "Everybody's just too threatened by UConn's greatness" one.

Your knowledge of the politics between BC, UConn, and Syracuse, etc. is lacking.

You should spend your energy boosting Louisville's academics. Maybe someday they'll fit with the rest of the ACC.

You made no mention of academics or politics in your argument. You specifically stated that the northeastern ACC schools blackballed UConn because they knew how to field quality teams. If you want me to acknowledge that Louisville is academically behind UNC, then simply state that fact in the argument I'm taking issue with, and I'll address it. Don't call me out for not arguing with you on point you did not, in fact, make. It lacks academic integrity to do so.

(08-06-2013 10:28 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:11 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:02 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 09:56 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 09:45 AM)Cardinals Wrote:  Yeah that's why the ACC picked Louisville over UConn, because UConn's overall sports program is so much more competent & competitive than ours. If it weren't for the fact that, since 2005, Louisville had won 17 more Big East championships in all sports, every word you say would be true!

Maybe you'd better find a different argument than the "Everybody's just too threatened by UConn's greatness" one.

Your knowledge of the politics between BC, UConn, and Syracuse, etc. is lacking.

You should spend your energy boosting Louisville's academics. Maybe someday they'll fit with the rest of the ACC.

They idea that two even three schools could keep someone out of a 15 team league is far fetched imo.

Maybe if it were the power schools I could buy it but new members who have little to no power? Highly doubtful.

It seems clear that there are other reasons to UConn not being invited that having nothing to do with Syracuse or BC.

The undisputed fact is UConn was targeted to go to the ACC with Cuse. BC raised an issue with that as a member of the ACC expansion comittee and the ACC moved on to Pitt. That seems pretty cut and dry to me. I realize as a Syracuse fan you are surely enjoying the damage CR has done to UConn's image, but the fact is we were the first choice along with your school. Those nagging reasons you keep referring to seem to be laid out pretty clearly by a national media member and point directly at BC.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...ppo-espn/1

There is a difference between not wanting you and having the power to do something about it. If FSU or UNC wanted UConn I have do doubt BC would have been told to STFU and go sit in the corner.

I know it is easier to point to BC than it is too look in the mirror and see that UConn's lawsuit against the ACC was a really bad idea and that folks in the ACC are holding a grudge.

As for what I want if you read any of my posts on the ACC board I have been pretty clear about wanting UConn as the 16th team. It was a mistake for the ACC to pass on Rutgers and it will be an even larger mistake to pass on UConn.

Look, I appreciate the sentiment of you wanting UConn in the ACC. I perosnally do not think UConn will ever be in the ACC and at this point am ok with that.

Anyone that points at the lawsuit as a reason UConn is not in the ACC is not thinking rationally in my opinion. 2 of the original plaintiffs are already in the ACC. Say what you want about the venue being placed in Connecticut, but Virginia Tech and Pitt signed their names to the complaint making them no different than any other plaintiff.

The fact UConn would be targetted as #14 proves the ACC is over the lawsuit.

If BC did not throw a stink regarding UConn's inclusion, would we be talking about the lawsuit or any other reasons you feel UConn is not in the ACC, or is UConn in a power conference right now?

I think much of the OP was tongue-in-cheek. However, it did bring up a couple of questions.

Could Penn State be holding a grudge against some teams for blackballing them when they wanted in the BE? I don't know what the original vote was but Rutgers didn't join the BE until after PSU was in the B1G.

Did A&M do Texas a huge favor by joining the SEC? Texas can now say, "You let A&M go to the SEC without any other Texas schools. Why do I have to take Texas schools with me to my new conference?"

(08-06-2013 10:36 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:28 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:11 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:02 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 09:56 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Your knowledge of the politics between BC, UConn, and Syracuse, etc. is lacking.

You should spend your energy boosting Louisville's academics. Maybe someday they'll fit with the rest of the ACC.

They idea that two even three schools could keep someone out of a 15 team league is far fetched imo.

