(07-27-2017 10:41 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  They felt aligning with big public schools made more sense.

To read it this way, they should have gone west to the WAC, then. You had sizable flagship institutions that at least resembled what it lost with Texas, A&M, and Tech, even though UNM and Utah were the only schools with an enrollment like the other SWC public members (and those in the Big XII it couldn't reach). Colorado State, Wyoming, Hawaii...even if smaller, kind of a no-brainer. Did UH leadership think they should have aligned with UL, Cincy, and Memphis-types rather than the flagships? Was it just being closer to eastern schools?

I'd like to know what might have happened if Houston DID go west with the other SWC schools and "got a taste" of the WAC. Would they have been included with the other front-range members to split off for the MWC? Where could that have taken them?

(07-27-2017 12:31 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 10:41 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  They felt aligning with big public schools made more sense.

To read it this way, they should have gone west to the WAC, then. You had sizable flagship institutions that at least resembled what it lost with Texas, A&M, and Tech, even though UNM and Utah were the only schools with an enrollment like the other SWC public members (and those in the Big XII it couldn't reach). Colorado State, Wyoming, Hawaii...even if smaller, kind of a no-brainer. Did UH leadership think they should have aligned with UL, Cincy, and Memphis-types rather than the flagships? Was it just being closer to eastern schools?

I'd like to know what might have happened if Houston DID go west with the other SWC schools and "got a taste" of the WAC. Would they have been included with the other front-range members to split off for the MWC? Where could that have taken them?

Going to the WAC with the other SWC schools was my second choice after rebuilding the SWC. I preferred it to going alone to CUSA, which was too basketball-centric in my view. While I like basketball, Im a football first guy. The mid-1990's WAC was a way better football conference than CUSA. I think the move was about a preference to lean east and, despite being far more spread out than the SWC---CUSA likley had far lower travel costs for UH than the WAC. To be fair, the early CUSA football schools were largely big public schools in high population centers---that was attractive to TV at the time.

(07-27-2017 12:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 12:31 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 10:41 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  They felt aligning with big public schools made more sense.

To read it this way, they should have gone west to the WAC, then. You had sizable flagship institutions that at least resembled what it lost with Texas, A&M, and Tech, even though UNM and Utah were the only schools with an enrollment like the other SWC public members (and those in the Big XII it couldn't reach). Colorado State, Wyoming, Hawaii...even if smaller, kind of a no-brainer. Did UH leadership think they should have aligned with UL, Cincy, and Memphis-types rather than the flagships? Was it just being closer to eastern schools?

I'd like to know what might have happened if Houston DID go west with the other SWC schools and "got a taste" of the WAC. Would they have been included with the other front-range members to split off for the MWC? Where could that have taken them?

Going to the WAC with the other SWC schools was my second choice after rebuilding the SWC. I preferred it to going alone to CUSA, which was too basketball-centric in my view. While I like basketball, Im a football first guy. The mid-1990's WAC was a way better football conference than CUSA. I think the move was about a preference to lean east and, despite being far more spread out than the SWC---CUSA likley had far lower travel costs for UH than the WAC. To be fair, the early CUSA football schools were largely big public schools in high population centers---that was attractive to TV at the time.

it would seem that C-USA was to be a southern equivalent of the Big East -- basketball Centric conference in metropolitan areas that also played football. Or it was just the Metro with football.

Strategically it was probably better than leaning west toward the WAC.

(07-27-2017 10:07 AM)bullet Wrote:  People forget that, except for FSU, the WAC was viewed as pretty similar to the ACC in football. It wasn't a HUGE step down to the WAC.

Clearly, CUSA could have been replaced by the SWC with Rice, TCU and SMU, but UH thought they were better than the rest and didn't want any part of them. That may have been a strategic mistake on their part. Probably couldn't peel off New Mexico, Utah and BYU, so it would have just been CUSA + the 3 SWCers.

