CSNbbs

(02-13-2022 11:24 PM)Twon Wrote: [ -> ]The hate comes from jealousy. UNT just moved up to the AAC.

Just looking at posts on this forum it looks like there is a lot jealousy directed toward La Tech also

You’ve really got your thumb on the pulse here…

(02-14-2022 08:10 AM)Saint3333 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 11:24 PM)Twon Wrote: [ -> ]The hate comes from jealousy. UNT just moved up to the AAC.

Just looking at posts on this forum it looks like there is a lot jealousy directed toward La Tech also

You’ve really got your thumb on the pulse here…

For those of us with less emotional investment in the process and outcome, this thread is mostly entertaining.

The (mostly) UNT, La. Tech. and one FAU posters who cannot let it go strike me as a set of flatulent dogs, who nonstop keep on twisting around to smell their own butts and then barking about how others are jealous of them for it.

(02-13-2022 11:03 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 10:09 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 07:58 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 05:53 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 05:44 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote: [ -> ]So... the SBC didn't necessarily "want UNT back".

I had a feeling.

No. The SB didn't want UTEP. If the Belt didn't want UNT they wouldn't have called us. We didn't reach out to the Sun Belt.

Don't worry, we never entertained the thought of moving back to the Sun Belt. The MWC had our full attention until the AAC shocked us with the "Texas 3" invitation.

I know for a fact that UNT was only a plan C and lower option for the SBC. If the schools that joined were available and willing UNT was out. I have no doubt unt was doing the same but neither side “wanted” the other.

I've noticed over the years, that many UNT fans here seem to think that the world revolves around their school. Why they act that way, I can't figure out.

Fact is... UNT was not a first option for the SBC, and the SBC was not desired by UNT.

First... there have never been many UNT fans around here. Even when UNT was in the Sun Belt, there were only a handful of us UNT posters on y'alls board. Personally, I rarely post anything over there. Maybe two or three posts over the last decade.

Second... I never said we were the Belt's first option. I said the Belt reached out to us again and we weren't interested. That's just the facts. So I have no idea what you're trying to sell here on the C-USA board.

As for your opinion of UNT's fans, you sound butt-hurt. We just follow our programs and enjoy talking sports like everyone else. If we have something to cheer about, we celebrate. If we have something to gripe about, we complain. That's pretty standard for every fan base. I have no opinion of Troy. I don't waste my time thinking about the programs we played back in our Sun Belt days. You should move on too.

What would I be butt-hurt about?

You literally said "the Sun Belt wanted us to come back"... and now you're saying the SBC simply reached out to UNT. There is a difference between "reaching out" to gauge the landscape, versus saying "THE SUN BELT WANTED US BACK, AND WE SAID NoPe."

Huge difference.

(02-14-2022 07:33 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 07:24 AM)Murray007 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm sure ODU, USM, and Marshall will pay something for leaving early. However, having this go to court will be expensive and likely unfruitful for CUSA. What's the best case scenario for CUSA leadership? Probably an exit fee of the cost of a school's share of the media deal and a little extra? That could of been negotiated in good faith over the past few months and now there will be bad blood spilled in the media and in the legal system.

Note: Not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV either.

CUSA was a good home for ODU. I hope all the remaining schools do well (including the AAC6), and I'm sure we'll play some of you all OOC.

If the SB3 are order by a judge to pay, then I would assume the SB3 will be paying all legal fees. CUSA would come out with no cost (or little). Highly unlikely a judge would rule the CUSA has to pay the SB3 fees. CUSA has less risk than the SB3.

In the end a settlement will be reached but in the meantime its just a bunch of ******** trying to out ******* each other.

First off, to Murray, no, the best case scenario for CUSA leadership (which is a lock per Twon) is the 3 schools end up staying through ‘22-‘23. Why the same people who all agree they’ll be better off without us want so badly to keep us around another year, who knows, but it is what it is because reasons.

From the 3 schools’ perspective re: risk, that’s the only truly bad outcome. They’re clearly already willing to pay to leave, and I don’t care if you hold the proceedings inside the conference room at CUSA HQ, they’re not gonna be told to fork over eleventy billion dollars in damages to a league that only pays out around $1.5 million/year.

