(12-18-2011 11:41 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:33 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  We would beat either of those teams by three touchdowns.

You can't ever predict that. USM should had beaten UAB and we know how that turned out.

That was obviously an anomaly.

(12-18-2011 11:42 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:41 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:33 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  We would beat either of those teams by three touchdowns.

You can't ever predict that. USM should had beaten UAB and we know how that turned out.

That was obviously an anomaly.

But they do happen its part of the game. Anybody can beat another team in one game. So while you might think that USM could beat either team by 3 tds, that might not be the case if they played?

I love how the argument is that since SDSU hasn't actually played in the Big East yet, this doesn't count against the conference, but all the Big East fans sure come in from their boards to the little ole CUSAbbs to defend them!

(12-18-2011 11:42 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:40 AM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 09:14 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Actually they aren't in Big East unil 2013 so this goes on their MWC portfolio . Wyoming getting beat by Temple and now SDST get beat by Louisiana. That request by the MWC to get AQ status for next two years is looking good.

f*** the splash, if they can get AQ, anybody should

Could say the same about ACC.

Not really, the ACC/New ACC is full of has-beens that are rebuilding and starting to come through splash is full of never-wases (there aren't any great ways to style that word). It's bad when the bulk of your all-time achievements are coming from the new members.

They also have strong fanbases. Aside from Louisville and maybe Cincy none of the schools in the splash have football fans.

(12-18-2011 12:15 PM)SouthGAEagle Wrote:  I love how the argument is that since SDSU hasn't actually played in the Big East yet, this doesn't count against the conference, but all the Big East fans sure come in from their boards to the little ole CUSAbbs to defend them!

Or how they state the teams shouldn't be treated as BE members yet....
But the same posters have a sig with the new BE conf helmets (includes SDSU, BSU, UH, SMU, UFC, etc.)

(12-18-2011 11:42 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:40 AM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 09:14 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Actually they aren't in Big East unil 2013 so this goes on their MWC portfolio . Wyoming getting beat by Temple and now SDST get beat by Louisiana. That request by the MWC to get AQ status for next two years is looking good.

f*** the splash, if they can get AQ, anybody should

Could say the same about ACC.

Not at all. I hate defending the ACC, but they are head and shoulders above your crap conference.

(12-18-2011 10:46 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 10:38 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 09:54 AM)oldblazer79 Wrote:  neither team won their respective conference, either

In the BCS era it doesn't matter if you win your conference...hell you don't even have to win your conference division and win the BCS Title-(Alabama, 2nd in the SEC West) but still play'n for the BCS Title...

Are you in any way comparing the little least with the SEC? Maybe like some bottom dwelling SEC teams we in MS are familiar with, you are trying to attach your worthyness with the bcs affilliation? The little least has nothing in common with the SEC and would never be in the tittle game as LSU and Bama are this year.

Not comparing anything but just pointing out you don't even have to win your league in the BCS...someone earlier pointed out that neither Boise State or Houston didn't win their league when I mentioned their BCS Rankings but neither did Alabama-(and the Crimson Tide didn't even win their division).

Now as far as your "Little Least" comment, USM would give both testies with a right arm/leg to join our league. But unfortunately you are stuck in the "Alliance" and a ticket to the Hawaii Bowl. Meanwhile the Co-Champ of the BIG EAST & Former C-USA member is playing in the Liberty Bowl...juz say'n...have a nice day.

(12-18-2011 02:15 PM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:42 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:40 AM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 09:14 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Actually they aren't in Big East unil 2013 so this goes on their MWC portfolio . Wyoming getting beat by Temple and now SDST get beat by Louisiana. That request by the MWC to get AQ status for next two years is looking good.

f*** the splash, if they can get AQ, anybody should

Could say the same about ACC.

Not at all. I hate defending the ACC, but they are head and shoulders above your crap conference.

Not really, since realignment the ACC is 1-5 in BCS Games...BIG EAST is 3-3 in BCS Games and the BIG EAST is leading head to head against the ACC...nice try though and maybe Terry Holland will fill out another application to our league...juz say'n and have a nice day...

I like these threads, the insecurity from both Alliance and Big East posters is hilarious.

(12-18-2011 01:32 PM)RUNVSFD MINER Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 12:15 PM)SouthGAEagle Wrote:  I love how the argument is that since SDSU hasn't actually played in the Big East yet, this doesn't count against the conference, but all the Big East fans sure come in from their boards to the little ole CUSAbbs to defend them!

Or how they state the teams shouldn't be treated as BE members yet....
But the same posters have a sig with the new BE conf helmets (includes SDSU, BSU, UH, SMU, UFC, etc.)

We're fortunate that it appears to be a minority of the posters from the BE transfer schools that have caused the animosity, but all programs have their knuckleheads.

