(11-05-2011 02:39 PM)OldCoog Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 10:11 AM)SouthGAEagle Wrote:  Well, Tulane was in the SEC, and Temple was in the Big East, so I guess they're next....

Actually, you're not too far off....

Temple was considered for the Big East, but Villanova objected to it. There has been talk of Tulane being invited to the Big XII, though even the New Orleans newspaper says their chances are slim.

Should note that in my opinion, it has more to do with size of their markets than it does with their previous conference membership, so you're right, the previous membership probably has very little to do with this.

Tulane/BigXii has more to do with UT's AAU fetish than markets.

(11-05-2011 11:51 AM)Steelbeard Wrote:  Houston and SMU don't deserve ****. Neither does UCF. That's the whole problem behind this whole thing.

That's why you don't understand why everyone else is mad. Southern Miss goes out and beats the **** out of all of you every single year. Who deserves to be AQ, the team located in the middle of a city that couldn't give two ***** about their program or the team that goes out there and beats said team into the dirt?

To answer the other thread about the whole BCS antitrust thing, THAT is where the anti-competition shows up. Teams that compete at the top level are arbitrarily left out for bull**** reasons while less qualified teams get a pass simply because they get let into the exclusive little club.

You don't deserve to be in an AQ conference because you were great in basketball a billion years ago, because you cheated your ass off for short-term glory, or because your state has more televisions in it than others.

You deserve to be in an AQ conference when you go out there and compete against the BEST and WIN.

this

(11-05-2011 11:51 AM)Steelbeard Wrote:  Houston and SMU don't deserve ****. Neither does UCF. That's the whole problem behind this whole thing.

That's why you don't understand why everyone else is mad. Southern Miss goes out and beats the **** out of all of you every single year. Who deserves to be AQ, the team located in the middle of a city that couldn't give two ***** about their program or the team that goes out there and beats said team into the dirt?

To answer the other thread about the whole BCS antitrust thing, THAT is where the anti-competition shows up. Teams that compete at the top level are arbitrarily left out for bull**** reasons while less qualified teams get a pass simply because they get let into the exclusive little club.

You don't deserve to be in an AQ conference because you were great in basketball a billion years ago, because you cheated your ass off for short-term glory, or because your state has more televisions in it than others.

You deserve to be in an AQ conference when you go out there and compete against the BEST and WIN.

Now, now, ECU is a solid program that deserves some respect and fills up their stadium but you guys are an East Coast version of Fresno State (i.e. a team that will play good BCS-AQ teams tough in non-conference and then struggle to be top tier in-conference). While ECU does have a couple conference titles recently, including one directly over UH, they weren't the head and shoulders best team in the league and it can be argued they were just the best team on the day of the championship game both times.

As for USM, much of the same though they are more consistent. Still, while USM is one of the more respected non-AQ programs, they don't exactly stack up in accomplishments in the way that Utah, Boise, BYU and TCU did/do either.

Moral of the story, USM and ECU have been upper-tier mid-majors that deserve lots of credit for filling their stadiums weekly and supporting their teams but it's not as if they are head and shoulders ahead of the three teams leaving. Well, maybe SMU who seems to be very, very fortunate to be waking out of a coma at just the right time, at least in football, as well as being in a major market. But UCF and Houston, while they rate behind USM and ECU, aren't exactly lacking in achievements either. Here's to hoping we all find our way into the unjust Cartel at some point.

(11-05-2011 02:39 PM)OldCoog Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 10:11 AM)SouthGAEagle Wrote:  Well, Tulane was in the SEC, and Temple was in the Big East, so I guess they're next....

Actually, you're not too far off....

Temple was considered for the Big East, but Villanova objected to it. There has been talk of Tulane being invited to the Big XII, though even the New Orleans newspaper says their chances are slim.

Should note that in my opinion, I agree it has more to do with size of their markets than it does with their previous conference membership.

If Tulane got into the Big XII over USM or ECU, I'd be furious as a fan of the latter two. But it also goes to show how academics and endowment play into this as well.

We all know that realignment isn't solely based on on-field performance. There are about ten different factors involved. SMU does well in some of those categories and doesn't do well in some others. But overall, as a total package, they're good enough in the eyes of the Big East.

