(04-27-2016 12:43 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  It'll happen they other way around, UH and SMU to the MW.

Not a chance. Stronger institutions, stronger academics, stronger research, far more resources in the AAC.

(04-27-2016 12:26 PM)YNot Wrote:  If Vegas gets a new stadium, the AAC needs to go all-in on western expansion.

Add Air Force, SDSU, Boise St., and UNLV

Bring the Las Vegas, Poinsettia, Hawaii, and Armed Forces bowls full-time to the AAC lineup. Then, use that to go convince BYU and Army to join.

You mean just add them, whether they want to join or not. It is not quite that easy.

(04-27-2016 04:50 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:07 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 01:44 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 01:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Link or it didn't happen.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...n-football
Since I am now your google I need all of your browser history for the past 10 years.

Yeah, I read the article. Where does it say they said no?

Link where they said yes or it didn't happen.

Too bad you have the burden of proof since you made the claim. Looks like they took SD and Boise instead and there is no where that says UNLV was ahead of either of them or that UNLV turned down the Big East. So go ahead and make any claim you want but this is the internet and you will be asked to prove that claim. You have yet to do that. Don't like it then don't make those claims.

Whatever dude you don't mind looking messed up keep preaching it. I'll hang up and listen to the silliness.

(04-27-2016 01:03 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 12:43 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  It'll happen they other way around, UH and SMU to the MW.

Boise St., Houston, and Fresno St. to the MWC should have happened befor Utah, TCU, and BYU left.

The MWC was on the cusp of BCS inclusion. To add Boise St. would have given the MWC another legitimate BCS contender. Houston and Fresno St. would have strengthened the middle group, lessening the drag of the bottom-dwellers.

TIER 1: TCU, Utah, Boise St., BYU
TIER 2: Air Force, CSU, SDSU, Fresno, Houston
TIER 3: Wyoming, New Mexico, UNLV

MOUNTAIN: TCU, Houston, Air Force, Wyoming, Colorado St., New Mexico
WEST: Utah, BYU, San Diego St., UNLV, Boise St., Fresno St.

Then, when TCU, Utah, and BYU bolted, the MWC might have just added SMU and stayed at 10 schools - or look to also add Memphis and Tulsa or Tulane.

And Idaho would be with NMSU, Nevada, Utah St., SJSU, and Hawaii in the WAC, and not moving back to the Big Sky.

UNR and Hawaii got in because of markets and history. Utah State have improved since they joined the MWC. San Jose State should have stayed in the WAC. UTEP was the better choice.

(04-27-2016 06:44 PM)HamiltonJames Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 12:43 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  It'll happen they other way around, UH and SMU to the MW.

Not a chance. Stronger institutions, stronger academics, stronger research, far more resources in the AAC.

In reality, neither the MW or AAC schools will move to either conference. The institutions are different in profiles. The MW are a majority of land-grant and flagship institutions. The AAC is a majority of private and city/regional schools.

(04-28-2016 08:48 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 06:44 PM)HamiltonJames Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 12:43 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  It'll happen they other way around, UH and SMU to the MW.

Not a chance. Stronger institutions, stronger academics, stronger research, far more resources in the AAC.

In reality, neither the MW or AAC schools will move to either conference. The institutions are different in profiles. The MW are a majority of land-grant and flagship institutions. The AAC is a majority of private and city/regional schools.

Lol wut? Signed SDSU, Fresno State, San Jose State, Boise State, etc...

Quit being a MWC homer and at least be a "hair" objective. The MWC isn't stealing anybody from the AAC.

(04-27-2016 12:26 PM)YNot Wrote:  If Vegas gets a new stadium, the AAC needs to go all-in on western expansion.

Add Air Force, SDSU, Boise St., and UNLV

Bring the Las Vegas, Poinsettia, Hawaii, and Armed Forces bowls full-time to the AAC lineup. Then, use that to go convince BYU and Army to join.

...because someone builds a stadium?

Maybe we should absorb the SEC since the Falcons are building a palace.

