(08-20-2015 10:01 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  oh good grief

(08-20-2015 11:13 PM)SlyFox Wrote:  Indeed, Knucklehead.

Seeing as how I'm not good at reading intent on the internet (or in normal conversation if you ask my wife), I'd like you to tell me what I'm doing wrong to make everyone upset. I'd like this to be a thriving, friendly community. I don't want it to be somewhere that everyone agrees with everyone because that would be boring, but it is necessary to have everyone be respectful.

I wasn't being a contrarian just to be difficult; I have a genuine interest as to why NewTimes has his particular point of view on the subject. If I gave the impression of being mean then I apologize because that was not my intention.

If you want to talk to me in a PM then "my door" is always open. Thanks.

Let me try to clarify and expand my post since my comment on Lang seems to have caused frustration and wonderment.

I own a small business that regularly purchases newspaper ads. From small local papers one-day-a-week papers (i.e. Chatham Star-Trubune, Brookneal Union-Star, Altavista Journal) to local daily papers (N&A, Richmond Times, Roanoke Times), to large regional publications (Atlanta Journal, Miami Herald, Washington Post) to at times national publications (Wall Street Journal, USA Today). I have fairly large experience in newspaper advertising.

There are two major distinct areas in newspapers. Editorial (reporting) and advertising. Newspaper reporting has been the major backbone for our country in keeping stability. In my career, I have had times early in my career when I, and others, when purchasing advertising to have asked the reporting side, to include a story, to make an announcement, to steer an outcome, which on the surface seems innocent and harmless. From the reporting/editorial side, justifiably so, it seems controlling and manipulative. I learned early on the needed separation that reporting must have when one offers a nugget or scoop for an expected outcome.

How does this effect Lang and his reporting? As long as Lang reports what he knows from his sources he's credible. If in any way, it could be proven that he steered an article as a favor due to LU as wanting to receive preferential treatment, due to inside information, he likely would be fired or certainly reprimanded by the paper.

It's a tight rope reporters must walk. Sure they receive inside info. And certainly LU and all schools feed and release info to present their position in the best light. In business, one of my favorite phrases is the Black, White and Gray description. We all know what black and white is, it's the gray that causes miscommunication and misunderstandings. Gray is when someone makes one point and another hears a different position. In written contracts, it's there before us in black and white, and the gray is a differing interpretations of the same point.

In Lang's position, he could be put in a very tedious position if he knew most or all of the behind scenes actions of LU's FBS attempts. Does he know more than anyone not affiliated directly with the, most likely? Would he have to compromise his ethics to withhold a story, or steer it if he owed a favor to a scoop? Black and white are easy to explain. It's the gray area that gets you.

If we do anything more than hope that Lang will report fairly and accurately LU's FBS quest we are setting ourselves and especially Lang in an unfair position. Let's not place expectations on Lang or the N&A to peddle LU's FBS desire. If we do, it's a gray area that will cause us to take a major step backward.

(08-21-2015 05:51 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(08-20-2015 10:01 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  oh good grief

(08-20-2015 11:13 PM)SlyFox Wrote:  Indeed, Knucklehead.

Seeing as how I'm not good at reading intent on the internet (or in normal conversation if you ask my wife), I'd like you to tell me what I'm doing wrong to make everyone upset. I'd like this to be a thriving, friendly community. I don't want it to be somewhere that everyone agrees with everyone because that would be boring, but it is necessary to have everyone be respectful.

I wasn't being a contrarian just to be difficult; I have a genuine interest as to why NewTimes has his particular point of view on the subject. If I gave the impression of being mean then I apologize because that was not my intention.

If you want to talk to me in a PM then "my door" is always open. Thanks.

I agree with most all of your points and no offense is taken from your questioning my posts.

(08-21-2015 07:49 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  Let me try to clarify and expand my post since my comment on Lang seems to have caused frustration and wonderment.

