USF is already a nationally known brand name. A name change now would only confuse the issue...

(04-14-2009 01:26 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(04-14-2009 01:18 PM)EgoBoss3000 Wrote:  Canewton needs to be kicked off for disrespecting the Cubanbull in here. Banishment forever.

I don't believe anybody asked for your opinion, firmbizzle. You are lucky that you haven't been banned with your new identity already.

Just trying to keep the non-BE posters in check. Maintain order.

(04-14-2009 01:18 PM)EgoBoss3000 Wrote:  I'm the same way with East, Coastal and Western Carolina. Canewton needs to be kicked off for disrespecting the Cubanbull in here. Banishment forever.

Well, except they don't have D1A er FBS football teams.

(04-14-2009 11:53 AM)Chappy Wrote:  People around my work (NC STATE) can't seem to tell the difference between USF and UCF. Perhaps it's the team colors or similar abbreviations, but I hear things all the time about how UCF destroyed the Pack last season. Then I have to say "no, that was USF" and they're like "whatever".

LOL. Well its just tells you how dumb they are not to even know who beat the crap out of them last year. We know who got the win and thats all that matters

(04-14-2009 03:14 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(04-14-2009 11:53 AM)Chappy Wrote:  People around my work (NC STATE) can't seem to tell the difference between USF and UCF. Perhaps it's the team colors or similar abbreviations, but I hear things all the time about how UCF destroyed the Pack last season. Then I have to say "no, that was USF" and they're like "whatever".

LOL. Well its just tells you how dumb they are not to even know who beat the crap out of them last year. We know who got the win and thats all that matters

Yeah, it WAS an arse-whooping. I'd try to forget it too if I were a Wolfpack fan.

South Florida should go by STFU, Side Tangent of Florida University. It's catchy, and all the kids will go a'crazy! Or they could keep USF, and go by the University of the Side of Florida. Maybe that would help keep all you geography buffs happy!

(04-14-2009 11:53 AM)Chappy Wrote:  People around my work (NC STATE) can't seem to tell the difference between USF and UCF. Perhaps it's the team colors or similar abbreviations, but I hear things all the time about how UCF destroyed the Pack last season. Then I have to say "no, that was USF" and they're like "whatever".

Should be much easier for your NC STate friend.

One of those two teams BEAT the 'Pack in Raleigh in 2007....and the other one of those two teams BEAT the 'Pack in Raleigh in 2008.

Tell that to your friend as that should help clear up some of his/her confusion.

PS. If my team lost 2 HOME games in a row to those teams...I too might say "whatever"....as I would be trying to forget that those games were even played.

(04-14-2009 03:38 PM)Chappy Wrote:  

(04-14-2009 03:14 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(04-14-2009 11:53 AM)Chappy Wrote:  People around my work (NC STATE) can't seem to tell the difference between USF and UCF. Perhaps it's the team colors or similar abbreviations, but I hear things all the time about how UCF destroyed the Pack last season. Then I have to say "no, that was USF" and they're like "whatever".

LOL. Well its just tells you how dumb they are not to even know who beat the crap out of them last year. We know who got the win and thats all that matters

Yeah, it WAS an arse-whooping. I'd try to forget it too if I were a Wolfpack fan.

They can't remember because all of the fans left by the end of the first quarter! The game was such a lopsided blowout, that all the fans left early. Game was over by the second quarter. USF DEMOLISHED the pack.

(04-14-2009 01:26 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(04-14-2009 01:18 PM)EgoBoss3000 Wrote:  Canewton needs to be kicked off for disrespecting the Cubanbull in here. Banishment forever.

I don't believe anybody asked for your opinion, firmbizzle. You are lucky that you haven't been banned with your new identity already.

Is that the Bizz? Wow! I haven't been around much, wondered where you'd gone to. Underground, it would seem, though that doesn't seem to have worked out so well since you've been uncovered. LMAO, how's it goin', man? What caused you to change your ID? ?

(04-10-2009 02:46 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Washington flexed its new central govenrment muscles shortly after the War of Northern Aggression by doling out "land grants". In Tennessee, the logical location was The University of Nashville, the oldest and most prestigious college in the state at that time, and a central location. However, politics being what they are, it was, instead, located in Knoxville (in the remote eastern corner of the state) at little (and obscure) Blount College, because that city and area had remained staunchly loyal to "the Union" during the War. Thus, the so-called "Tennessee Volunteers" are ironically indebted to their traitorous, inbred "home-made yankee" ancestors.