Honestly, all the 3 schools really need to get out of any court action is the opportunity to argue about it for a couple months while they ease on down the road.

(02-13-2022 10:09 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 07:58 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 05:53 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 05:44 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 05:02 PM)chiefsfan Wrote: [ -> ]Gill talked to the entire CUSA West sans UTEP from what I understand. It never took off because everyone with a pulse knew there would not be enough support from either side to make it happen. Tech didn't join in until real late though, after the AAC schools had left.

The SBC was at the time considering whether or not to expand to 12, 14, or 16 teams, and also looking at who the best available teams were. We talked to just about every possible option under the sun, even schools that we knew the votes would be hard to get.

So... the SBC didn't necessarily "want UNT back".

I had a feeling.

No. The SB didn't want UTEP. If the Belt didn't want UNT they wouldn't have called us. We didn't reach out to the Sun Belt.

Don't worry, we never entertained the thought of moving back to the Sun Belt. The MWC had our full attention until the AAC shocked us with the "Texas 3" invitation.

I know for a fact that UNT was only a plan C and lower option for the SBC. If the schools that joined were available and willing UNT was out. I have no doubt unt was doing the same but neither side “wanted” the other.

I've noticed over the years, that many UNT fans here seem to think that the world revolves around their school. Why they act that way, I can't figure out.

Fact is... UNT was not a first option for the SBC, and the SBC was not desired by UNT.

its a weird superiority complex for sure. Officials on all sides had to make several contingencies based on multiple variables. Everyone was talking to everyone for the most part. Hell, UNT was AACs plan C (or lower), but it worked out for them.

(02-12-2022 06:33 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-12-2022 06:17 PM)gdunn Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-12-2022 06:11 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-12-2022 05:57 PM)gdunn Wrote: [ -> ]If UNT could head over to the AAC next season would you feel the same?

Ha! I actually made a joke about doing that over on the AAC board.

The ability to play a season in the AAC against Houston, Cincinnati, & UCF is a different situation from you three joining a SB that isn't losing anyone. But even so, I wouldn't want to bring further pain to our C-USA, so I'm going to try and enjoy what time we have left. I always liked C-USA West.

No it’s not. You say that but it’s not. If the AAC said hey we have room if you can come you know full well you’d be hooping and hollering to go.

The leadership at UNT probably would, if they could secure an exit. I think the problem is that none of the SB3 secured an exit.

Me personally? I'd stay for at least one more season in C-USA. Like I said, I like C-USA West.

Hard to secure an exit when the inept conference leadership refuses to even talk to you. If we can all agree on anything, surely its that Judy is a complete failure as a conference leader.

(02-14-2022 08:34 AM)HarborPointe Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 07:33 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 07:24 AM)Murray007 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm sure ODU, USM, and Marshall will pay something for leaving early. However, having this go to court will be expensive and likely unfruitful for CUSA. What's the best case scenario for CUSA leadership? Probably an exit fee of the cost of a school's share of the media deal and a little extra? That could of been negotiated in good faith over the past few months and now there will be bad blood spilled in the media and in the legal system.

Note: Not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV either.

CUSA was a good home for ODU. I hope all the remaining schools do well (including the AAC6), and I'm sure we'll play some of you all OOC.

If the SB3 are order by a judge to pay, then I would assume the SB3 will be paying all legal fees. CUSA would come out with no cost (or little). Highly unlikely a judge would rule the CUSA has to pay the SB3 fees. CUSA has less risk than the SB3.

In the end a settlement will be reached but in the meantime its just a bunch of ******** trying to out ******* each other.

First off, to Murray, no, the best case scenario for CUSA leadership (which is a lock per Twon) is the 3 schools end up staying through ‘22-‘23. Why the same people who all agree they’ll be better off without us want so badly to keep us around another year, who knows, but it is what it is because reasons.

From the 3 schools’ perspective re: risk, that’s the only truly bad outcome. They’re clearly already willing to pay to leave, and I don’t care if you hold the proceedings inside the conference room at CUSA HQ, they’re not gonna be told to fork over eleventy billion dollars in damages to a league that only pays out around $1.5 million/year.