Maybe if it were the power schools I could buy it but new members who have little to no power? Highly doubtful.

It seems clear that there are other reasons to UConn not being invited that having nothing to do with Syracuse or BC.

The undisputed fact is UConn was targeted to go to the ACC with Cuse. BC raised an issue with that as a member of the ACC expansion comittee and the ACC moved on to Pitt. That seems pretty cut and dry to me. I realize as a Syracuse fan you are surely enjoying the damage CR has done to UConn's image, but the fact is we were the first choice along with your school. Those nagging reasons you keep referring to seem to be laid out pretty clearly by a national media member and point directly at BC.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...ppo-espn/1

There is a difference between not wanting you and having the power to do something about it. If FSU or UNC wanted UConn I have do doubt BC would have been told to STFU and go sit in the corner.

I know it is easier to point to BC than it is too look in the mirror and see that UConn's lawsuit against the ACC was a really bad idea and that folks in the ACC are holding a grudge.

As for what I want if you read any of my posts on the ACC board I have been pretty clear about wanting UConn as the 16th team. It was a mistake for the ACC to pass on Rutgers and it will be an even larger mistake to pass on UConn.

Look, I appreciate the sentiment of you wanting UConn in the ACC. I perosnally do not think UConn will ever be in the ACC and at this point am ok with that.

Anyone that points at the lawsuit as a reason UConn is not in the ACC is not thinking rationally in my opinion. 2 of the original plaintiffs are already in the ACC. Say what you want about the venue being placed in Connecticut, but Virginia Tech and Pitt signed their names to the complaint making them no different than any other plaintiff.

The fact UConn would be targetted as #14 proves the ACC is over the lawsuit.

If BC did not throw a stink regarding UConn's inclusion, would we be talking about the lawsuit or any other reasons you feel UConn is not in the ACC, or is UConn in a power conference right now?

Some of the more long time ACC board posters have mentioned that there was more ill will towards UConn than the other two because they had named names and made it personal. I don't know all the details of it but it was pretty clear a lot of the UNC folks still held that grudge with UConn that they didn't with Pitt or VTech.

Whether or not that is legitimate I don't know but it has been brought up more than a few times by some of the UNC folks on that board.

Grudges are funny things.

(08-06-2013 10:44 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:36 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:28 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:11 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:02 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  They idea that two even three schools could keep someone out of a 15 team league is far fetched imo.

Maybe if it were the power schools I could buy it but new members who have little to no power? Highly doubtful.

It seems clear that there are other reasons to UConn not being invited that having nothing to do with Syracuse or BC.

The undisputed fact is UConn was targeted to go to the ACC with Cuse. BC raised an issue with that as a member of the ACC expansion comittee and the ACC moved on to Pitt. That seems pretty cut and dry to me. I realize as a Syracuse fan you are surely enjoying the damage CR has done to UConn's image, but the fact is we were the first choice along with your school. Those nagging reasons you keep referring to seem to be laid out pretty clearly by a national media member and point directly at BC.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...ppo-espn/1

There is a difference between not wanting you and having the power to do something about it. If FSU or UNC wanted UConn I have do doubt BC would have been told to STFU and go sit in the corner.

I know it is easier to point to BC than it is too look in the mirror and see that UConn's lawsuit against the ACC was a really bad idea and that folks in the ACC are holding a grudge.

As for what I want if you read any of my posts on the ACC board I have been pretty clear about wanting UConn as the 16th team. It was a mistake for the ACC to pass on Rutgers and it will be an even larger mistake to pass on UConn.

Look, I appreciate the sentiment of you wanting UConn in the ACC. I perosnally do not think UConn will ever be in the ACC and at this point am ok with that.

Anyone that points at the lawsuit as a reason UConn is not in the ACC is not thinking rationally in my opinion. 2 of the original plaintiffs are already in the ACC. Say what you want about the venue being placed in Connecticut, but Virginia Tech and Pitt signed their names to the complaint making them no different than any other plaintiff.