SMU has lots of money, excellent facilities, impressive academics, football tradition, a great campus, a great location, and a bright future.

(11-05-2011 02:11 PM)Kandy Atz Wrote:  It is amazing to me how many experts there are regarding SMU and its athletic history. I am especially amused by the continued desire to single out SMU with regards to NCAA infractions. Please grab a list of final rankings for the last 30 years. Go to the NCAA major infraction database. You will quickly discover an interesting correlation between success and infractions especially in the 80s, but also into the present.

I highly doubt any CUSA team would reject a Big East invitation, or refuse an opportunity to be a BCS team. There are many reasons SMU was considered, but location was one of the primary ones. I'm not going to attempt to make the case for SMU, because with this crowd, it is wasted effort. SMU has been left behind several times by conference changes and I know from personal experience it sucks.

No SMU, HOUSTON or UCF fan or alum made the decision for the Big East. The presidents, ADs and media consultants for the conference are the ones that voted for these three schools. Instead of gnashing your teeth at folks who had nothing to do with this, take a long and objective look at your own school, administration and alumni. It might not hurt to even look at the politicians in your city and state. Are they doing everything in their power to elevate your program? Are they serious about competing at the highest football level? Ten years ago at SMU, the answer would have been a big NO.

Final thought -- Does anyone "deserve" BCS status? I mean seriously, what an odd word. Does Duke, Baylor, Wake Forest, Vanderbilt, Northwestern and a host of others "deserve" to be BCS? In the case of those, they got the lucky golden ticket at the beginning. But did USF, Cincinnati or UCONN "deserve" BCS invites? No, its never been about who is deserving.

Invites are simply a business decision based on media consultants and Presidents crunching numbers. I could make a solid case for every CUSA school, but it does not matter because fans don't make those decisions. I would encourage you all to channel your frustration towards the right targets. And please don't burn down my school.

Well said, KA. We've all got strengths and weaknesses. During this round, SMU did a good job of reading the rules of the game and playing the right cards in front of the right people at the right time. I could make as good of a case as possible on this board for 9 other CUSA schools, but in the end, the Mustangs did what they had to do.

I wish all 3 schools and their fans well in the new conference and in the future, unless they're playing the Tigers.

IMO any school that suits up a Div I / FBS team ought to have the chance to compete for the Nat'l. Championship whether there are 100 or 100,000 fans in the stands. We are only guilty of playing the bad hand that was dealt to all of us when the BCS was formed.

(11-05-2011 09:56 AM)Kronke Wrote:  No. SMU has been in a power conference before...

How 'bout these guys:



1. Never lost a bowl game.

2. Undefeated since 1951. *

3. Brings a large Texas TV market.

4. Charter member of the Southwest Conference.

They meet the criteria, I tells ya!!






* -- Likely to change as of the 2013 season.

First, that 2009 Houston team got its ass royally kicked by East Carolina.

Second, you haven't played anyone this year. You have this entitlement mentality and that's what is pissing everyone off. You ought to be out there with your mental equals at the Occupy Who the Hell Cares rallies, because you want a football bail out.

By the way, how is that new stadium coming along?

Yeah, losing 38-32 on the road and throwing the game losing interception in the end zone sure is getting your ass royally kicked. And no matter how you spin it, it doesn't change that ECU wasn't the heads and shoulders best team in the league that year.

And how you like us two years ago when we did beat 3 solid Cartel members but fell apart in conference/bowl play? Who cares, beat who is in front of you.

(11-05-2011 07:02 PM)Steelbeard Wrote:  Second, you haven't played anyone this year. You have this entitlement mentality and that's what is pissing everyone off.

What does that say about your Pirates, since we raped you 56-3 in that stretch?

Do you think that ECU is still more entitled?

(11-05-2011 07:17 PM)SPECoog518 Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 07:02 PM)Steelbeard Wrote:  Second, you haven't played anyone this year. You have this entitlement mentality and that's what is pissing everyone off.

What does that say about your Pirates, since we raped you 56-3 in that stretch?

Do you think that ECU is still more entitled?

No, we suck this year, but my whole point is that NO ONE is ENTITLED to anything. The entitlement mentality is what makes fans of other schools hate you guys. It's why we hate the Louisville fans, and you guys are rapidly becoming worse than they ever were.

