(12-25-2013 10:29 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 11:47 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 10:44 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 02:06 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 01:44 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  There is a reason both Pastner and Calpari both opposed playing UT-K. It hurts recruiting - the life blood of any program. The U of M should dispel the notion of Tiger/Vol games so the mother you cited and other like her will know they will never see their sons play unless they journey from Memphis.

Exactly. There is no upside to playing any local SEC team in bball.

True, but there is a huge upside, both financially and opportunity-wise, to play them in football. Make no mistake, these two series are about football for us, and we are simply using basketball to get the football schedule we want.

The perceived potential damage to BB recruiting is apparently less than the potential advantage to football. Also, how many potential recruits that we really want will we actually lose to UTk strictly b/c we are playing them in BB? I say none. Just like the woman who had no idea whether we were playing or not. UTk can always say we are about to. They may get some recruits we didn't want by doing that, but it is of no consequence to us.

I respect you a lot Andy, but on this we disagree. But maybe I just hate them too much.

I understand the other point of view. But it's emotional, as opposed to fiscal, which overrides it. The money we get from the football games, plus the potential to earn a big win with little downside for a loss, makes it huge for the football program.

Only 3 games right now really get this fan base riled up: Louisville, Ole Miss and Tennessee. Seems silly to kill the two oldest ones b/c we're afraid of losing a basketball recruit to either.

Think of it this way. We had no problem continuing to play Louisville, and they are a much bigger threat to beat us out for a recruit than are Ole Miss or Tennessee, where we rarely chase the same players.

Pastner doesn't want to play due to recruiting, but UTk can recruit Memphis, whether we play them, or not. And they can tell recruits we're playing whether we really or, or not, so the real impact is minimal, and we're still going to get the guys we want, vs. them.

They would be wise to follow the advice of a pair of top recruiters over this shallow conventional wisdom.

(12-25-2013 12:14 PM)umfreak Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 10:29 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 11:47 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 10:44 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 02:06 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  Exactly. There is no upside to playing any local SEC team in bball.

True, but there is a huge upside, both financially and opportunity-wise, to play them in football. Make no mistake, these two series are about football for us, and we are simply using basketball to get the football schedule we want.

The perceived potential damage to BB recruiting is apparently less than the potential advantage to football. Also, how many potential recruits that we really want will we actually lose to UTk strictly b/c we are playing them in BB? I say none. Just like the woman who had no idea whether we were playing or not. UTk can always say we are about to. They may get some recruits we didn't want by doing that, but it is of no consequence to us.

I respect you a lot Andy, but on this we disagree. But maybe I just hate them too much.

I understand the other point of view. But it's emotional, as opposed to fiscal, which overrides it. The money we get from the football games, plus the potential to earn a big win with little downside for a loss, makes it huge for the football program.

Only 3 games right now really get this fan base riled up: Louisville, Ole Miss and Tennessee. Seems silly to kill the two oldest ones b/c we're afraid of losing a basketball recruit to either.

Think of it this way. We had no problem continuing to play Louisville, and they are a much bigger threat to beat us out for a recruit than are Ole Miss or Tennessee, where we rarely chase the same players.

Pastner doesn't want to play due to recruiting, but UTk can recruit Memphis, whether we play them, or not. And they can tell recruits we're playing whether we really or, or not, so the real impact is minimal, and we're still going to get the guys we want, vs. them.

They would be wise to follow the advice of a pair of top recruiters over this shallow conventional wisdom.

No, it's a matter of whether you think it's worth it to help the football program. Of course 2 BB coaches are going to say no.

I dunno. You gotta play somebody. I would love a chance to ge to a Tigers game 15 minutes from home every other weekend, plus Josh owns Martin like an old pair of Nikes. Martin and UTK can recruit in Memphis regardless of whether we play there or not (See: Donovan and UF; Haith and Mizzou; Anderson and Arky), so what exactly is the downside?

Games and publicity in a talent hotbed is a recruiters wet dream.