It was both snobbery and geography. Houston likes playing teams in the central and eastern time zones. They also fit better in C-USA with large urban schools that emphasized basketball. Why UH's AD didn't place more emphasis on basketball, I don't know as that was the one sport it had national relevance and cache in. They'd rather try and compete with Texas and A&M in football which is borderline impossible.

(07-27-2017 12:31 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 10:41 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  They felt aligning with big public schools made more sense.

To read it this way, they should have gone west to the WAC, then. You had sizable flagship institutions that at least resembled what it lost with Texas, A&M, and Tech, even though UNM and Utah were the only schools with an enrollment like the other SWC public members (and those in the Big XII it couldn't reach). Colorado State, Wyoming, Hawaii...even if smaller, kind of a no-brainer. Did UH leadership think they should have aligned with UL, Cincy, and Memphis-types rather than the flagships? Was it just being closer to eastern schools?

I'd like to know what might have happened if Houston DID go west with the other SWC schools and "got a taste" of the WAC. Would they have been included with the other front-range members to split off for the MWC? Where could that have taken them?

Probably not. Houston was playing in a stadium that many high schools would laugh at. Plus, a major reason those schools broke away was to get away from the central time zone schools and Hawai'i. So Houston made the right choice.

(07-27-2017 06:14 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 03:14 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 01:55 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 12:29 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  there was nothing to rebuild the SWC around back when it broke up

there was really no incentive to draw teams away from the conferences they were in to another conference especially one out of their region

the CUSA formed because there were teams in other conferences looking to break away from their dead weight, but they were not interested in a conference with a dying/dead name and a name that reflected a region they were not located in

there was not going to be any additional money for a conference made up of the same teams that were in the CUSA with the only exception being it was named the SWC

and the teams that did not go to the CUSA decided they had a better situation in the WAC Vs trying to start new with a dying/dead name or starting in the CUSA

Says the proven UH hater.

Every one of those 6 schools were looking for new opportunities in 1995.

Louisville having a recent and storied history with UH (not to mention being independent in 1995) would have come into the fold. Its not a big stretch to see a team in Louisville in what would have been a Texas heavy conference.

Cincinnati was also independent in 1995 so its an easy transition into any conference.

Memphis also an independent in 1995 looking for a home.

Tulane.... guess what an independent in 1995 as well.

Tulsa? you guessed it an independent......

The problem is you're looking at this from a 2017 POV and not from the time that these moves would have taken place.

The effects of NCAA vs. BOR OU (the decentralization of CFB TV deals) were hypothetical in 1995 and you can't apply the world we live in today to the early 90's.

At that time Louisville and TCU didn't and wouldn't get a sniff of a P5 conference. TCU was literally left behind.

While a reconstituted SWC would have lost a significant amount of cache as damaged as the corpse of the SWC was it would have provided a better landing spot than the made from scratch CUSA that every one of those teams went to.

One that these "upstarts" (at the time and from a power league perspective) would have cashed in on the name recognition (like Louisville and Cincinnati did with the dying but not dead Big East) to build their brand.

A conference "spread" from DFW to Cincinnati... Houston to Louisville... Memphis to Tulsa isn't a beast that couldn't be managed. It's actually pretty tight especially compared to CUSA 1.0 that was spread from Chicago to Tampa and from Charlotte to Houston.