The fact UConn would be targetted as #14 proves the ACC is over the lawsuit.

If BC did not throw a stink regarding UConn's inclusion, would we be talking about the lawsuit or any other reasons you feel UConn is not in the ACC, or is UConn in a power conference right now?

Some of the more long time ACC board posters have mentioned that there was more ill will towards UConn than the other two because they had named names and made it personal. I don't know all the details of it but it was pretty clear a lot of the UNC folks still held that grudge with UConn that they didn't with Pitt or VTech.

Whether or not that is legitimate I don't know but it has been brought up more than a few times by some of the UNC folks on that board.

Grudges are funny things.

I have a hard time believing that men and women who possess the capableintelligence to run some of the finest universities in the country are inable to get over a grudge over one specific plaintiff in an action that contained 5 of which 40% are now included in their conference. That is honestly the most unrealistic excuse ever, but if it is true those people should likely be fired or closely monitored to ensure the university isn't holding grudges that affect their business decisions because of the dozens of suits it encounters every year.

Back to the original point. Would we be talking about this if BC did not raise its hand to object to UConn when Cuse and UConn were targetted originally? I am guessing you are bringing this lawsuit stuff up because your answer is no and the UNC would object, but I do not want to put words in your mouth.

(08-06-2013 10:58 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:44 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:36 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:28 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:11 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  The undisputed fact is UConn was targeted to go to the ACC with Cuse. BC raised an issue with that as a member of the ACC expansion comittee and the ACC moved on to Pitt. That seems pretty cut and dry to me. I realize as a Syracuse fan you are surely enjoying the damage CR has done to UConn's image, but the fact is we were the first choice along with your school. Those nagging reasons you keep referring to seem to be laid out pretty clearly by a national media member and point directly at BC.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...ppo-espn/1

There is a difference between not wanting you and having the power to do something about it. If FSU or UNC wanted UConn I have do doubt BC would have been told to STFU and go sit in the corner.

I know it is easier to point to BC than it is too look in the mirror and see that UConn's lawsuit against the ACC was a really bad idea and that folks in the ACC are holding a grudge.

As for what I want if you read any of my posts on the ACC board I have been pretty clear about wanting UConn as the 16th team. It was a mistake for the ACC to pass on Rutgers and it will be an even larger mistake to pass on UConn.

Look, I appreciate the sentiment of you wanting UConn in the ACC. I perosnally do not think UConn will ever be in the ACC and at this point am ok with that.

Anyone that points at the lawsuit as a reason UConn is not in the ACC is not thinking rationally in my opinion. 2 of the original plaintiffs are already in the ACC. Say what you want about the venue being placed in Connecticut, but Virginia Tech and Pitt signed their names to the complaint making them no different than any other plaintiff.

The fact UConn would be targetted as #14 proves the ACC is over the lawsuit.

If BC did not throw a stink regarding UConn's inclusion, would we be talking about the lawsuit or any other reasons you feel UConn is not in the ACC, or is UConn in a power conference right now?

Some of the more long time ACC board posters have mentioned that there was more ill will towards UConn than the other two because they had named names and made it personal. I don't know all the details of it but it was pretty clear a lot of the UNC folks still held that grudge with UConn that they didn't with Pitt or VTech.

Whether or not that is legitimate I don't know but it has been brought up more than a few times by some of the UNC folks on that board.

Grudges are funny things.

I have a hard time believing that men and women who possess the capableintelligence to run some of the finest universities in the country are inable to get over a grudge over one specific plaintiff in an action that contained 5 of which 40% are now included in their conference. That is honestly the most unrealistic excuse ever, but if it is true those people should likely be fired or closely monitored to ensure the university isn't holding grudges that affect their business decisions because of the dozens of suits it encounters every year.