(12-25-2013 01:46 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  I dunno. You gotta play somebody. I would love a chance to ge to a Tigers game 15 minutes from home every other weekend, plus Josh owns Martin like an old pair of Nikes. Martin and UTK can recruit in Memphis regardless of whether we play there or not (See: Donovan and UF; Haith and Mizzou; Anderson and Arky), so what exactly is the downside?

One basketball game every year, one football game every two years,ut canceling whenever they feel like it.

(12-25-2013 02:21 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 01:46 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  I dunno. You gotta play somebody. I would love a chance to ge to a Tigers game 15 minutes from home every other weekend, plus Josh owns Martin like an old pair of Nikes. Martin and UTK can recruit in Memphis regardless of whether we play there or not (See: Donovan and UF; Haith and Mizzou; Anderson and Arky), so what exactly is the downside?

One basketball game every year, one football game every two years,ut canceling whenever they feel like it.

The 2004 game is what changed things for me. It's almost a guaranteed loss, because if they think we might win they will simply cancel the game.

(12-25-2013 05:18 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 02:21 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 01:46 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  I dunno. You gotta play somebody. I would love a chance to ge to a Tigers game 15 minutes from home every other weekend, plus Josh owns Martin like an old pair of Nikes. Martin and UTK can recruit in Memphis regardless of whether we play there or not (See: Donovan and UF; Haith and Mizzou; Anderson and Arky), so what exactly is the downside?

One basketball game every year, one football game every two years,ut canceling whenever they feel like it.

The 2004 game is what changed things for me. It's almost a guaranteed loss, because if they think we might win they will simply cancel the game.

So what exactly happened in 2004? It was before my interest in Memphis Tigers FB. And before anyone says anything, no, I was not an SEC FB fan.....didn't like any FB.

(12-25-2013 05:35 PM)Tanyaskees Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 05:18 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 02:21 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 01:46 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  I dunno. You gotta play somebody. I would love a chance to ge to a Tigers game 15 minutes from home every other weekend, plus Josh owns Martin like an old pair of Nikes. Martin and UTK can recruit in Memphis regardless of whether we play there or not (See: Donovan and UF; Haith and Mizzou; Anderson and Arky), so what exactly is the downside?

One basketball game every year, one football game every two years,ut canceling whenever they feel like it.

The 2004 game is what changed things for me. It's almost a guaranteed loss, because if they think we might win they will simply cancel the game.

So what exactly happened in 2004? It was before my interest in Memphis Tigers FB. And before anyone says anything, no, I was not an SEC FB fan.....didn't like any FB.

There was supposed to be a UT vs Memphis game in Memphis. We had Danny and DeAngelo and it was LIKELY that we'd win. UT backed out of the game due to injury. Apparently their vaginas hurt.

(12-25-2013 06:31 PM)transitt Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 05:35 PM)Tanyaskees Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 05:18 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 02:21 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 01:46 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  I dunno. You gotta play somebody. I would love a chance to ge to a Tigers game 15 minutes from home every other weekend, plus Josh owns Martin like an old pair of Nikes. Martin and UTK can recruit in Memphis regardless of whether we play there or not (See: Donovan and UF; Haith and Mizzou; Anderson and Arky), so what exactly is the downside?

One basketball game every year, one football game every two years,ut canceling whenever they feel like it.

The 2004 game is what changed things for me. It's almost a guaranteed loss, because if they think we might win they will simply cancel the game.

So what exactly happened in 2004? It was before my interest in Memphis Tigers FB. And before anyone says anything, no, I was not an SEC FB fan.....didn't like any FB.

There was supposed to be a UT vs Memphis game in Memphis. We had Danny and DeAngelo and it was LIKELY that we'd win. UT backed out of the game due to injury. Apparently their vaginas hurt.

Thanks....bunch of *******!

I didn't realize teams can just back out of a game when they feel like it.