Honestly, all the 3 schools really need to get out of any court action is the opportunity to argue about it for a couple months while they ease on down the road.

I suppose you're correct, but it could be a PR nightmare for CUSA if they forced the SBC3 to stay. Imagine having such horrific leadership that almost no effort was made to make the league better, but that same leadership will fight tooth and nail to retain departing members once they have asked to leave.

I sincerely hope the remaining/incoming CUSA schools do some serious evaluation of the current conference leadership.

I'm just ready for USM to pay the hundreds of dollars it will owe CUSA to leave early so some posters can get finally stop losing sleep.

(02-14-2022 10:38 AM)Murray007 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 08:34 AM)HarborPointe Wrote: [ -> ]First off, to Murray, no, the best case scenario for CUSA leadership (which is a lock per Twon) is the 3 schools end up staying through ‘22-‘23. Why the same people who all agree they’ll be better off without us want so badly to keep us around another year, who knows, but it is what it is because reasons.

From the 3 schools’ perspective re: risk, that’s the only truly bad outcome. They’re clearly already willing to pay to leave, and I don’t care if you hold the proceedings inside the conference room at CUSA HQ, they’re not gonna be told to fork over eleventy billion dollars in damages to a league that only pays out around $1.5 million/year.

Honestly, all the 3 schools really need to get out of any court action is the opportunity to argue about it for a couple months while they ease on down the road.

I suppose you're correct, but it could be a PR nightmare for CUSA if they forced the SBC3 to stay. Imagine having such horrific leadership that almost no effort was made to make the league better, but that same leadership will fight tooth and nail to retain departing members once they have asked to leave.

I sincerely hope the remaining/incoming CUSA schools do some serious evaluation of the current conference leadership.

That same leadership negotiated the worst media contracts in FBS, just had 9 out of 14 schools walk out with 2 more coming close, and responded by adding a school with a 12,000-seat stadium and asking Tarleton State if they were ready to move up. They’re lonnnnnnnnng past being worried about their image.

(02-14-2022 08:34 AM)HarborPointe Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 07:33 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 07:24 AM)Murray007 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm sure ODU, USM, and Marshall will pay something for leaving early. However, having this go to court will be expensive and likely unfruitful for CUSA. What's the best case scenario for CUSA leadership? Probably an exit fee of the cost of a school's share of the media deal and a little extra? That could of been negotiated in good faith over the past few months and now there will be bad blood spilled in the media and in the legal system.

Note: Not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV either.

CUSA was a good home for ODU. I hope all the remaining schools do well (including the AAC6), and I'm sure we'll play some of you all OOC.

If the SB3 are order by a judge to pay, then I would assume the SB3 will be paying all legal fees. CUSA would come out with no cost (or little). Highly unlikely a judge would rule the CUSA has to pay the SB3 fees. CUSA has less risk than the SB3.

In the end a settlement will be reached but in the meantime its just a bunch of ******** trying to out ******* each other.

First off, to Murray, no, the best case scenario for CUSA leadership (which is a lock per Twon) is the 3 schools end up staying through ‘22-‘23. Why the same people who all agree they’ll be better off without us want so badly to keep us around another year, who knows, but it is what it is because reasons.

From the 3 schools’ perspective re: risk, that’s the only truly bad outcome. They’re clearly already willing to pay to leave, and I don’t care if you hold the proceedings inside the conference room at CUSA HQ, they’re not gonna be told to fork over eleventy billion dollars in damages to a league that only pays out around $1.5 million/year.

Honestly, all the 3 schools really need to get out of any court action is the opportunity to argue about it for a couple months while they ease on down the road.

I dont believe the best case is for the SB3 to stay. The best case is to reach an agreement which allows them to move on. The bitterness will only grow if forced to stay and neither CUSA nor the SB3 will look good in the end.

(02-14-2022 11:50 AM)HarborPointe Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 10:38 AM)Murray007 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 08:34 AM)HarborPointe Wrote: [ -> ]First off, to Murray, no, the best case scenario for CUSA leadership (which is a lock per Twon) is the 3 schools end up staying through ‘22-‘23. Why the same people who all agree they’ll be better off without us want so badly to keep us around another year, who knows, but it is what it is because reasons.

