(09-04-2017 07:58 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 07:49 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 07:42 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 07:35 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Tigers Should Schedule More MAC Schools

Toledo Should Schedule more AAC Schools

Question: Would Toledo join the AAC upon invitation?

Answer: Any response other than "yes " means you are a liar, a fool, or both.

Not concerned at the moment. I enjoy driving to most of my games. Travel expenses makes it harder for me to be a fan on the road in Texas and Florida. Marshall left the MAC and look at that program. Temple left and they still don't beat good MAC teams. It's a stable league right now. The short answer is How Much Can you Pay Us compared to what we make now? We're a flagship for football in our current conference. It wouldn't be an easy conversation.

You are delusional lol

(09-04-2017 07:10 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 07:06 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 06:54 PM)pesik Wrote:  i dont get whats shoddy bout it...

tulsa losing to okstate was predicated by everyone, temple losing to nd was predicted by everyone, jmu beating ecu was no surpise by anyone....

we had no real upsets against us..some game were closer than expected but all that matters is winning..usc barely beat wmu, no one will say usc is shoddy...usc won and will still be top 7 next week

i say it was a good week.

+SMU and Tulane for doing what they should against their FCS teams.
+UCF and Navy looked outstanding, although against bottom G5 opponents.

=Memphis had a chance to make a statement...did not. I understand it was a monsoon, but they didn't cover.

- Temple. ND is a good I think? But they still were a 4 win team last season. We've seen Temple be competitive in this spot before.

- Tulsa played a very good Oklahoma State but didn't come close to covering.

-- UConn looked terrible.
-- ECU looked terrible (predicted it... but lost by 20???)
- UC played to their competition.
- USF maybe played themselves out of the top 25

LOL. USF isn't dropping out of the Top 25.

Mommy says turn off the computer and go brush your teeth. Wanna be well-rested for your first day of 6th grade.

yeah, USF ain't dropping.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Bragging about being the flagship of the MAC is like saying you are the king of ****

(09-04-2017 07:54 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  I'm aware of all these things, just disagree that it was a "Good week." 2 teams did good things if you ask me... The rest of the conference went par or below par for expectations.

Tulsa will be fine, Ok State is good. But you CAN take away some things from a game like that. Ok State was prepared and wasn't going to let CMU of 2016 happen again. I can certainly take away something good from the WMU versus USC game, or the CSU versus Colorado game. Why am I not allowed to say I was expecting more of a 2 to 3 TD game for Tulsa @Ok State??

And betters do look at the weather before placing their bets. Probably why the line moved from 27.5 to 25 near game time.

Once again, great teams bury lower competition, and by the words on this board prior, you should NOT be okay with NOT winning that game by 50 points. That wasn't my prediction... I don't boast P6.

and Once again... it's week 1. There are jitters and things to fix. Memphis will have chances to prove themselves as the season goes on and they play more non monsoon games. I like Memphis. I picked them as my top 3 in the G5 prior to the season. FOR ME... they did not impress.

i saw a lot of good things in the tulsa game..it was presidents first ever start, coming from injury. he was splitting reps and had 70yds rushing nad threw 50% ..he was moving the ball.. note the best colorado team in the last decade was beat 38-8 by ok state in the game before this one...the score was bad, but im not too worried about tulsa

i cant stand the p6 hater nonsense..we claim p6..we dont claim to be the best conference in the history of the world...ecu losses to jmu (fcs #1).. nonstop p6 haters flood in...baylor loses to dramatically worse liberty, are we going to question big 12 status as a power conference?

and ulm is fbs and it was a monsoon...no one was expecting to beat fbs teams by 50..you guys over hype our projections. and then mock for not meeting your made up projections....plus if Memphis could have played to its strength (passing) that game would have been a blowout... and you know it.
if you arent impressed, thats good becuase memphis will be playing in a monson every game..

me? im impressed, now i know memphis can throw 400yds 6tds (happened a few times last year) or run 300yds.. on a clear weather day, i dont think memphis can be stopped, at best slowed down

(09-04-2017 07:58 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 07:49 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 07:42 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 07:35 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Tigers Should Schedule More MAC Schools

Toledo Should Schedule more AAC Schools

Question: Would Toledo join the AAC upon invitation?