I own a small business that regularly purchases newspaper ads. From small local papers one-day-a-week papers (i.e. Chatham Star-Trubune, Brookneal Union-Star, Altavista Journal) to local daily papers (N&A, Richmond Times, Roanoke Times), to large regional publications (Atlanta Journal, Miami Herald, Washington Post) to at times national publications (Wall Street Journal, USA Today). I have fairly large experience in newspaper advertising.

There are two major distinct areas in newspapers. Editorial (reporting) and advertising. Newspaper reporting has been the major backbone for our country in keeping stability. In my career, I have had times early in my career when I, and others, when purchasing advertising to have asked the reporting side, to include a story, to make an announcement, to steer an outcome, which on the surface seems innocent and harmless. From the reporting/editorial side, justifiably so, it seems controlling and manipulative. I learned early on the needed separation that reporting must have when one offers a nugget or scoop for an expected outcome.

How does this effect Lang and his reporting? As long as Lang reports what he knows from his sources he's credible. If in any way, it could be proven that he steered an article as a favor due to LU as wanting to receive preferential treatment, due to inside information, he likely would be fired or certainly reprimanded by the paper.

It's a tight rope reporters must walk. Sure they receive inside info. And certainly LU and all schools feed and release info to present their position in the best light. In business, one of my favorite phrases is the Black, White and Gray description. We all know what black and white is, it's the gray that causes miscommunication and misunderstandings. Gray is when someone makes one point and another hears a different position. In written contracts, it's there before us in black and white, and the gray is a differing interpretations of the same point.

In Lang's position, he could be put in a very tedious position if he knew most or all of the behind scenes actions of LU's FBS attempts. Does he know more than anyone not affiliated directly with the, most likely? Would he have to compromise his ethics to withhold a story, or steer it if he owed a favor to a scoop? Black and white are easy to explain. It's the gray area that gets you.

If we do anything more than hope that Lang will report fairly and accurately LU's FBS quest we are setting ourselves and especially Lang in an unfair position. Let's not place expectations on Lang or the N&A to peddle LU's FBS desire. If we do, it's a gray area that will cause us to take a major step backward.

You have the life experience so I'll defer to you. I still don't know why it wouldn't be a huge win for Lang and the N&A to be the ones to break what would be a massive national story before anyone else. It isn't like Lang would be doing anything illegal (Adam Schefter taking a picture of Jason Pierre-Paul's medical records on a computer screen) and Lang has the history of being a credible reporter. But thanks for sharing your inside knowledge.

(08-21-2015 04:12 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(08-21-2015 07:49 AM)NewTimes Wrote:  Let me try to clarify and expand my post since my comment on Lang seems to have caused frustration and wonderment.

I own a small business that regularly purchases newspaper ads. From small local papers one-day-a-week papers (i.e. Chatham Star-Trubune, Brookneal Union-Star, Altavista Journal) to local daily papers (N&A, Richmond Times, Roanoke Times), to large regional publications (Atlanta Journal, Miami Herald, Washington Post) to at times national publications (Wall Street Journal, USA Today). I have fairly large experience in newspaper advertising.

There are two major distinct areas in newspapers. Editorial (reporting) and advertising. Newspaper reporting has been the major backbone for our country in keeping stability. In my career, I have had times early in my career when I, and others, when purchasing advertising to have asked the reporting side, to include a story, to make an announcement, to steer an outcome, which on the surface seems innocent and harmless. From the reporting/editorial side, justifiably so, it seems controlling and manipulative. I learned early on the needed separation that reporting must have when one offers a nugget or scoop for an expected outcome.

How does this effect Lang and his reporting? As long as Lang reports what he knows from his sources he's credible. If in any way, it could be proven that he steered an article as a favor due to LU as wanting to receive preferential treatment, due to inside information, he likely would be fired or certainly reprimanded by the paper.

It's a tight rope reporters must walk. Sure they receive inside info. And certainly LU and all schools feed and release info to present their position in the best light. In business, one of my favorite phrases is the Black, White and Gray description. We all know what black and white is, it's the gray that causes miscommunication and misunderstandings. Gray is when someone makes one point and another hears a different position. In written contracts, it's there before us in black and white, and the gray is a differing interpretations of the same point.