^^^^ says a noted person that lacks reality

the CUSA was formed in 1995 and Louisville, Memphis, Cincy and Tulane were in the CUSA

it was not until 1996 that dem coogs doh, TCU, SMU and Rice became available

and I do not need to judge what happened based on a 2017 perspective (as you are actually doing not me)

I can judge based on what ACTUALLY happened

dem coogs doh totally sucked and had sucked for a LONG time and had 12 wins over the prior 5 seasons to prove it and only three winning seasons in the last dozen or so

SMU was still totally sucking from the death penalty

TCU had not had a winning season on forever and Rice looked like they were totally giving up (just like dem coogs doh)

so as I correctly stated there was NOTHING attractive about any other team or group of teams leaving their current situation to join into a conference with a dying/dead name and 4 programs that were content to ride the pine and contribute NOTHING other than easy wins for other members to a conference

it does not matter what happened prior to 1995 or what all these teams that you think would have joined the SWC were doing because the SWC was not going to add those teams

and in 1995 all these teams you think were dying to join the SWC had already formed a new conference and liked that conference better than leaving it and trying to join 4 programs that were in "we barely exist" mode in a conference with the stench of death

so as I stated none of the teams you listed were going to leave the conference they WERE ALREADY IN to join the likes of a terrible dem coogs doh, a terrible SMU, a terrible TCU and a terrible Rice in a conference with the label DEAD on it

and I know that to be a fact because I know that did not happen

Oh please, Houston was coming off probation. They kicked off C-USA with a bang by winning it, including going through a legit top 25 team.

Even with all you said, the SWC still carried weight, as much as the Big East five years ago. Maybe, just maybe they get included in the original BCS. Tulane's name still carried weight and Louisville, Cincinnati and Memphis were basketball powers. BYU wanted IN the club. I think the conference gets shoed aside like the old WAC but it's possible they get in based on seniority, granted, their tie-in bowl was not included in the BCS.

yea "kicked it off with a bang"

by winning the conference with a 7-5 record.......the dem coogs doh standards showing up again.....WHAT AN ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!!

and yea you beat a "legit top 25 team"

what "legit top 25 team" was that the one that lost their final 2 games and ended the season outside the top 25

or all the others you lost to

the wins for that "bang" of a 7 win kick off to the years in the CUSA consisted of Sam Houston, 4-7 Pitt, 5-7 Louisiana, 4-7 Memphis, 2-9 Tulane, 8-3 USM (legit top 25 doh except at the end of the season when the ranking actually matters) and 5-6 Louisville

so you beat a D1-AA team, 5 teams with a losing record and one team with a winning record to get that "bang" of a kick off to the CUSA years

but yea if only the conference had been called the SWC that season would have been "legit"

oh yea and then in typical dem coogs doh fashion after that "bang" of a kick off 7-5 season with wins against terrible teams you had 6 losing seasons out of the next nine with one season being 6-6 and the other two 7-4 and 7-6

hard to get more legit than that!

a 60% losing season ratio out of a decade to start off in the conference and a 70% ratio of not having a winning season in a decade

but if only the CUSA had been called the SWC it all would have been more respected

and what "weight" did Tulane carry coming into the CUSA......the "weight" of totally sucking because they had gone 15 straight seasons from 1981 to 1996 without having a single winning season

the one thing you are 100% correct on is the SWC carried the same weight as the BE did 5 years ago.....the weight of being a conference that is dead and gone and that was never to return with a couple of hangers on left over in the new conference formed from the ashes clinging to the leaky inner tube and telling everyone about basketball and da season doh and what would have happened IF ONLY!!!!!! or what will happen IF ONLY!!!!!!!

What does "doh" mean in this context?

(07-27-2017 02:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  What does "doh" mean in this context?

This fool is just trying to get under our skin. It's downright sad how much he seeks out anything related to UH (on any board local media included) to bash our school and anything tangentially related to us.

He has real trouble getting past his ire and making a clear and concise point.

See his post just before yours for an example of his difficulty to express his point.

(07-27-2017 02:42 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 02:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  What does "doh" mean in this context?

This fool is just trying to get under our skin. It's downright sad how much he seeks out anything related to UH (on any board local media included) to bash our school and anything tangentially related to us.

He has real trouble getting past his ire and making a clear and concise point.

See his post just before yours for an example of his difficulty to express his point.

Ah, OK. Don't feed the troll!

(07-27-2017 03:18 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 02:42 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 02:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  What does "doh" mean in this context?