Answer: Any response other than "yes " means you are a liar, a fool, or both.

Not concerned at the moment. I enjoy driving to most of my games. Travel expenses makes it harder for me to be a fan on the road in Texas and Florida. Marshall left the MAC and look at that program. Temple left and they still don't beat good MAC teams. It's a stable league right now. The short answer is How Much Can you Pay Us compared to what we make now? We're a flagship for football in our current conference. It wouldn't be an easy conversation.

You supplied the answer, thanks.

pesik has already covered most of what I'd have said.
Initially I just thought "Hmm, tough grader but okay." Then with every explanation op made less and less sense.

Memphis: if you're just grading tough okay, it's an =. But when challenged they should have controlled it more? They were in control throughout. Navyesque game control. Should win by 50? Now you're just doubling down on wrong.
USF drop out of rankings? Again you're doubling down on stupid. - for not owning that? Okay, they did just go back and forth cross country so letdown but ultimately two score win? Okay debate on - vs = but drop out of rankings gs!?!
Tulsa and Temple both list as big dogs. So we can disagree on = vs - but when you take those with your Memphis and USF hottaeks....

Week was as expected, possibly disappointing with a once proud conference mates losing to FCS. But with that happening to another P6 conference and 2 G4 conferences...

Hardly shoddy

(09-04-2017 08:33 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  pesik has already covered most of what I'd have said.
Initially I just thought "Hmm, tough grader but okay." Then with every explanation op made less and less sense.

Memphis: if you're just grading tough okay, it's an =. But when challenged they should have controlled it more? They were in control throughout. Navyesque game control. Should win by 50? Now you're just doubling down on wrong.
USF drop out of rankings? Again you're doubling down on stupid. - for not owning that? Okay, they did just go back and forth cross country so letdown but ultimately two score win? Okay debate on - vs = but drop out of rankings gs!?!
Tulsa and Temple both list as big dogs. So we can disagree on = vs - but when you take those with your Memphis and USF hottaeks....

Week was as expected, possibly disappointing with a once proud conference mates losing to FCS. But with that happening to another P6 conference and 2 G4 conferences...

Hardly shoddy

The Memphis mention of a 50 point margin game is what I've seen the last 2 seasons with some (closer to most) of you saying insert other G5 champ... would lose to Tulane or finish below .500 in the AAC etc. If you insinuate you are #P6 you should compete at the level of an average P5 team. With the exception of the garbage ones, USM doesn't hang around with those. Garbage TD's or not. The expectation was of a 25 point win. The weather was bad so there is leeway, but I'm grading that as a = ... which means they didn't impress me by any stretch of the imagination. I've seen Riley throw the ball in past seasons. That offense will be good. But I still expected more. I'm entitled to that grade as it should not be to far off. To say that it was good week and that they should not have come close to the spread of expectations (half bet above, half bet below) is odd to me

I was surprised by the ECU score, not the outcome. I picked JMU. I went 19-1 in week one. I don't just say sh!t without a decent picking record as evidence.

And what else is there to say about USF? This team is one of the most hyped G5 teams EVER coming into the season. They do not play a schedule that will let voters skip over some closer games because they have a resume to lean on. Being down at half to Stony Brook is BAD. No top 25 G5 teams have ever been "allowed" to have slow games and not pay for it. I've seen much better efforts than USF in their first two games by other G5 teams. Are they good? I still think so. They were my preseason #1 G5 team and pick for the access bowl... I'll give them the minus grade until they live up to expectations. Beating upcoming competition by larger margins would do the trick. As for falling out of the top 25? I said they could. I think they will absolutely drop a couple spots. Tell me I'm wrong if I'm wrong. We will know tomorrow.