Many fans talk about going to the Big12, why dont we play more big 12 schools, makes sense if u want to join, cuz we aint ever getting in the sec.

because delusional fans want to pretend they're in the sec by playing their favorite team, old mrs., tennessee or otherwise.

couldn't care less either way.

(12-25-2013 10:55 PM)umfreak Wrote:  because delusional fans want to pretend they're in the sec by playing their favorite team, old mrs., tennessee or otherwise.

Are you for real? Your screen name suits you well freak

(12-25-2013 06:31 PM)transitt Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 05:35 PM)Tanyaskees Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 05:18 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 02:21 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(12-25-2013 01:46 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  I dunno. You gotta play somebody. I would love a chance to ge to a Tigers game 15 minutes from home every other weekend, plus Josh owns Martin like an old pair of Nikes. Martin and UTK can recruit in Memphis regardless of whether we play there or not (See: Donovan and UF; Haith and Mizzou; Anderson and Arky), so what exactly is the downside?

One basketball game every year, one football game every two years,ut canceling whenever they feel like it.

The 2004 game is what changed things for me. It's almost a guaranteed loss, because if they think we might win they will simply cancel the game.

So what exactly happened in 2004? It was before my interest in Memphis Tigers FB. And before anyone says anything, no, I was not an SEC FB fan.....didn't like any FB.

There was supposed to be a UT vs Memphis game in Memphis. We had Danny and DeAngelo and it was LIKELY that we'd win. UT backed out of the game due to injury. Apparently their vaginas hurt.

typical tigahhigh mentality. the worst ut teams are always better than the best memphis teams.


"LIKELY that we'd win" is a joke. we'd have been our usual two touchdown underdog

(12-24-2013 01:27 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  It is a bad idea to give a rival (already well-endowed with SEC riches) better access to the fertile Memphis recruiting area, the ability to reward local UT-K fans, and allow improved media coverage. Tiger fans supporting the series should consider the long term damage inflicted in exchange for an opportunity to thrash the Vols.

So if we don't play UT, then recruits that we may want won't be able to see UT play in person or on TV at all?

I have never understood this argument.

It is solely based in fear and cowardice.

If we are losing recruits to UT that we want, then there is a much larger problem than playing a game.

Same holds true for them in football. You all REALLY think UT is scared of losing recruits to Memphis?

We shouldn't be scared of anyone, anytime.

If you're scared, say you're scared.

(12-26-2013 07:59 AM)madtiger Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 01:27 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  It is a bad idea to give a rival (already well-endowed with SEC riches) better access to the fertile Memphis recruiting area, the ability to reward local UT-K fans, and allow improved media coverage. Tiger fans supporting the series should consider the long term damage inflicted in exchange for an opportunity to thrash the Vols.

So if we don't play UT, then recruits that we may want won't be able to see UT play in person or on TV at all?

I have never understood this argument.

It is solely based in fear and cowardice.

If we are losing recruits to UT that we want, then there is a much larger problem than playing a game.

Same holds true for them in football. You all REALLY think UT is scared of losing recruits to Memphis?

We shouldn't be scared of anyone, anytime.

If you're scared, say you're scared.

perpetual victims

Madtiger, I tend to agree with Tigerbill and Stammers. I tend to NOT trust a person or entity that has stabbed me in the back on a previous agreement.

The 2004 FB game cancellation really sticks in my craw. Yeah, let's talk about cowardice. That was straight up FEAR of MEMPHIS by Tennessee that year. They knew what was coming and used the BS smokescreen of Calipari pushing for a Nashville BB series to "postpone" the game.

The dagger in the MEMPHIS ribs was that fool R.C. Johnson only had a $200,000 buyout provision for that game. UT threatened to use it, and RC was forced to agree to the postponement. THIS GAME STILL HAS NOT BEEN MADE UP; it was postponed AGAIN in 2012 to 2017.

BTW, don't forget the Vol starting QB was injured the week before that scheduled November 2004 game against MEMPHIS. UT would have been starting a true freshman QB against MEMPHIS had that game been played as scheduled.

