(04-04-2015 01:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-04-2015 11:07 AM)Bull Wrote:  Interesting how such a 'marginal' and 'shaky' bowl like St. Pete managed a significant upgrade in opponent and actually pulled in a P5 opponent from the ACC. Something that was a coup for the American, and a shot in the arm to our bowl lineup, right at a point where many in the P5 were going to 'not play against G5' anymore.

Who cares what the heck 'bitpay' is or isn't? So we take their money for sponsorship, and when they are done another sponsor steps up. Seriously, a bowl sponsor changes and that's todays reason to ***** about the conference? If that's all you got, we're doing pretty good!!

But why let any facts get in the way of the bash-the-AAC narrative? Keep on with the vague negative adjective-laden posts! lol

The St Pete Bowl is, in fact, a marginal bowl, so it does, in fact, make sense to question whether a sponsor dropping out is about the bowl.

That is not a shot at the AAC, just a fact about the nature of the bowl.

Quo you are really off your game my man... This post is (yet again) just your unsupported name-calling ("marginal") opinion. And they you close by calling your opinion 'just a fact'. You used to put much more effort into your trolling.