At the end of your comment, I agree with what you said. But "good." doesn't fly with ME for this week.

(09-04-2017 06:25 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/thegreat5/season-...ek-1-recap

agree with your assessment of the AAC thus far....

(09-04-2017 09:10 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 06:25 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/thegreat5/season-...ek-1-recap

agree with your assessment of the AAC thus far....

You think USF may drop out of the Top 25?

(09-04-2017 09:12 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:10 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 06:25 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/thegreat5/season-...ek-1-recap

agree with your assessment of the AAC thus far....

You think USF may drop out of the Top 25?

no not this week....

I agree with his assessment that overall, it was a shoddy week for the AAC though.

No one has to agree that the term "shoddy" is the best word. Maybe... "The AAC sleepwalks through week 1 with bad ECU loss and 2nd concerning slow start for USF, but bright spots in Navy and UCF" would be a better title. Sadly I can't fit all of that in the dingaling.
It worked as far as starting a conversation though.

(09-04-2017 09:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  No one has to agree that the term "shoddy" is the best word. Maybe... "The AAC sleepwalks through week 1 with bad ECU loss and 2nd concerning slow start for USF, but bright spots in Navy and UCF" would be a better title. Sadly I can't fit all of that in the dingaling.
It worked as far as starting a conversation though.

My only question is, "Are you trying to attract fans to your podcasts, or run them all off?"

(09-04-2017 06:25 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/thegreat5/season-...ek-1-recap

You are quite a salesman. Great way to get people to listen to your inane podcast.

(09-04-2017 09:27 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  No one has to agree that the term "shoddy" is the best word. Maybe... "The AAC sleepwalks through week 1 with bad ECU loss and 2nd concerning slow start for USF, but bright spots in Navy and UCF" would be a better title. Sadly I can't fit all of that in the dingaling.
It worked as far as starting a conversation though.

My only question is, "Are you trying to attract fans to your podcasts, or run them all off?"

I'm trying to be an unbiased "reporter" who gives his honest/fair opinions and predictions of events surrounding the #G5. Most of you don't like me on here anyways so why not start a dialogue that involves my podcast and what is said on it? I'm not going to lie and say, "every team is good all of the time! Listen to me because I'm nice!"

My listener-ship is almost strictly csnbbs posters. I'd rather argue or sometimes agree with you peoples than to not post at all and attract no listeners.

(09-04-2017 09:37 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:27 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  No one has to agree that the term "shoddy" is the best word. Maybe... "The AAC sleepwalks through week 1 with bad ECU loss and 2nd concerning slow start for USF, but bright spots in Navy and UCF" would be a better title. Sadly I can't fit all of that in the dingaling.
It worked as far as starting a conversation though.

My only question is, "Are you trying to attract fans to your podcasts, or run them all off?"

I'm trying to be an unbiased "reporter" who gives his honest/fair opinions and predictions of events surrounding the #G5. Most of you don't like me on here anyways so why not start a dialogue that involves my podcast and what is said on it? I'm not going to lie and say, "every team is good all of the time! Listen to me because I'm nice!"

My listener-ship is almost strictly csnbbs posters. I'd rather argue or sometimes agree with you peoples than to not post at all and attract no listeners.

Your opinions are fine. It's your expressions, delivery, interaction and attitude that need work. Nobody is going to listen on a regular basis to somebody who acts a bit like a *******, solid opinions, or not.

(09-04-2017 09:46 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:37 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:27 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  No one has to agree that the term "shoddy" is the best word. Maybe... "The AAC sleepwalks through week 1 with bad ECU loss and 2nd concerning slow start for USF, but bright spots in Navy and UCF" would be a better title. Sadly I can't fit all of that in the dingaling.
It worked as far as starting a conversation though.

My only question is, "Are you trying to attract fans to your podcasts, or run them all off?"