The topper of them all was when a fan of one of the transfer schools proposed a non-AQ playoff for the little guys from the WAC/MWC/Sunbelt/CUSA. I'd like to spit some Beechnut in that dude's eye.

As an aside, imho Maize isn't one of the "bad guys" at all; I've always found him to be respectful and civil.

(12-18-2011 05:00 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  I like these threads, the insecurity from both Alliance and Big East posters is hilarious.

There's probably some truth to that for all of us.

(12-18-2011 04:32 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 02:15 PM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:42 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:40 AM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 09:14 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Actually they aren't in Big East unil 2013 so this goes on their MWC portfolio . Wyoming getting beat by Temple and now SDST get beat by Louisiana. That request by the MWC to get AQ status for next two years is looking good.

f*** the splash, if they can get AQ, anybody should

Could say the same about ACC.

Not at all. I hate defending the ACC, but they are head and shoulders above your crap conference.

Not really, since realignment the ACC is 1-5 in BCS Games...BIG EAST is 3-3 in BCS Games and the BIG EAST is leading head to head against the ACC...nice try though and maybe Terry Holland will fill out another application to our league...juz say'n and have a nice day...

You have been a loyal soldier Maize but no need expending too much energy defending the Big East. Your school is about to deservedly get called up to the show.

(12-18-2011 05:07 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 01:32 PM)RUNVSFD MINER Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 12:15 PM)SouthGAEagle Wrote:  I love how the argument is that since SDSU hasn't actually played in the Big East yet, this doesn't count against the conference, but all the Big East fans sure come in from their boards to the little ole CUSAbbs to defend them!

Or how they state the teams shouldn't be treated as BE members yet....
But the same posters have a sig with the new BE conf helmets (includes SDSU, BSU, UH, SMU, UFC, etc.)

We're fortunate that it appears to be a minority of the posters from the BE transfer schools that have caused the animosity, but all programs have their knuckleheads.

The topper of them all was when a fan of one of the transfer schools proposed a non-AQ playoff for the little guys from the WAC/MWC/Sunbelt/CUSA. I'd like to spit some Beechnut in that dude's eye.

As an aside, imho Maize isn't one of the "bad guys" at all; I've always found him to be respectful and civil.

I now have to wonder if omitting the MAC was a slam or an oversight .

The new mods don't do their job on the C-USA site. It amazes me that they allow all this "I'm insecure so I constantly call the Big East the Big Least/Splash and make threads about them"

(12-18-2011 06:03 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  all this "I'm insecure so I constantly call the Big East the Big Least/Splash and make threads about them"

Many of them have no other card to play.

(12-18-2011 06:03 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The new mods don't do their job on the C-USA site. It amazes me that they allow all this "I'm insecure so I constantly call the Big East the Big Least/Splash and make threads about them"

It amazes me that some posters get so upset with the terms "Big Least/Splash" that they feel the need for mod intervention.

Grow some skin.

I, for one, think the "Big Splash" thing Tallgrass started is quite ironic, considering that Tallgrass is the poster who has repeatedly suggested that the Alliance go to 24 or 32 teams to make a splash.

(12-18-2011 06:58 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 06:03 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The new mods don't do their job on the C-USA site. It amazes me that they allow all this "I'm insecure so I constantly call the Big East the Big Least/Splash and make threads about them"

It amazes me that some posters get so upset with the terms "Big Least/Splash" that they feel the need for mod intervention.

Grow some skin.

I find Big Least classic. Big Splash I think is lame but whatever.

(12-18-2011 07:26 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 06:58 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 06:03 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The new mods don't do their job on the C-USA site. It amazes me that they allow all this "I'm insecure so I constantly call the Big East the Big Least/Splash and make threads about them"

It amazes me that some posters get so upset with the terms "Big Least/Splash" that they feel the need for mod intervention.

Grow some skin.

I find Big Least classic. Big Splash I think is lame but whatever.

They are both just as lame as calling C-USA "C-DOA."

(12-18-2011 04:32 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 02:15 PM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:42 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 11:40 AM)randaddyminer Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 09:14 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Actually they aren't in Big East unil 2013 so this goes on their MWC portfolio . Wyoming getting beat by Temple and now SDST get beat by Louisiana. That request by the MWC to get AQ status for next two years is looking good.

f*** the splash, if they can get AQ, anybody should

Could say the same about ACC.

Not at all. I hate defending the ACC, but they are head and shoulders above your crap conference.

Not really, since realignment the ACC is 1-5 in BCS Games...BIG EAST is 3-3 in BCS Games and the BIG EAST is leading head to head against the ACC...nice try though and maybe Terry Holland will fill out another application to our league...juz say'n and have a nice day...

Didn't realize six games is all it comes down to. And at that, there is a two game difference. Hum, who would've known.