In Lang's position, he could be put in a very tedious position if he knew most or all of the behind scenes actions of LU's FBS attempts. Does he know more than anyone not affiliated directly with the, most likely? Would he have to compromise his ethics to withhold a story, or steer it if he owed a favor to a scoop? Black and white are easy to explain. It's the gray area that gets you.

If we do anything more than hope that Lang will report fairly and accurately LU's FBS quest we are setting ourselves and especially Lang in an unfair position. Let's not place expectations on Lang or the N&A to peddle LU's FBS desire. If we do, it's a gray area that will cause us to take a major step backward.

You have the life experience so I'll defer to you. I still don't know why it wouldn't be a huge win for Lang and the N&A to be the ones to break what would be a massive national story before anyone else. It isn't like Lang would be doing anything illegal (Adam Schefter taking a picture of Jason Pierre-Paul's medical records on a computer screen) and Lang has the history of being a credible reporter. But thanks for sharing your inside knowledge.

I would hope that Lang does break the story and I hope that he does. It's about LU providing him info in return for a favor. That's the sticky wicket.

Attached is an simple attendance comparison for those 9 teams that did not average 15k in 2014. It's a very active thread on the Realignment site. If you didn't see it there, check it out below, it's fairly telling. I did find out that the NCAA requires teams to average 15k or better once every 2 years to be compliant. See who didn't.

For the record, Chris has announced that he is leaving the News Advance to taking a job in Richmond with Virginia Golfer. So Damien is once again taking over the Flames beat after the season opener.

(08-28-2015 10:39 AM)SlyFox Wrote:  For the record, Chris has announced that he is leaving the News Advance to taking a job in Richmond with Virginia Golfer. So Damien is once again taking over the Flames beat after the season opener.

No surprise there. The only surprise is that the N&A was able to keep him as long as they did. Newspapers are in the ultimate upheaval now on all levels. Staff, low circulation, poor daily delivery, declining display ad revenue, and classified, once the golden egg of the industry, are now almost non existent being replaced with Craigslist.

He did quality work. I just 3 days ago posted a tweet commending him on his high quality articles on the upcoming FB season in the N&A. He will be missed.

(08-28-2015 10:39 AM)SlyFox Wrote:  For the record, Chris has announced that he is leaving the News Advance to taking a job in Richmond with Virginia Golfer. So Damien is once again taking over the Flames beat after the season opener.

That's great news for Chris. He deserves the job for the great coverage he's done over the years for Liberty. Unfortunately that sucks for us although I'm unfamiliar with Damien so I'll give him a chance to win me over.

Starting to leak out that Coastal will be invited within days. Ugghhh..

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Just read a USA article saying it's either EKU or Coastal. Article said that only 1 would be invited and that if Idaho was booted out, that NMSU would get a full invite. The LU indy path may be closer with this anticipated announcement.

Edit: And I'm betting it's Coastal rather than EKU, not close, but by a landslide.

This http://www.libertyflamesnation.com/the-h...-its-hand/

If I were the Sun Belt I too would add Coastal. Hopefully it motivates us to be proactive and not to patiently wait for an invitation that isn't coming.

(08-29-2015 12:13 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  If I were the Sun Belt I too would add Coastal. Hopefully it motivates us to be proactive and not to patiently wait for an invitation that isn't coming.

As of right now, neither Coastal nor EKU nor NMSU has the votes.

It's part of the reason you guys never got in. The East schools will not invite NMSU, the West schools will not invite an East School without getting NMSU in return.

Maybe something happens...but that would mean a significant compromise had been reached.

(08-29-2015 12:26 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 12:13 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  If I were the Sun Belt I too would add Coastal. Hopefully it motivates us to be proactive and not to patiently wait for an invitation that isn't coming.

As of right now, neither Coastal nor EKU nor NMSU has the votes.

It's part of the reason you guys never got in. The East schools will not invite NMSU, the West schools will not invite an East School without getting NMSU in return.

Maybe something happens...but that would mean a significant compromise had been reached.

If that's true, your comment does not agree with what is being perpetuated by the media, which is not uncommon. Most media, in this section of the country, seems to think it's CCU.