Which war are you referencing in your post? I thought that you were referencing the Civil War, but then I couldn't tell because your comments about "Washington flexing its new Central government muscles" seems to point to the American Revolution. But be that as it may I linked an article that shows that the State of North Carolina issued land grants in the State of Tennessee as far back as the American Revolution. The Federal government didn't get involved in the matter until a little while later, but that was long before the Civil War.

http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/

(04-15-2009 01:27 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(04-10-2009 02:46 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Washington flexed its new central govenrment muscles shortly after the War of Northern Aggression by doling out "land grants". In Tennessee, the logical location was The University of Nashville, the oldest and most prestigious college in the state at that time, and a central location. However, politics being what they are, it was, instead, located in Knoxville (in the remote eastern corner of the state) at little (and obscure) Blount College, because that city and area had remained staunchly loyal to "the Union" during the War. Thus, the so-called "Tennessee Volunteers" are ironically indebted to their traitorous, inbred "home-made yankee" ancestors.

Which war are you referencing in your post? I thought that you were referencing the Civil War, but then I couldn't tell because your comments about "Washington flexing its new Central government muscles" seems to point to the American Revolution. But be that as it may I linked an article that shows that the State of North Carolina issued land grants in the State of Tennessee as far back as the American Revolution. The Federal government didn't get involved in the matter until a little while later, but that was long before the Civil War.

http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/

I think he means the Civil War. When he says Washington, he means Washington DC. When he says Central Government, he means the new centralized powers in DC. Since a big reason of that war was states rights. Having central powers took away states rights.

It was a reference to the post Civil War Carpetbaggers who came down from the north to steal all the wealth of the south. UT is one of the symbols of the influx of Carpetbaggers in the post Civil War south...

(04-14-2009 03:14 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  LOL. Well its just tells you how dumb they are

An ACC fan that doesn't know a little FB? I'm shocked!

(04-15-2009 12:08 AM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(04-14-2009 01:26 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(04-14-2009 01:18 PM)EgoBoss3000 Wrote:  Canewton needs to be kicked off for disrespecting the Cubanbull in here. Banishment forever.

I don't believe anybody asked for your opinion, firmbizzle. You are lucky that you haven't been banned with your new identity already.

Is that the Bizz? Wow! I haven't been around much, wondered where you'd gone to. Underground, it would seem, though that doesn't seem to have worked out so well since you've been uncovered. LMAO, how's it goin', man? What caused you to change your ID? ?

Naw, this is somebody else. The bizz is good. We are short staffed around here so he's been working his @ss of. He should be in later today, I'll tell him that you said hi.

(04-15-2009 01:27 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(04-10-2009 02:46 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Washington flexed its new central govenrment muscles shortly after the War of Northern Aggression by doling out "land grants". In Tennessee, the logical location was The University of Nashville, the oldest and most prestigious college in the state at that time, and a central location. However, politics being what they are, it was, instead, located in Knoxville (in the remote eastern corner of the state) at little (and obscure) Blount College, because that city and area had remained staunchly loyal to "the Union" during the War. Thus, the so-called "Tennessee Volunteers" are ironically indebted to their traitorous, inbred "home-made yankee" ancestors.

Which war are you referencing in your post? I thought that you were referencing the Civil War, but then I couldn't tell because your comments about "Washington flexing its new Central government muscles" seems to point to the American Revolution. But be that as it may I linked an article that shows that the State of North Carolina issued land grants in the State of Tennessee as far back as the American Revolution. The Federal government didn't get involved in the matter until a little while later, but that was long before the Civil War.

http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/

(1) A "civil war" is between two factions within the same nation. The war of northern aggression was fought between two separate nations: the USA and the CSA. There is no question as to which side was the aggressor - President Jefferson Davis said repeatedly "all we want is to be left alone".

(2) Yes, the state of Tennessee was formed from land which originally was part of North Carolina, but the Federal Government did not award the "land grant" for the University of Tennessee until after the war. Here is a link for you: http://www.utk.edu/aboutut/ (click "About the University" and see "History")

(04-15-2009 11:26 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(04-15-2009 01:27 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(04-10-2009 02:46 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Washington flexed its new central govenrment muscles shortly after the War of Northern Aggression by doling out "land grants". In Tennessee, the logical location was The University of Nashville, the oldest and most prestigious college in the state at that time, and a central location. However, politics being what they are, it was, instead, located in Knoxville (in the remote eastern corner of the state) at little (and obscure) Blount College, because that city and area had remained staunchly loyal to "the Union" during the War. Thus, the so-called "Tennessee Volunteers" are ironically indebted to their traitorous, inbred "home-made yankee" ancestors.

