Is everyone sure the SoCon is in our best interest. Articles from the Comish and WCU AD

http://blog.postandcourier.com/bulldog-b...-big-boys/

http://catamountsportsblog.blogspot.com/...eaton.html

Yeah, I'm all in for the OVC now.

As far as the SoCon commissioner's comments, he was just telling the truth. I dont see any reason to hold that against him, as the reduction or elimination of FBS playing FCS schools is going to impact us no matter where we go. As ive said before, I think its absolutely the best thing for college football as a whole. But its bad for us. The only good thing is that maybe we wont have to fund as many scholarships if we dont play the money games.

(02-23-2013 03:51 PM)etsubuc Wrote:  As far as the SoCon commissioner's comments, he was just telling the truth. I dont see any reason to hold that against him, as the reduction or elimination of FBS playing FCS schools is going to impact us no matter where we go. As ive said before, I think its absolutely the best thing for college football as a whole. But its bad for us. The only good thing is that maybe we wont have to fund as many scholarships if we dont play the money games.

Huh? I have read that last statement 5 times now and it makes less sense everytime. How is that good? The top FCS schools will still fund 63 scholarships, if ETSU doesn't that will put them at the same disadvantage that they were at before when they didn't fund all the scholarships they could. WE need the money games.. for, you know the money? Okay read it 6 times now and still don't understand it.
We don't need 65 scholarships to be competitive with FBS schools, it won't make us able to compete with them on most days, we need 63 scholarships to compete against other FCS schools, the top ones.

Hopefully they will look at the situation and then allow the FBS money games to be played. It is a key area where FCS partially fund their programs. It gets them not only good money but also great publicity. Big teams get a win so it is a win/win for everybody.

Calm down Rod. Of course I did not mean that we should not fund the max amount of scholarships if the rest of our peers are. But if the money games are off the table for FCS teams, I suspect most everyone will not fund that many. In fact, FCS might make a rule limiting scholarships to a lower number of there are no money games.

I know we need the money games, I said that it would hurt teams like us. But I am also a fan of FBS level football- and from their perspective they have no business playing us. Alabama should not be able to schedule ETSU as their money game, and Florida schedule a Sun Belt team as their money game- and it both count as a win.

(02-23-2013 05:05 PM)etsubuc Wrote:  Calm down Rod. Of course I did not mean that we should not fund the max amount of scholarships if the rest of our peers are. But if the money games are off the table for FCS teams, I suspect most everyone will not fund that many. In fact, FCS might make a rule limiting scholarships to a lower number of there are no money games.

I know we need the money games, I said that it would hurt teams like us. But I am also a fan of FBS level football- and from their perspective they have no business playing us. Alabama should not be able to schedule ETSU as their money game, and Florida schedule a Sun Belt team as their money game- and it both count as a win.

etsubuc....under your idea that they have no business playing lower level, you eliminate Appalachian's win over Michigan. Let the free market decide. Nothing is more thrilling than for a lower level to stroll into a BCS palace and have a shot at it. You idea would take away some of ETSU's greatest wins...N.C. State, Tennessee to name a few.

(02-23-2013 05:15 PM)Mister Jennings Wrote:  

(02-23-2013 05:05 PM)etsubuc Wrote:  Calm down Rod. Of course I did not mean that we should not fund the max amount of scholarships if the rest of our peers are. But if the money games are off the table for FCS teams, I suspect most everyone will not fund that many. In fact, FCS might make a rule limiting scholarships to a lower number of there are no money games.

I know we need the money games, I said that it would hurt teams like us. But I am also a fan of FBS level football- and from their perspective they have no business playing us. Alabama should not be able to schedule ETSU as their money game, and Florida schedule a Sun Belt team as their money game- and it both count as a win.

etsubuc....under your idea that they have no business playing lower level, you eliminate Appalachian's win over Michigan. Let the free market decide. Nothing is more thrilling than for a lower level to stroll into a BCS palace and have a shot at it. You idea would take away some of ETSU's greatest wins...N.C. State, Tennessee to name a few.

I think you are confused Mister, when has ETSU ever played Tennessee in football let alone beat them? Yeah they beat NC State in football but not UT.

I was referring to ETSU's two basketball victories over Tennessee. If you want a football example, how 'bout when Chattanooga strode into Knoxville and embarrassed the Vols.

i do think that basketball is different than football. In basketball, many of the mid majors are better than many of those in the top 2-3 conferences. I understand that Appy State beat Michigan 6 years ago- when Appy State had the best team in the FBS. But typically the distance is so far greater in football that it is not realistic for a team on our level to "go to a BCS palace and have a shot at it". They have a shot at getting their tails kicked, simple as that.