From the 3 schools’ perspective re: risk, that’s the only truly bad outcome. They’re clearly already willing to pay to leave, and I don’t care if you hold the proceedings inside the conference room at CUSA HQ, they’re not gonna be told to fork over eleventy billion dollars in damages to a league that only pays out around $1.5 million/year.

Honestly, all the 3 schools really need to get out of any court action is the opportunity to argue about it for a couple months while they ease on down the road.

I suppose you're correct, but it could be a PR nightmare for CUSA if they forced the SBC3 to stay. Imagine having such horrific leadership that almost no effort was made to make the league better, but that same leadership will fight tooth and nail to retain departing members once they have asked to leave.

I sincerely hope the remaining/incoming CUSA schools do some serious evaluation of the current conference leadership.

That same leadership negotiated the worst media contracts in FBS, just had 11 out of 14 schools walk out with 2 more coming close, and responded by adding a school with a 12,000-seat stadium and asking Tarleton State if they were ready to move up. They’re lonnnnnnnnng past being worried about their image.

CUSA right now:

Is the working relationship between C-USA and the Sun Belt going to deteriorate beyond repair? There is a lot of bad blood obviously spilling over and it could stem back from 2012/13 or is that just message board posters?

(02-14-2022 12:17 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote: [ -> ]Is the working relationship between C-USA and the Sun Belt going to deteriorate beyond repair? There is a lot of bad blood obviously spilling over and it could stem back from 2012/13 or is that just message board posters?

It's more so message board posters.

Not to say there might not be some school administrations that aren't big fans of other school administrations, but message boards are much more volatile.

I mean, considering La Tech was one step away from being given an SBC invitation... and WKU was one step away if JMU hadn't accepted... I'd say the school admins have much cooler heads.

Many AD's and presidents also know each other and have a network. It doesn't do them any favors to treat the others like crap.

(02-13-2022 11:29 PM)benny_t Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 10:17 PM)Twon Wrote: [ -> ]The SB3 announced their early departure 3 days before the release of the football schedules. That is unprecedented as far as I can remember

Did you not see in the 3 letters the schools sent out that we notified CUSA offices in December that we planned to leave early. Cusa officials ghosted the 3 schools and then sent out schedules anyway.

Big difference - WVU filed suit 10 months before so they were in contact with the Big East before then.

The SB3 issued a statement 3 days before the schedule release, if they knew that CUSA was committed to following the agreed upon bylaws they should have acted in December.

Anyway this is viewed it favors CUSA. I’m actually surprised how well CUSA handled this situation.

CUSA played the long game in this situation
The SB3 will not be able show any cause to move early, They have been allowed to compete in all sports, All the conference tournaments are still intact (Southern Miss).

And The abrupt move 3 days before the schedule release will show duress to the other 11 conference members.

I think the SB3 have really miscalculated this one and will paid dearly even more so than WVU

(02-14-2022 01:03 PM)Twon Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 11:29 PM)benny_t Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-13-2022 10:17 PM)Twon Wrote: [ -> ]The SB3 announced their early departure 3 days before the release of the football schedules. That is unprecedented as far as I can remember

Did you not see in the 3 letters the schools sent out that we notified CUSA offices in December that we planned to leave early. Cusa officials ghosted the 3 schools and then sent out schedules anyway.

Big difference - WVU filed suit 10 months before so they were in contact with the Big East before then.

The SB3 issued a statement 3 days before the schedule release, if they knew that CUSA was committed to following the agreed upon bylaws they should have acted in December.

Anyway this is viewed it favors CUSA. I’m actually surprised how well CUSA handled this situation.

CUSA played the long game in this situation
The SB3 will not be able show any cause to move early, They have been allowed to compete in all sports, All the conference tournaments are still intact (Southern Miss).

And The abrupt move 3 days before the schedule release will show duress to the other 11 conference members.

I think the SB3 have really miscalculated this one and will paid dearly even more so than WVU

December to February 11th is 3 days?

Holy cow!