Back to the original point. Would we be talking about this if BC did not raise its hand to object to UConn when Cuse and UConn were targetted originally? I am guessing you are bringing this lawsuit stuff up because your answer is no and the UNC would object, but I do not want to put words in your mouth.

My answer is I simply don't know. I think there are probably more than a few reasons that the ACC has passed on UConn now.

I do know a lot (and I mean a lot) of Clemson and FSU fans are against you guys. The question is do the decision makers at those two universities feel the same?

The ensuing tug-of-war between the remains of the Big 12, the AAC, the MWC, and C-USA would be interesting to say the least.

Simplest geographic solution would be for the MWC to take all but WVU, which would then go to the AAC. However, considering the Big 12 would have more $, that's not likely.

Cincy, USF, and UCF going to the Big 12 would seemingly open the way for FAU, FIU, and USM to go the AAC.

Fascinating idea.

(08-06-2013 05:17 AM)miko33 Wrote:  To be accurate, you just happened to shoot your arrow close to the mark this time. Congrats, but remember the old saying that once in a awhile, even a blind hog can find an ear of corn...

Pigs have an exceptional sense of smell.

(08-06-2013 11:19 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:58 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:44 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:36 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:28 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  There is a difference between not wanting you and having the power to do something about it. If FSU or UNC wanted UConn I have do doubt BC would have been told to STFU and go sit in the corner.

I know it is easier to point to BC than it is too look in the mirror and see that UConn's lawsuit against the ACC was a really bad idea and that folks in the ACC are holding a grudge.

As for what I want if you read any of my posts on the ACC board I have been pretty clear about wanting UConn as the 16th team. It was a mistake for the ACC to pass on Rutgers and it will be an even larger mistake to pass on UConn.

Look, I appreciate the sentiment of you wanting UConn in the ACC. I perosnally do not think UConn will ever be in the ACC and at this point am ok with that.

Anyone that points at the lawsuit as a reason UConn is not in the ACC is not thinking rationally in my opinion. 2 of the original plaintiffs are already in the ACC. Say what you want about the venue being placed in Connecticut, but Virginia Tech and Pitt signed their names to the complaint making them no different than any other plaintiff.

The fact UConn would be targetted as #14 proves the ACC is over the lawsuit.

If BC did not throw a stink regarding UConn's inclusion, would we be talking about the lawsuit or any other reasons you feel UConn is not in the ACC, or is UConn in a power conference right now?

Some of the more long time ACC board posters have mentioned that there was more ill will towards UConn than the other two because they had named names and made it personal. I don't know all the details of it but it was pretty clear a lot of the UNC folks still held that grudge with UConn that they didn't with Pitt or VTech.

Whether or not that is legitimate I don't know but it has been brought up more than a few times by some of the UNC folks on that board.

Grudges are funny things.

I have a hard time believing that men and women who possess the capableintelligence to run some of the finest universities in the country are inable to get over a grudge over one specific plaintiff in an action that contained 5 of which 40% are now included in their conference. That is honestly the most unrealistic excuse ever, but if it is true those people should likely be fired or closely monitored to ensure the university isn't holding grudges that affect their business decisions because of the dozens of suits it encounters every year.

Back to the original point. Would we be talking about this if BC did not raise its hand to object to UConn when Cuse and UConn were targetted originally? I am guessing you are bringing this lawsuit stuff up because your answer is no and the UNC would object, but I do not want to put words in your mouth.

My answer is I simply don't know. I think there are probably more than a few reasons that the ACC has passed on UConn now.

I do know a lot (and I mean a lot) of Clemson and FSU fans are against you guys. The question is do the decision makers at those two universities feel the same?

Fair enough. There is no debating Clemson and FSU are the true football first fanbases of the ACC and it is understandable they would not want another basketball first school in a basketball centric conference that just added you guys in addition to the powers that already existed in the conference.