(04-28-2016 11:11 AM)k5james Wrote:  

(04-28-2016 08:48 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 06:44 PM)HamiltonJames Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 12:43 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  It'll happen they other way around, UH and SMU to the MW.

Not a chance. Stronger institutions, stronger academics, stronger research, far more resources in the AAC.

In reality, neither the MW or AAC schools will move to either conference. The institutions are different in profiles. The MW are a majority of land-grant and flagship institutions. The AAC is a majority of private and city/regional schools.

Lol wut? Signed SDSU, Fresno State, San Jose State, Boise State, etc...

Quit being a MWC homer and at least be a "hair" objective. The MWC isn't stealing anybody from the AAC.

Utah St, Wyoming, Colorado St., New Mexico, Nevada, Hawaii, UNLV.

(04-27-2016 10:49 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:50 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:07 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 01:44 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...n-football
Since I am now your google I need all of your browser history for the past 10 years.

Yeah, I read the article. Where does it say they said no?

Link where they said yes or it didn't happen.

Too bad you have the burden of proof since you made the claim. Looks like they took SD and Boise instead and there is no where that says UNLV was ahead of either of them or that UNLV turned down the Big East. So go ahead and make any claim you want but this is the internet and you will be asked to prove that claim. You have yet to do that. Don't like it then don't make those claims.

Whatever dude you don't mind looking messed up keep preaching it. I'll hang up and listen to the silliness.

Don't say silly things like UNLV turned down a BCS conference. What you say is the silliness.

(04-27-2016 04:50 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:07 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 01:44 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 01:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Link or it didn't happen.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...n-football
Since I am now your google I need all of your browser history for the past 10 years.

Yeah, I read the article. Where does it say they said no?

Link where they said yes or it didn't happen.

Too bad you have the burden of proof since you made the claim. Looks like they took SD and Boise instead and there is no where that says UNLV was ahead of either of them or that UNLV turned down the Big East. So go ahead and make any claim you want but this is the internet and you will be asked to prove that claim. You have yet to do that. Don't like it then don't make those claims.

The burden of proof actually lies with YOU, since you are the one claiming his statement is false. Not the other way around.

(04-27-2016 02:10 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:09 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 01:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Link or it didn't happen.

I am pretty sure UNLV was asked about joining the then Big East (along with BYU and perhaps one other team), before SDSU was asked and accepted.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong.

I don't recall asking your opinion. However since you believe it is wrong, prove it.

Never Boise.

(04-28-2016 12:31 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:50 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:07 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 01:44 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...n-football
Since I am now your google I need all of your browser history for the past 10 years.

Yeah, I read the article. Where does it say they said no?

Link where they said yes or it didn't happen.

Too bad you have the burden of proof since you made the claim. Looks like they took SD and Boise instead and there is no where that says UNLV was ahead of either of them or that UNLV turned down the Big East. So go ahead and make any claim you want but this is the internet and you will be asked to prove that claim. You have yet to do that. Don't like it then don't make those claims.

The burden of proof actually lies with YOU, since you are the one claiming his statement is false. Not the other way around.

(04-27-2016 02:10 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:09 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 01:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Link or it didn't happen.

I am pretty sure UNLV was asked about joining the then Big East (along with BYU and perhaps one other team), before SDSU was asked and accepted.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong.

I don't recall asking your opinion. However since you believe it is wrong, prove it.

No, the burden of proof is on you. You made an outlandish claim...well prove it.

(04-28-2016 07:16 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(04-28-2016 12:31 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:50 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:07 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Yeah, I read the article. Where does it say they said no?

Link where they said yes or it didn't happen.

Too bad you have the burden of proof since you made the claim. Looks like they took SD and Boise instead and there is no where that says UNLV was ahead of either of them or that UNLV turned down the Big East. So go ahead and make any claim you want but this is the internet and you will be asked to prove that claim. You have yet to do that. Don't like it then don't make those claims.

The burden of proof actually lies with YOU, since you are the one claiming his statement is false. Not the other way around.

(04-27-2016 02:10 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:09 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 01:03 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Link or it didn't happen.