I'm trying to be an unbiased "reporter" who gives his honest/fair opinions and predictions of events surrounding the #G5. Most of you don't like me on here anyways so why not start a dialogue that involves my podcast and what is said on it? I'm not going to lie and say, "every team is good all of the time! Listen to me because I'm nice!"

My listener-ship is almost strictly csnbbs posters. I'd rather argue or sometimes agree with you peoples than to not post at all and attract no listeners.

Your opinions are fine. It's your expressions, delivery, interaction and attitude that need work. Nobody is going to listen on a regular basis to somebody who acts a bit like a *******, solid opinions, or not.

Where did I go wrong with the delivery? Have you listened to the podcast? It's pretty neutrally delivered to all G5 conferences.

I've said nothing inappropriate. The first two responses on here were snipes at my podcast. The next post was me explaining my position on the week for the AAC. The next was a return snipe to the AAC (to Temple) just as stupid as the one at Bowling Green (from Memphis fan).

I'm not here to start a war. Just here to talk College Football. What's the big deal?

first thing, you need to put the AAC in the P6 podcasts.....start there. We don't recognize a "G5" in these here parts.

(09-04-2017 10:01 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:46 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:37 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:27 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:19 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  No one has to agree that the term "shoddy" is the best word. Maybe... "The AAC sleepwalks through week 1 with bad ECU loss and 2nd concerning slow start for USF, but bright spots in Navy and UCF" would be a better title. Sadly I can't fit all of that in the dingaling.
It worked as far as starting a conversation though.

My only question is, "Are you trying to attract fans to your podcasts, or run them all off?"

I'm trying to be an unbiased "reporter" who gives his honest/fair opinions and predictions of events surrounding the #G5. Most of you don't like me on here anyways so why not start a dialogue that involves my podcast and what is said on it? I'm not going to lie and say, "every team is good all of the time! Listen to me because I'm nice!"

My listener-ship is almost strictly csnbbs posters. I'd rather argue or sometimes agree with you peoples than to not post at all and attract no listeners.

Your opinions are fine. It's your expressions, delivery, interaction and attitude that need work. Nobody is going to listen on a regular basis to somebody who acts a bit like a *******, solid opinions, or not.

Where did I go wrong with the delivery? Have you listened to the podcast? It's pretty neutrally delivered to all G5 conferences.

I've said nothing inappropriate. The first two responses on here were snipes at my podcast. The next post was me explaining my position on the week for the AAC. The next was a return snipe to the AAC (to Temple) just as stupid as the one at Bowling Green (from Memphis fan).

I'm not here to start a war. Just here to talk College Football. What's the big deal?

If you can't figure out a better way to communicate with people whom you want to listen to your podcasts, then I can't help you. Nobody expects you to say everybody is great. They simply ask if you come on a message board to promote your podcast, figure out a way to do it without alienating people.

You keep arguing with people about your choice of words. Those are your customers. The customer is always right. Listen to them. Don't argue. Say the same thing some different way than "shoddy," for example.

But you don't seem to think you are doing anything wrong, so I'm out.

(09-04-2017 10:02 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  first thing, you need to put the AAC in the P6 podcasts.....start there. We don't recognize a "G5" in these here parts.

I'm aware. I will never talk exclusively BIG though so that dream is dead and gone.

Once an AAC team goes to the playoffs though, I'll stop including them in my podcast and I can move on the world of the G4. Until then, it's safe to say they'll be getting air time. More air time than most actually I only preview intriguing P5 vs. G5 games and top 65 Massey Composite ranked teams. That includes 5 to 8 AAC teams at any given time.

Did I miss it or was there no mention of SMU and Tulane? ECU and UConn both mentioned. Are they rated above SMU and Tulane? All in all, Fair is the rating I give the AAC in the week 0 and 1. Last year we had Houston's big win in Week 1 to brag about. Tulsa and Temple failed big time, along with USF. SUPPOSED to be three of our better teams. See Western Michigan v. USC. No excuses.