As for my opinion, I think if BC did not block UConn in the first expansion, UConn would be in today. I think GDF serving on the expansion comittee was the single greatest factor in why UConn is not in the ACC. It was reported as such and is the only concrete evidence of why UConn was not chosen. Obviously, there is no certainty and you have voiced some of the reasons, but since UConn was one of the first 2 targets the 4x4x4 comittee targetted it is clear to me that the majority of that conference is not harboring ill will towards UConn for some lawsuit a decade ago.

(08-06-2013 10:36 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:28 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:11 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 10:02 AM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 09:56 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Your knowledge of the politics between BC, UConn, and Syracuse, etc. is lacking.

You should spend your energy boosting Louisville's academics. Maybe someday they'll fit with the rest of the ACC.

They idea that two even three schools could keep someone out of a 15 team league is far fetched imo.

Maybe if it were the power schools I could buy it but new members who have little to no power? Highly doubtful.

It seems clear that there are other reasons to UConn not being invited that having nothing to do with Syracuse or BC.

The undisputed fact is UConn was targeted to go to the ACC with Cuse. BC raised an issue with that as a member of the ACC expansion comittee and the ACC moved on to Pitt. That seems pretty cut and dry to me. I realize as a Syracuse fan you are surely enjoying the damage CR has done to UConn's image, but the fact is we were the first choice along with your school. Those nagging reasons you keep referring to seem to be laid out pretty clearly by a national media member and point directly at BC.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...ppo-espn/1

There is a difference between not wanting you and having the power to do something about it. If FSU or UNC wanted UConn I have do doubt BC would have been told to STFU and go sit in the corner.

I know it is easier to point to BC than it is too look in the mirror and see that UConn's lawsuit against the ACC was a really bad idea and that folks in the ACC are holding a grudge.

As for what I want if you read any of my posts on the ACC board I have been pretty clear about wanting UConn as the 16th team. It was a mistake for the ACC to pass on Rutgers and it will be an even larger mistake to pass on UConn.

Look, I appreciate the sentiment of you wanting UConn in the ACC. I perosnally do not think UConn will ever be in the ACC and at this point am ok with that.

Anyone that points at the lawsuit as a reason UConn is not in the ACC is not thinking rationally in my opinion. 2 of the original plaintiffs are already in the ACC. Say what you want about the venue being placed in Connecticut, but Virginia Tech and Pitt signed their names to the complaint making them no different than any other plaintiff.

The fact UConn would be targetted as #14 proves the ACC is over the lawsuit.

If BC did not throw a stink regarding UConn's inclusion, would we be talking about the lawsuit or any other reasons you feel UConn is not in the ACC, or is UConn in a power conference right now?

The question of whether BC opposed Uconn in the ACC is not the issue. One school opposing the addition of another school in the same region in a conference is hardly new. Whether BC had the power to on its own prevent Uconn's inclusion is the question.

For a fan base who have been proclaiming on message boards for years that BC has no power or influence in the ACC, it seems ludicrous for that fan base to now say that BC on its own had the power to keep Uconn out. Either you guys were wrong all along about BC's influence in the ACC or there was more opposition than just BC. Which is it??

How much impact did the lawsuit have? Hard for any of us to say as we were not part of the negotiations. However, IMO, to be the recognized leader of a lawsuit that basically branded two member schools and the conference as participating in some kind of criminal scheme, and included suing individual school and conference admins. PERSONALLY, doesn't help.

PSU fan here...I've never heard of PSU being worried about UConn for anything. Sure, they may be better in this or that sport...but we're awfully far away from each other...and PSU is significantly bigger.

If we stamped Rutgers' entry, I think we'd be OK with UConn. Rutgers football "scares" me much more for their future potential than UConn does. Not that afraid...just saying.