Frisco was notified in December and did nothing.

Shouldn't you be on Twitter making up random things like how NDSU didn't turn down CUSA?

(02-14-2022 11:16 AM)Big Dub Wrote: [ -> ]I'm just ready for USM to pay the hundreds of dollars it will owe CUSA to leave early so some posters can get finally stop losing sleep.

Given your recent results in football and MBB, a few hundred dollars is all USM is worth.



J/K Nothing but respect for USM. I just couldn't resist the dig. Sorry.

(02-14-2022 11:50 AM)HarborPointe Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 10:38 AM)Murray007 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 08:34 AM)HarborPointe Wrote: [ -> ]First off, to Murray, no, the best case scenario for CUSA leadership (which is a lock per Twon) is the 3 schools end up staying through ‘22-‘23. Why the same people who all agree they’ll be better off without us want so badly to keep us around another year, who knows, but it is what it is because reasons.

From the 3 schools’ perspective re: risk, that’s the only truly bad outcome. They’re clearly already willing to pay to leave, and I don’t care if you hold the proceedings inside the conference room at CUSA HQ, they’re not gonna be told to fork over eleventy billion dollars in damages to a league that only pays out around $1.5 million/year.

Honestly, all the 3 schools really need to get out of any court action is the opportunity to argue about it for a couple months while they ease on down the road.

I suppose you're correct, but it could be a PR nightmare for CUSA if they forced the SBC3 to stay. Imagine having such horrific leadership that almost no effort was made to make the league better, but that same leadership will fight tooth and nail to retain departing members once they have asked to leave.

I sincerely hope the remaining/incoming CUSA schools do some serious evaluation of the current conference leadership.

That same leadership negotiated the worst media contracts in FBS, just had 11 out of 14 schools walk out with 2 more coming close, and responded by adding a school with a 12,000-seat stadium and asking Tarleton State if they were ready to move up. They’re lonnnnnnnnng past being worried about their image.

9/14 with two more close (for what that's worth).

(02-14-2022 11:53 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote: [ -> ]I dont believe the best case is for the SB3 to stay. The best case is to reach an agreement which allows them to move on. The bitterness will only grow if forced to stay and neither CUSA nor the SB3 will look good in the end.

I don't see that as a problem.

It'd be better if they could make them stay (but I don't think they can).

(02-14-2022 01:11 PM)inutech Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 11:53 AM)Gemofthehills Wrote: [ -> ]I dont believe the best case is for the SB3 to stay. The best case is to reach an agreement which allows them to move on. The bitterness will only grow if forced to stay and neither CUSA nor the SB3 will look good in the end.

I don't see that as a problem.

It'd be better if they could make them stay (but I don't think they can).

From what others have said, I think the conference can file an injunction to prevent the move until '23.

But what will that do? It's either you lose 3 this year and 6 next year or you lose 9 at one time. I know it sucks for Tech losing a close rival.

(02-14-2022 12:17 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote: [ -> ]Is the working relationship between C-USA and the Sun Belt going to deteriorate beyond repair? There is a lot of bad blood obviously spilling over and it could stem back from 2012/13 or is that just message board posters?

(02-14-2022 12:38 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-14-2022 12:17 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote: [ -> ]Is the working relationship between C-USA and the Sun Belt going to deteriorate beyond repair? There is a lot of bad blood obviously spilling over and it could stem back from 2012/13 or is that just message board posters?

It's more so message board posters.

Not to say there might not be some school administrations that aren't big fans of other school administrations, but message boards are much more volatile.

I mean, considering La Tech was one step away from being given an SBC invitation... and WKU was one step away if JMU hadn't accepted... I'd say the school admins have much cooler heads.

Many AD's and presidents also know each other and have a network. It doesn't do them any favors to treat the others like crap.

Yeah, all these schools are still going to work together. SBC schools will want OOC games with the new CUSA schools and the departing AAC schools. We're all still going to play each other in other sports for sure (just like for all the supposed hurt feelings between Tech and the UL-twins we still play all the time).

Message boards aren't real life (which is why I don't worry about "all this distraction" or "avoiding bad blood" as reasons to "just want the whole thing over with").