No, I don't want to play UT in BB for the most basic of reasons:
- payback for their chicken$h^t ducking of the 2004 FB game.
- UT really WANTS to have the BB series (H&H) every year; why kowtow to their wants and desires? Deny them what they really want. Mississippi does the same thing to So Miss in FB; I've had several Rebel fans tell me straight up it is a matter of denying USM even though USM has made numerous offers (playing in Oxford, etc.).

People talk about the huge FB attendance for a Vol-TIGER game here in MEMPHIS. The attendance the past few UT games has been down. The largest crowd MEMPHIS has had for a FB was that Louisville Thursday night game (56,000). Fuente gets the FB program turned around and the crowds will be there for Cincinnati, UCF, Houston, Navy, Connecticut, USF, etc.

But I guess I would CONSIDER signing a FB/BB series with the backstabbers under these conditions:
1) The 2004 postponed FB must be played in MEMPHIS before any deal is signed. Right now that game is "set" for 2017...unless, of course, UT backs out AGAIN.
2) However, that game has been delayed THIRTEEN years. All other FB games that were scheduled were played without cancellation or postponement (2005 in Knoxville, 2006 and 2010 in MEMPHIS). So, UT must also play a "penalty" FB game in MEMPHIS before any new deal is signed. This means ANOTHER FB game in MEMPHIS in 2018 or 2019 or whenever. However, any BB/FB seeries deal will only commence AFTER both the 2004/2012 postponed game is played AND the penalty game is played.

Now, after that second FB game is olayed and in the books, Bowen can discuss a new contract for a NEW series of FB and BB games with UT. We will even let UT choose the option they prefer:
1) A BB game in Nashville each year for a FB game in Nashville every other year
OR
2) A H&H BB series and a H&H FB series for the same "x" years.

There will NOT be a 6 game H&H BB series with only 2 FB games H&H. Those days are done.

If UT refuses either option, Bowen should smile and wish UT well, and walk out.

No major heartburn. UT can always schedule one of the OOC or SEC BB games through the FEF. The OOC game just won't be against the TIGERS. UT will be at least third in the pecking order behind the Grizzlies and then MEMPHIS for preferred dates. Unless the Globetrotters, concerts, and Muppets on Ice get to choose ahead of them.

This is boss man and I approve this strategy to deny UT pending our DEMAND they play the two FB games here FIRST.

(12-25-2013 10:29 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 11:47 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 10:44 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 02:06 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(12-24-2013 01:44 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  There is a reason both Pastner and Calpari both opposed playing UT-K. It hurts recruiting - the life blood of any program. The U of M should dispel the notion of Tiger/Vol games so the mother you cited and other like her will know they will never see their sons play unless they journey from Memphis.

Exactly. There is no upside to playing any local SEC team in bball.

True, but there is a huge upside, both financially and opportunity-wise, to play them in football. Make no mistake, these two series are about football for us, and we are simply using basketball to get the football schedule we want.

The perceived potential damage to BB recruiting is apparently less than the potential advantage to football. Also, how many potential recruits that we really want will we actually lose to UTk strictly b/c we are playing them in BB? I say none. Just like the woman who had no idea whether we were playing or not. UTk can always say we are about to. They may get some recruits we didn't want by doing that, but it is of no consequence to us.

I respect you a lot Andy, but on this we disagree. But maybe I just hate them too much.

I understand the other point of view. But it's emotional, as opposed to fiscal, which overrides it. The money we get from the football games, plus the potential to earn a big win with little downside for a loss, makes it huge for the football program.

Only 3 games right now really get this fan base riled up: Louisville, Ole Miss and Tennessee. Seems silly to kill the two oldest ones b/c we're afraid of losing a basketball recruit to either.

Think of it this way. We had no problem continuing to play Louisville, and they are a much bigger threat to beat us out for a recruit than are Ole Miss or Tennessee, where we rarely chase the same players.