(08-05-2013 09:19 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I was in Berlin last week working on a lucrative business deal. I happened to meet up with an old friend who is an expat with plenty of connections to several B1G schools. We had a good time. It's nice to catch up with old friends you haven't seen in awhile. We had a great bottle of Riesling. Truly an enjoyable time. Anyways, he gave me a scoop about the B1G. It definitely is going to expand in the near future. The 15th school is going to be Kansas - it's a slam dunk - but the 16th school gets rather interesting. UCONN was originally going to get the nod; however, a very unexpected thing happened. PSU blackballed them! Their AD Joyner advised that PSU wants to see itself as the preeminent eastern university from an athletic POV. Their fear was that UCONN is so good in most of their current athletics - especially in girls BB - that PSU felt in time that UCONN would eclipse them and start siphoning off their recruits. PSU felt like their hands were tied and this is the best they could do.

As a compromise school, the B1G is now looking at Oklahoma. Texas would have been a clear first choice except for the fact that the ACC was in secret negotiations with them for awhile and that UT and ND are going to join the ACC as full time members. Amazingly, both Texas and OU will be able to break away from the Big12 without any repercussions nor with any baggage. Not sure how they did it, and I'll find out more about that later. Basically, the Big12 GOR was not as strong as originally thought.

I also found out a little later that Joyner was being a little loose lipped bragging about what PSU did to UCONN. Also, Joyner confided with a big booster that FoxSports told the B1G who to take for their 16th school.

Stay tuned guys. More to follow as soon as I get more info!

You're welcome.

(08-06-2013 01:37 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  PSU fan here...I've never heard of PSU being worried about UConn for anything. Sure, they may be better in this or that sport...but we're awfully far away from each other...and PSU is significantly bigger.

If we stamped Rutgers' entry, I think we'd be OK with UConn. Rutgers football "scares" me much more for their future potential than UConn does. Not that afraid...just saying.

None of this is actually based on truths. Just the original OP's imagination which leads to interesting conversations and possibilities.

PSU currently has very little to worry about UConn.

and Cincinnati to the Big 12 !!!

WVU would be the "big dog" and only "marqee" program left in the Big 12 if UT, OU, and KU jumped. Cincy would be their obvious first choice I'm sure, OR could the AAC come up with some way to lure them eastward?

This speculation is fun.

(08-06-2013 01:38 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 09:19 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I was in Berlin last week working on a lucrative business deal. I happened to meet up with an old friend who is an expat with plenty of connections to several B1G schools. We had a good time. It's nice to catch up with old friends you haven't seen in awhile. We had a great bottle of Riesling. Truly an enjoyable time. Anyways, he gave me a scoop about the B1G. It definitely is going to expand in the near future. The 15th school is going to be Kansas - it's a slam dunk - but the 16th school gets rather interesting. UCONN was originally going to get the nod; however, a very unexpected thing happened. PSU blackballed them! Their AD Joyner advised that PSU wants to see itself as the preeminent eastern university from an athletic POV. Their fear was that UCONN is so good in most of their current athletics - especially in girls BB - that PSU felt in time that UCONN would eclipse them and start siphoning off their recruits. PSU felt like their hands were tied and this is the best they could do.

As a compromise school, the B1G is now looking at Oklahoma. Texas would have been a clear first choice except for the fact that the ACC was in secret negotiations with them for awhile and that UT and ND are going to join the ACC as full time members. Amazingly, both Texas and OU will be able to break away from the Big12 without any repercussions nor with any baggage. Not sure how they did it, and I'll find out more about that later. Basically, the Big12 GOR was not as strong as originally thought.

I also found out a little later that Joyner was being a little loose lipped bragging about what PSU did to UCONN. Also, Joyner confided with a big booster that FoxSports told the B1G who to take for their 16th school.

Stay tuned guys. More to follow as soon as I get more info!

You're welcome.

I laughed. Well done.