Oh please, most UH, SMU, and UCF fans have been very humble through all of this as far as I've seen. If, for example, you took anything I said in this thread personally then it was only in response to comments like "Hous and ton and SMU don't deserve ****" and "Teams that compete at the top level are arbitrarily left out for bull**** reasons while less qualified teams get a pass simply because they get let into the exclusive little club."

We the fans had nothing to do with this decision making and I feel the majority of the three fan bases know and very much respect the ECU, USM and even UTEP programs from an overall perspective (support, football, basketball, etc...). But like I said, stop making it out to be as if ECU is so much more qualified than everyone else. Yes, based on the merit system of football and support, it's highly likely ECU would have it's BE membership wrapped up but there is more to these decisions than that and it's not as if ECU is Boise (more like Fresno). The basketball program is non-existent and pretty much never has been relevant.

So like I said, stop taking your frustrations out on us, it's not the end of the world that your favorite sports team caught a bad break, heck UH and SMU were dropped from the Cartel only a decade and a half ago. Like I said, if there is karma in the universe, ECU will be apart of a major conference one day.

(11-05-2011 08:43 PM)Caltex2 Wrote:  Oh please, most UH, SMU, and UCF fans have been very humble through all of this as far as I've seen. If, for example, you took anything I said in this thread personally then it was only in response to comments like "Hous and ton and SMU don't deserve ****" and "Teams that compete at the top level are arbitrarily left out for bull**** reasons while less qualified teams get a pass simply because they get let into the exclusive little club."

Like I said, if there is karma in the universe, ECU will be apart of a major conference one day.

Amen!

(11-05-2011 11:51 AM)Steelbeard Wrote:  Houston and SMU don't deserve ****. Neither does UCF. That's the whole problem behind this whole thing.

That's why you don't understand why everyone else is mad. Southern Miss goes out and beats the **** out of all of you every single year. Who deserves to be AQ, the team located in the middle of a city that couldn't give two ***** about their program or the team that goes out there and beats said team into the dirt?

To answer the other thread about the whole BCS antitrust thing, THAT is where the anti-competition shows up. Teams that compete at the top level are arbitrarily left out for bull**** reasons while less qualified teams get a pass simply because they get let into the exclusive little club.

You don't deserve to be in an AQ conference because you were great in basketball a billion years ago, because you cheated your ass off for short-term glory, or because your state has more televisions in it than others.

You deserve to be in an AQ conference when you go out there and compete against the BEST and WIN.

You guys are really funny...When Memphis, ECU, or Southern Miss has been in a major conference for about 50 plus years with Texas and Texas A@M and have Doak Walker play for you so they can name an important award after him..have heisman trophy winners....come talk to SMU.

Stop with the Sour Grapes, your programs are minor blips on the radar compared to SMU....understand that...accept it. We have history, market, money, and academics....

(11-05-2011 08:59 PM)shadowman Wrote:  

(11-05-2011 11:51 AM)Steelbeard Wrote:  Houston and SMU don't deserve ****. Neither does UCF. That's the whole problem behind this whole thing.

That's why you don't understand why everyone else is mad. Southern Miss goes out and beats the **** out of all of you every single year. Who deserves to be AQ, the team located in the middle of a city that couldn't give two ***** about their program or the team that goes out there and beats said team into the dirt?

To answer the other thread about the whole BCS antitrust thing, THAT is where the anti-competition shows up. Teams that compete at the top level are arbitrarily left out for bull**** reasons while less qualified teams get a pass simply because they get let into the exclusive little club.

You don't deserve to be in an AQ conference because you were great in basketball a billion years ago, because you cheated your ass off for short-term glory, or because your state has more televisions in it than others.

You deserve to be in an AQ conference when you go out there and compete against the BEST and WIN.

You guys are really funny...When Memphis, ECU, or Southern Miss has been in a major conference for about 50 plus years with Texas and Texas A@M and have Doak Walker play for you so they can name an important award after him..have heisman trophy winners....come talk to SMU.

Stop with the Sour Grapes, your programs are minor blips on the radar compared to SMU....understand that...accept it. We have history, market, money, and academics....

Minor blips?

Remember October 22nd? You were a blip.