I am pretty sure UNLV was asked about joining the then Big East (along with BYU and perhaps one other team), before SDSU was asked and accepted.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong.

I don't recall asking your opinion. However since you believe it is wrong, prove it.

No, the burden of proof is on you. You made an outlandish claim...well prove it.

Exactly! Thats like me telling my friends that i'm banging Jennifer Lawrence. It's on ME to prove I am, not up to my friends to prove im not.

AAC should simply try to get a great bowl tie-in out west. No reason with the new stadium the New Years 6 can't become the New Years 7.

(04-29-2016 11:04 AM)Eichorst Wrote:  AAC should simply try to get a great bowl tie-in out west. No reason with the new stadium the New Years 6 can't become the New Years 7.

After the 3-year bowl moratorium, the MWC/AAC/BYU/Army (or expanded AAC) should team up to form a new Vegas bowl as close to New Year's as possible. The current Las Vegas Bowl would stay in place, held before Christmas. The new bowl would showcase the highest ranked out of MWC/AAC/BYU/Army (or expanded AAC) that isn't already in the NY6. This would be a ranked or nearly-ranked team every year.

Then, work to get the highest selection possible on the other side - it's possible the new Vegas Bowl could get a selection/rotation (ie, 2 in 6 years) on the other side from among:
- PAC #4/5 (same tier as Foster Farms and Sun bowls, behind Holiday)
- Big 12 #4/5 (same tier as Texas and Liberty bowls, behind Russell Athletic)
- ACC #4-6 (same tier as Music City, Belk, Sun, and Pinstripe bowls, behind Russell Athletic).

This team would usually have an 8-4 or 9-3 record and be ranked, or just outside the top-25.

The other idea is to have the top-2 from amongst the Group of 5 and BYU/Army that aren't already in the NY6 to play each other in this bowl game - avoiding a same-conference matchup of course.

(04-29-2016 11:47 AM)YNot Wrote:  

(04-29-2016 11:04 AM)Eichorst Wrote:  AAC should simply try to get a great bowl tie-in out west. No reason with the new stadium the New Years 6 can't become the New Years 7.

After the 3-year bowl moratorium, the MWC/AAC/BYU/Army (or expanded AAC) should team up to form a new Vegas bowl as close to New Year's as possible. The current Las Vegas Bowl would stay in place, held before Christmas. The new bowl would showcase the highest ranked out of MWC/AAC/BYU/Army (or expanded AAC) that isn't already in the NY6. This would be a ranked or nearly-ranked team every year.

Then, work to get the highest selection possible on the other side - it's possible the new Vegas Bowl could get a selection/rotation (ie, 2 in 6 years) on the other side from among:
- PAC #4/5 (same tier as Foster Farms and Sun bowls, behind Holiday)
- Big 12 #4/5 (same tier as Texas and Liberty bowls, behind Russell Athletic)
- ACC #4-6 (same tier as Music City, Belk, Sun, and Pinstripe bowls, behind Russell Athletic).

This team would usually have an 8-4 or 9-3 record and be ranked, or just outside the top-25.

The other idea is to have the top-2 from amongst the Group of 5 and BYU/Army that aren't already in the NY6 to play each other in this bowl game - avoiding a same-conference matchup of course.

Sorry but, this would not be in the best interest of the AAC. When you're trying to elevate yourself above another conference or group, you don't sign contracts or agreements that state you're at their level. It's counter productive.

Now I agree, the AAC should attempt to create a NY6/7 Bowl game. If that is to be played in Los Vegas, so be it.

(04-28-2016 12:01 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 10:49 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:50 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:07 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Yeah, I read the article. Where does it say they said no?

Link where they said yes or it didn't happen.

Too bad you have the burden of proof since you made the claim. Looks like they took SD and Boise instead and there is no where that says UNLV was ahead of either of them or that UNLV turned down the Big East. So go ahead and make any claim you want but this is the internet and you will be asked to prove that claim. You have yet to do that. Don't like it then don't make those claims.