(08-06-2013 08:54 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 08:50 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:18 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:06 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 10:58 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  So are we. Even more so that you posted about it. :coffee3:

Knightsweat...
Where do you think OU would end up if UT starts an avalanche? You follow OU more than we do.:cheers:

I think it depends on what kind of deal Texas cuts. If Texas goes B1G, I think OU follows them. If Texas goes Indy with an ND type agreement with the ACC, OU might still go to the B1G with Kansas, or with OSU to the SEC. I've commented before that the SEC would be my preference, because the SEC is on the rise while the B1G is still prospering on past successes. No offense intended, but the B1G schools and fanbases don't impress me much.

Last thought is I think OU fans would like the SEC more than the school's leadership, so I'd give the B1G the edge. Hope that helps. Probably didn't tell you anything you hadn't already figured out yourself.

You could have substituted UNC for OU in the bolded sentences, and your comment would be true of them, too, based on what I've read by their fans. That's what makes this round hard; fewer obvious choices in movement at the top.

Personally I find it amusing that he thinks there is something wrong with the Big Ten fanbases. It is those fanbases that keep the Big Ten where it is despite lackluster performances. There is nothing wrong with Big Ten fanbases. He just doesn't like the North and is trying to pass it off as "their fanbases do not impress me". His comment speaks of the schools not impressing him either. Compared to what? CFU or OU? Yeah, gotta look through these kind of comments and see that the person is just saying he hates the North because those Institutions are far more impressive than Central Florida and Boren would be singing "Sweet Jesus" if he was able to maneuver Oklahoma into that Fraternity.

Wow, I suggest decaf. I don't "hate" anyone. I don't have anything against northern schools. Except for Michigan, OhioState, and maybe Nebraska, or Mich. St., the rest of the B1G is fairly pedestrian. My opinion of B1G is just that. Stop being so thin skinned, and just accept that not everyone worships at the altar of the B1G.

Lets just see if Rutgers can win in Orlando this year before you start declaring Rutgers superior to UCF. I have a feeling were going to beat your heads in. Time will tell. I'll certainly remind you of this thread if we beat you guys. I'll even provide the crow for you. Cheers.

(08-06-2013 06:08 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 08:54 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 08:50 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:18 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:06 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Knightsweat...
Where do you think OU would end up if UT starts an avalanche? You follow OU more than we do.

I think it depends on what kind of deal Texas cuts. If Texas goes B1G, I think OU follows them. If Texas goes Indy with an ND type agreement with the ACC, OU might still go to the B1G with Kansas, or with OSU to the SEC. I've commented before that the SEC would be my preference, because the SEC is on the rise while the B1G is still prospering on past successes. No offense intended, but the B1G schools and fanbases don't impress me much.

Last thought is I think OU fans would like the SEC more than the school's leadership, so I'd give the B1G the edge. Hope that helps. Probably didn't tell you anything you hadn't already figured out yourself.

You could have substituted UNC for OU in the bolded sentences, and your comment would be true of them, too, based on what I've read by their fans. That's what makes this round hard; fewer obvious choices in movement at the top.

Personally I find it amusing that he thinks there is something wrong with the Big Ten fanbases. It is those fanbases that keep the Big Ten where it is despite lackluster performances. There is nothing wrong with Big Ten fanbases. He just doesn't like the North and is trying to pass it off as "their fanbases do not impress me". His comment speaks of the schools not impressing him either. Compared to what? CFU or OU? Yeah, gotta look through these kind of comments and see that the person is just saying he hates the North because those Institutions are far more impressive than Central Florida and Boren would be singing "Sweet Jesus" if he was able to maneuver Oklahoma into that Fraternity.

Wow, I suggest decaf. I don't "hate" anyone. I don't have anything against northern schools. Except for Michigan, OhioState, and maybe Nebraska, or Mich. St., the rest of the B1G is fairly pedestrian. My opinion of B1G is just that. Stop being so thin skinned, and just accept that not everyone worships at the altar of the B1G.

Lets just see if Rutgers can win in Orlando this year before you start declaring Rutgers superior to UCF. I have a feeling were going to beat your heads in. Time will tell. I'll certainly remind you of this thread if we beat you guys. I'll even provide the crow for you. Cheers.