I enjoy rooting for David against Goliath. If the big shot wants to take a week off against a small fry, let them. The small fry needs the money and the chance to make history.

(02-23-2013 05:19 PM)Mister Jennings Wrote:  I was referring to ETSU's two basketball victories over Tennessee. If you want a football example, how 'bout when Chattanooga strode into Knoxville and embarrassed the Vols.

We aren't talking about basketball we are talking about FBS and FCS football, there is only 1 basketball divison ETSU and UT are both Div I and everybody gets 13 scholarships. In football there is a big difference in number of scholarships. Not being able to play down in football wouldn't mean anything to basketball, ETSU is not in a lower divison. Hence playing in the same NCAA tournament as Tennessee, Kentucky etc.

I think Chattanoga beat UT in 1958? 20 years before Div I was divided into I and IAA so sorry that game isn't any more relative to what we are talking about then basketball games. UT used to lose to Sewanee and Maryville at one point in time. pointing to a game 55 years ago does little to help agruments today.

Rod...I'm so glad you've taken on the role of poster police but that 1958 game was a upset of gigantic proportions...and they did it in Neyland. The fact it was so long ago doesn't make the point any less relevant.

(02-23-2013 06:03 PM)Mister Jennings Wrote:  Rod...I'm so glad you've taken on the role of poster police but that 1958 game was a upset of gigantic proportions...and they did it in Neyland. The fact it was so long ago doesn't make the point any less relevant.

How did they do it in Neyland when the Stadium wasn't named Neyland until 62?

If you can't see the how totally ilrelevant the game is, well.. okay then.

(02-23-2013 06:08 PM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  

(02-23-2013 05:15 PM)Mister Jennings Wrote:  

(02-23-2013 05:05 PM)etsubuc Wrote:  Calm down Rod. Of course I did not mean that we should not fund the max amount of scholarships if the rest of our peers are. But if the money games are off the table for FCS teams, I suspect most everyone will not fund that many. In fact, FCS might make a rule limiting scholarships to a lower number of there are no money games.

I know we need the money games, I said that it would hurt teams like us. But I am also a fan of FBS level football- and from their perspective they have no business playing us. Alabama should not be able to schedule ETSU as their money game, and Florida schedule a Sun Belt team as their money game- and it both count as a win.

etsubuc....under your idea that they have no business playing lower level, you eliminate Appalachian's win over Michigan. Let the free market decide. Nothing is more thrilling than for a lower level to stroll into a BCS palace and have a shot at it. You idea would take away some of ETSU's greatest wins...N.C. State, Tennessee to name a few.

When did ETSU ever beat UT in football?

Read on, he switched to basketball mid stream in there. Don't ask.

You figured it out all on your own great one.

Moving to the OVC is our best option considering everything going on in the SoCon. I'm sure that this has been a taxing decision for Noland and Sander but I cast my vote for OVC.

(02-25-2013 08:08 AM)Youre my boy blue! Wrote:  Moving to the OVC is our best option considering everything going on in the SoCon. I'm sure that this has been a taxing decision for Noland and Sander but I cast my vote for OVC.

At 12 members with 9 playing OVC football (a good number for scheduling), what is the OVC expansion plan?

(02-25-2013 08:21 AM)Buc66 Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 08:08 AM)Youre my boy blue! Wrote:  Moving to the OVC is our best option considering everything going on in the SoCon. I'm sure that this has been a taxing decision for Noland and Sander but I cast my vote for OVC.

At 12 members with 9 playing OVC football (a good number for scheduling), what is the OVC expansion plan?

I don't know if they have any plans for expansion.. but wouldn't it be great if they went to 14 with UTC and ETSU??????

Just because fans and the school want to join a better conference doesn't mean a better conference will want that school.

If a move does not happen soon or if it is only to a conference like the SoCon and/or OVC, I think we need to blame the previous athletic administration for their facility development plan.

I will say it until I'm blue in the face. The immediate needs of this school and community weren't for a new softball and/or baseball park or golf practice facility. The only reason to build the soccer fields was because ETSU got kicked out of the SoCon.

The immediate need of the community and school were for a new football stadium and basketball arena.

If those had been planned first, ETSU would still be in the SoCon, there would be renewed momentum and interest in the sports programs, and the non-revenue sports would have benefitted from the trickle down effect of fans checking them out (similar to how SuperFan would go on here and talk about the womens' soccer teams).

Better venues would have meant better teams. Better teams would have meant right now ETSU wouldn't be talking about which one of their former conferences they'd like to return to but rather which major conference they'd like to join.

But, hey. We have our all sports trophy from 2007, "The Greatest Year in the History of ETSU Athletics!"