Whatever dude you don't mind looking messed up keep preaching it. I'll hang up and listen to the silliness.

Don't say silly things like UNLV turned down a BCS conference. What you say is the silliness.

From the Las Vegas Review Journal 12-19-12
Livengood (UNLV AD) has been critical of the decisions by Boise State and San Diego State to take their football programs to the Big East next year while sending their other sports to separate leagues.

UNLV has given every indication it would prefer to keep all its programs in the Mountain West and not do anything to negatively affect its nationally ranked basketball team.

Same date Reno Gazette Journal says member of board of Regents states wants Nevada and UNLV to remain in same league.

12-21-12 NY Daily News. Sources tell the Daily News that Big East wants UNLV and Fresno and adds that CBS has said BYU is being pursued as well.

And our own Realignment friend Frank the Tank weighs in on the Big East's problems.
By the time that it was clear that the TV deal that the Big East was holding out for would never materialize, it was too late to get even Fresno State or UNLV (much less BYU). Without further western members willing to come to the Big East, that forced Boise State to reevaluate its own status and ultimately decide to remain in the Mountain West. Whether or not the Big East should have offered Boise State some favorable TV deal terms in the same vein as the Mountain West did (where Boise State’s home games will be sold as a separate TV deal with financial bonuses to schools for national TV appearances) is irrelevant here. It would never have come to this if the Big East hadn’t overvalued its TV prospects three months ago.
https://frankthetank.me/2013/01/02/big-m...ouisville/

(04-29-2016 09:47 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-28-2016 07:16 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(04-28-2016 12:31 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:50 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Link where they said yes or it didn't happen.

Too bad you have the burden of proof since you made the claim. Looks like they took SD and Boise instead and there is no where that says UNLV was ahead of either of them or that UNLV turned down the Big East. So go ahead and make any claim you want but this is the internet and you will be asked to prove that claim. You have yet to do that. Don't like it then don't make those claims.

The burden of proof actually lies with YOU, since you are the one claiming his statement is false. Not the other way around.

(04-27-2016 02:10 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:09 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  I am pretty sure UNLV was asked about joining the then Big East (along with BYU and perhaps one other team), before SDSU was asked and accepted.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong.

I don't recall asking your opinion. However since you believe it is wrong, prove it.

No, the burden of proof is on you. You made an outlandish claim...well prove it.

Exactly! Thats like me telling my friends that i'm banging Jennifer Lawrence. It's on ME to prove I am, not up to my friends to prove im not.

No you fail analogies and logic.

You get a major media outlet report saying the Big East has approached a school and then leap to the hilarious conclusion that school would accept a membership if offered. I've added other links, embarrass yourself further if you really want to.

Right now you have a decision to make.
Respond no further pretend this thread didn't happen.
Back down
Double down on a losing argument.

(04-29-2016 09:47 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-28-2016 07:16 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(04-28-2016 12:31 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:50 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 04:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Link where they said yes or it didn't happen.

Too bad you have the burden of proof since you made the claim. Looks like they took SD and Boise instead and there is no where that says UNLV was ahead of either of them or that UNLV turned down the Big East. So go ahead and make any claim you want but this is the internet and you will be asked to prove that claim. You have yet to do that. Don't like it then don't make those claims.

The burden of proof actually lies with YOU, since you are the one claiming his statement is false. Not the other way around.

(04-27-2016 02:10 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(04-27-2016 02:09 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  I am pretty sure UNLV was asked about joining the then Big East (along with BYU and perhaps one other team), before SDSU was asked and accepted.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong.

I don't recall asking your opinion. However since you believe it is wrong, prove it.

No, the burden of proof is on you. You made an outlandish claim...well prove it.

Exactly! Thats like me telling my friends that i'm banging Jennifer Lawrence. It's on ME to prove I am, not up to my friends to prove im not.

Oh and one more thing.

Evidence has been submitted supporting my assertion so Yes the burden has shifted to refute the evidence.

Great. Jennifer Lawrence two-timing me with some RutgersGuy. Not cool.