If Coastal does get the invite, it will make the Nov 19th game the most intense and anticipated to date, especially if both teams have good records. The better the records, the more intense the game.

(08-29-2015 12:37 PM)NewTimes Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 12:26 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 12:13 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  If I were the Sun Belt I too would add Coastal. Hopefully it motivates us to be proactive and not to patiently wait for an invitation that isn't coming.

As of right now, neither Coastal nor EKU nor NMSU has the votes.

It's part of the reason you guys never got in. The East schools will not invite NMSU, the West schools will not invite an East School without getting NMSU in return.

Maybe something happens...but that would mean a significant compromise had been reached.

If that's true, your comment does not agree with what is being perpetuated by the media, which is not uncommon. Most media, in this section of the country, seems to think it's CCU.

About 2 years ago, the media was reporting that the Sun Belt was close to adding Liberty and JMU.

As of right now, Coastal is a vote or 2 short. It's that close

When Liberty was mentioned, it was mostly Liberty beating their drum with few others promoting their cause, other than allegedly Benson. This time around, there seems to be a greater outside appeal for Coastal. With the two votes shy, who are the two schools and what's their opposition? Is the SBC truly going to do better than CCU? Is EKU a better choice than CCU? If it it's not either, then who is the school(s) to be invited? This seems to have been discussed to the point of exhaustion on the SBC board.

If Coastal is the pick I hope the big south would quickly make them inelgible for any conference championships.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(08-29-2015 12:06 PM)knucklehead Wrote:  This http://www.libertyflamesnation.com/the-h...-its-hand/

Regarding the above article, the religious belief mention does have merit but there are other factors greater than that, that is keeping Liberty from receiving a SBC bid.

One factor that is the largest is LU's recent financial success. Recent being one of the caveats felt by those deep south SBC schools, that don't believe LU's business model will sustain itself, and/or that LU has such a large head start with their online success that it is beyond what those schools would hope to attain. That's an intimidating point if you are a public university in the SBC. The educational puritans mock LU's online success. Behind the scenes, most if not all wish they could replicate what LU has.

A point to be expanded is the regional and socio-economic issue enjoyed by LU. LU is located in Virginia. The most Northern of the true Southern states. The only Southern state that voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 when included among SBC member states. Even North Carolina did not repeat in 2012 and instead voted republican. This point is to clarify the progressive thinking, mainly driven by the impact of Norther Virginia and it's population, that tends to lead Virginia. We in SWVA at times feel like we are the caboose in the train of Virginia due to the Northern Virginia influence.

Just this week, the Governor of Virginia was taking the lead to attempt to reform gun laws due to the recent tragic events at TV station WDBJ. What other state Governor within the SBC footprint would take that initiative? Whether a region is red or blue simply provides a snap shot of the area. It provides an overview where conclusions and observations can be made as how a majority of people think and feel.

Most of the SBC conference teams, respected universities and many quality programs, are located within a geographical area with limited resources from the public sector. Most of the existing teams are comfortably competing against each other with similar assets and restrictions, and from their perspective, a level playing field. LU would unbalance those scales as they see it.

So the stronger reasons for LU not receiving an SBC invite are:
- financial success being #1 and the fear of LU using that economic muscle ($500 million improvements)
- valid case that LU's present and past positions (Moral Majority, Matt Staver, evolution) have promoted causes appealing to a small, vocal minority that is grass roots for the lesser aware and non-academic
- the tremendous growth of the university would propel LU to an advantage none of the other SBC schools could match
- and to a lesser degree, due to it's religious beliefs

Yes, the religious beliefs are a part but they are not the primary reason. It is the economic success, the economic engine that LU has created that most keeps LU from an SBC invite. The huge upside the school has, due to it's desire to achieve and succeed on the field as a means to promote itself is unmatched by any FCS school and few FBS. It's assets continue to increase as it's position as a important stop for high profile candidates and speakers. This helps to evolve it's format as a blueprint to develop it's program, that is well beyond any SBC school at the present. That is the reason, more than any other, why LU will not receive an SBC invite.