Which war are you referencing in your post? I thought that you were referencing the Civil War, but then I couldn't tell because your comments about "Washington flexing its new Central government muscles" seems to point to the American Revolution. But be that as it may I linked an article that shows that the State of North Carolina issued land grants in the State of Tennessee as far back as the American Revolution. The Federal government didn't get involved in the matter until a little while later, but that was long before the Civil War.

http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/

(1) A "civil war" is between two factions within the same nation. The war of northern aggression was fought between two separate nations: the USA and the CSA. There is no question as to which side was the aggressor - President Jefferson Davis said repeatedly "all we want is to be left alone".

(2) Yes, the state of Tennessee was formed from land which originally was part of North Carolina, but the Federal Government did not award the "land grant" for the University of Tennessee until after the war. Here is a link for you: http://www.utk.edu/aboutut/ (click "About the University" and see "History")

Well, it was the CSA that commited treason and fired first on the USA. We all know what the punishment for treason is, I think the South got off easy. USA 1 -CSA 0 God Bless the USA

I think this world and certaintly all americans would be worse off if the southern states would had been able successful in seceding. There is no way that either country would have become the major power the US has become and the outcome of WWII might had been different.
Even if they had been allowed to secede I think that eventually both countries would have gone to war over expansion to the west.

(04-15-2009 11:26 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(04-15-2009 01:27 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(04-10-2009 02:46 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  Washington flexed its new central govenrment muscles shortly after the War of Northern Aggression by doling out "land grants". In Tennessee, the logical location was The University of Nashville, the oldest and most prestigious college in the state at that time, and a central location. However, politics being what they are, it was, instead, located in Knoxville (in the remote eastern corner of the state) at little (and obscure) Blount College, because that city and area had remained staunchly loyal to "the Union" during the War. Thus, the so-called "Tennessee Volunteers" are ironically indebted to their traitorous, inbred "home-made yankee" ancestors.

Which war are you referencing in your post? I thought that you were referencing the Civil War, but then I couldn't tell because your comments about "Washington flexing its new Central government muscles" seems to point to the American Revolution. But be that as it may I linked an article that shows that the State of North Carolina issued land grants in the State of Tennessee as far back as the American Revolution. The Federal government didn't get involved in the matter until a little while later, but that was long before the Civil War.

http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/

(1) A "civil war" is between two factions within the same nation. The war of northern aggression was fought between two separate nations: the USA and the CSA. There is no question as to which side was the aggressor - President Jefferson Davis said repeatedly "all we want is to be left alone".

(2) Yes, the state of Tennessee was formed from land which originally was part of North Carolina, but the Federal Government did not award the "land grant" for the University of Tennessee until after the war. Here is a link for you: http://www.utk.edu/aboutut/ (click "About the University" and see "History")

I see what what you were referencing now; thanks for clarifying it for me. BTW, the "traitorous, inbred home-made yankee ancestors" comment was pretty funny, but I think that you have to apply that to North Carolina and Tennessee, because both of those States were pretty much pro-Union, until they basically had to secede.

(04-15-2009 11:48 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I think this world and certaintly all americans would be worse off if the southern states would had been able successful in seceding. There is no way that either country would have become the major power the US has become and the outcome of WWII might had been different.
Even if they had been allowed to secede I think that eventually both countries would have gone to war over expansion to the west.

Uh Ohs... You are turning this into an expansion thread!

(04-15-2009 11:48 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I think this world and certaintly all americans would be worse off if the southern states would had been able successful in seceding. There is no way that either country would have become the major power the US has become and the outcome of WWII might had been different.
Even if they had been allowed to secede I think that eventually both countries would have gone to war over expansion to the west.

Not trying to jack this thread, but seeing how it partially already is let us continue.

I will agree that a strong USA EXTERNALLY is and has been a good thing for the world. Whether or not that would have made a difference in WWII is up to debate. Had there not been a strong USA but a weaker USA and a CSA in 1914 the outcome of WWI would have been different too. USA forces gave the Western Allies the edge over the Central Powers. IF the USA had to keep to North America in 1917 the Central Powers could have won the war or a more equitable peace that left the Kaiser in power would have led to a more stable Germany. A more stable Germany would have meant no Hitler; no Hitler would have meant no WWII.

If, under this scenario, there was a WWII at all or a different WWII is debatable. WWI seems the more likely to have STILL occurred with either the CSA and USA fighting each other in NA (thus no help to either side in Europe) or both sitting the war out. Be mindful that the CSA was closer to France and Britain during the Yankee Invasion so the USA could have even been a German ally!

As for INTERNALLY I will postulate that a strong Federal Government has been a very bad thing!

Don't agree? Here's an example:

IRS

Now I’m not saying that the South winning the Yankee Invasion would have been a good or bad thing, but the response of the FedGov to it was a violation of the Constitution, such violations have ALL been negative to Liberty and individual rights and continue to this day. The current financial crisis can be traced to federal laws which VIOLATE our Constitution.