Pastner doesn't want to play due to recruiting, but UTk can recruit Memphis, whether we play them, or not. And they can tell recruits we're playing whether we really or, or not, so the real impact is minimal, and we're still going to get the guys we want, vs. them.

I like beating the Vols as much as any blue blooded Tiger, but rationally an occasional ticket sale boost is not worth the strategic disadvantage placed on the crown jewel of Tiger athletics.

(12-26-2013 09:07 AM)boss man Wrote:  Madtiger, I tend to agree with Tigerbill and Stammers. I tend to NOT trust a person or entity that has stabbed me in the back on a previous agreement.

The 2004 FB game cancellation really sticks in my craw. Yeah, let's talk about cowardice. That was straight up FEAR of MEMPHIS by Tennessee that year. They knew what was coming and used the BS smokescreen of Calipari pushing for a Nashville BB series to "postpone" the game.

The dagger in the MEMPHIS ribs was that fool R.C. Johnson only had a $200,000 buyout provision for that game. UT threatened to use it, and RC was forced to agree to the postponement. THIS GAME STILL HAS NOT BEEN MADE UP; it was postponed AGAIN in 2012 to 2017.

BTW, don't forget the Vol starting QB was injured the week before that scheduled November 2004 game against MEMPHIS. UT would have been starting a true freshman QB against MEMPHIS had that game been played as scheduled.

No, I don't want to play UT in BB for the most basic of reasons:
- payback for their chicken$h^t ducking of the 2004 FB game.
- UT really WANTS to have the BB series (H&H) every year; why kowtow to their wants and desires? Deny them what they really want. Mississippi does the same thing to So Miss in FB; I've had several Rebel fans tell me straight up it is a matter of denying USM even though USM has made numerous offers (playing in Oxford, etc.).

People talk about the huge FB attendance for a Vol-TIGER game here in MEMPHIS. The attendance the past few UT games has been down. The largest crowd MEMPHIS has had for a FB was that Louisville Thursday night game (56,000). Fuente gets the FB program turned around and the crowds will be there for Cincinnati, UCF, Houston, Navy, Connecticut, USF, etc.

But I guess I would CONSIDER signing a FB/BB series with the backstabbers under these conditions:
1) The 2004 postponed FB must be played in MEMPHIS before any deal is signed. Right now that game is "set" for 2017...unless, of course, UT backs out AGAIN.
2) However, that game has been delayed THIRTEEN years. All other FB games that were scheduled were played without cancellation or postponement (2005 in Knoxville, 2006 and 2010 in MEMPHIS). So, UT must also play a "penalty" FB game in MEMPHIS before any new deal is signed. This means ANOTHER FB game in MEMPHIS in 2018 or 2019 or whenever. However, any BB/FB seeries deal will only commence AFTER both the 2004/2012 postponed game is played AND the penalty game is played.

Now, after that second FB game is olayed and in the books, Bowen can discuss a new contract for a NEW series of FB and BB games with UT. We will even let UT choose the option they prefer:
1) A BB game in Nashville each year for a FB game in Nashville every other year
OR
2) A H&H BB series and a H&H FB series for the same "x" years.

There will NOT be a 6 game H&H BB series with only 2 FB games H&H. Those days are done.

If UT refuses either option, Bowen should smile and wish UT well, and walk out.

No major heartburn. UT can always schedule one of the OOC or SEC BB games through the FEF. The OOC game just won't be against the TIGERS. UT will be at least third in the pecking order behind the Grizzlies and then MEMPHIS for preferred dates. Unless the Globetrotters, concerts, and Muppets on Ice get to choose ahead of them.

This is boss man and I approve this strategy to deny UT pending our DEMAND they play the two FB games here FIRST.

LOL.....don't ever change.

A question for good Tiger fans supporting a basketball series with UT-K: what are the reasons UT-K want to play Memphis?

The Vols are not advocating the series out of charity.