Thin skinned? I replied to your ignorance about weather in the north during football season. Yes, there are the occasional snow games and such but they are much more rare than southern folk like to try and propagandize. They happen at the end of the season, not in September.

Who is saying you need to worship the Big Ten. People are welcome to their own likes and dislikes. I was just responding to the fallacies.

In terms of Rutgers, they aren't really a deep love of mine. I just hate how everyone is betting against them and I think they have a shot at seriously surprising a lot of people. That leaves me feeling somewhat fond for them and I am looking forward to following them. Best of luck to you against them and if you feel the need to be a braggart about what other people do then by all means do so. If Rutgers rolls over you guys I won't give a second thought to remembering to come and find you. That isn't an insult, it just wont be on my mind to do so over this little conversation.

(08-06-2013 06:54 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 06:08 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 08:54 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 08:50 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:18 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  I think it depends on what kind of deal Texas cuts. If Texas goes B1G, I think OU follows them. If Texas goes Indy with an ND type agreement with the ACC, OU might still go to the B1G with Kansas, or with OSU to the SEC. I've commented before that the SEC would be my preference, because the SEC is on the rise while the B1G is still prospering on past successes. No offense intended, but the B1G schools and fanbases don't impress me much.

Last thought is I think OU fans would like the SEC more than the school's leadership, so I'd give the B1G the edge. Hope that helps. Probably didn't tell you anything you hadn't already figured out yourself.

You could have substituted UNC for OU in the bolded sentences, and your comment would be true of them, too, based on what I've read by their fans. That's what makes this round hard; fewer obvious choices in movement at the top.

Personally I find it amusing that he thinks there is something wrong with the Big Ten fanbases. It is those fanbases that keep the Big Ten where it is despite lackluster performances. There is nothing wrong with Big Ten fanbases. He just doesn't like the North and is trying to pass it off as "their fanbases do not impress me". His comment speaks of the schools not impressing him either. Compared to what? CFU or OU? Yeah, gotta look through these kind of comments and see that the person is just saying he hates the North because those Institutions are far more impressive than Central Florida and Boren would be singing "Sweet Jesus" if he was able to maneuver Oklahoma into that Fraternity.

Wow, I suggest decaf. I don't "hate" anyone. I don't have anything against northern schools. Except for Michigan, OhioState, and maybe Nebraska, or Mich. St., the rest of the B1G is fairly pedestrian. My opinion of B1G is just that. Stop being so thin skinned, and just accept that not everyone worships at the altar of the B1G.

Lets just see if Rutgers can win in Orlando this year before you start declaring Rutgers superior to UCF. I have a feeling were going to beat your heads in. Time will tell. I'll certainly remind you of this thread if we beat you guys. I'll even provide the crow for you. Cheers.

Thin skinned? I replied to your ignorance about weather in the north during football season. Yes, there are the occasional snow games and such but they are much more rare than southern folk like to try and propagandize. They happen at the end of the season, not in September.

Who is saying you need to worship the Big Ten. People are welcome to their own likes and dislikes. I was just responding to the fallacies.

In terms of Rutgers, they aren't really a deep love of mine. I just hate how everyone is betting against them and I think they have a shot at seriously surprising a lot of people. That leaves me feeling somewhat fond for them and I am looking forward to following them. Best of luck to you against them and if you feel the need to be a braggart about what other people do then by all means do so. If Rutgers rolls over you guys I won't give a second thought to remembering to come and find you. That isn't an insult, it just wont be on my mind to do so over this little conversation.

I think you have me mixed up with someone else, because I never made any comments about weather, or being against anyone or anything from the north. That's completely contrived by you. B1G is a decent enough conference, I just think OU is a better fit in the SEC. Deal with it. Reply if you need the last word, but I've spent enough time explaining anything to you. I'm sure you'll be insulted by that as well. So be it.