This fool is just trying to get under our skin. It's downright sad how much he seeks out anything related to UH (on any board local media included) to bash our school and anything tangentially related to us.

He has real trouble getting past his ire and making a clear and concise point.

See his post just before yours for an example of his difficulty to express his point.

Ah, OK. Don't feed the troll!

I know but if you think I am kidding click on his profile and see what he's reading right now.

http://csnbbs.com/user-35138.html

http://csnbbs.com/thread-822794.html

@ToddRodge

Houston was 7-5 that year with losses to North Carolina (top ten ranked), USC, @LSU (after blowing a 20 point lead) and Syracuse with Donovan McNabb, plus an upset to Cincinnati. They also produced an NFL player or two. Southern Miss ended up outside the top 25 because they lost a close one to Houston and then played Florida State, who was the premiere power of that time aside from Nebraska. Beat Houston and they finish 9-2 and likely in the top 25. Their only other loss was to Alabama, also ranked.

It all just came crashing down, between probation, bad coaching hires and being left out of the Big 12. But things turned up for the better.

As for Tulane, they were still a major independent, having been in the SEC a generation before. I was around at that time and yes, their name still mattered. Like Rice, they were considered another Northwestern, Stanford or Duke. Stop looking at it through 2010's glasses.

Here's another "Left Behind": Rutgers

Teams that Left Rutgers Behind (Conference at the time / Conference school left for / Present conference)

2004
Miami-FL (Big East / ACC / ACC)
Virginia Tech (Big East / ACC / ACC)

2005
Boston College (Big East / ACC / ACC)
Temple (Big East / FBS Ind / American) -- it was really the conference that left Temple behind

2012
West Virginia (Big East / Big 12 / Big 12)

2013
Pittsburgh (Big East / ACC / ACC)
Syracuse (Big East / ACC / ACC)

Teams Rutgers Left Behind (Conference at the time / Present conference)

2014 (Rutgers left American for Big Ten)
Central Florida (American / American)
Cincinnati (American / American)
Connecticut (American / American)
Houston (American / American)
Memphis (American / American)
SMU (American / American)
South Florida (American / American)
Temple (American / American)

(07-27-2017 03:46 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Here's another "Left Behind": Rutgers

Teams that Left Rutgers Behind (Conference at the time / Conference school left for / Present conference)

2004
Miami-FL (Big East / ACC / ACC)
Virginia Tech (Big East / ACC / ACC)

2005
Boston College (Big East / ACC / ACC)
Temple (Big East / FBS Ind / American) -- it was really the conference that left Temple behind

2012
West Virginia (Big East / Big 12 / Big 12)

2013
Pittsburgh (Big East / ACC / ACC)
Syracuse (Big East / ACC / ACC)

Teams Rutgers Left Behind (Conference at the time / Present conference)

2014 (Rutgers left American for Big Ten)
Central Florida (American / American)
Cincinnati (American / American)
Connecticut (American / American)
Houston (American / American)
Memphis (American / American)
SMU (American / American)
South Florida (American / American)
Temple (American / American)

You left a few out on Temple/2005
1. Indy 05-06
2. MAC-07-11
3. Big East 2102
4. AAC 13-present

(07-27-2017 03:27 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 03:18 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 02:42 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 02:22 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  What does "doh" mean in this context?

This fool is just trying to get under our skin. It's downright sad how much he seeks out anything related to UH (on any board local media included) to bash our school and anything tangentially related to us.

He has real trouble getting past his ire and making a clear and concise point.

See his post just before yours for an example of his difficulty to express his point.

Ah, OK. Don't feed the troll!

I know but if you think I am kidding click on his profile and see what he's reading right now.

http://csnbbs.com/user-35138.html

http://csnbbs.com/thread-822794.html

I really don't understand the mindset of certain Texas, Texas Tech and Texas A&M fans who exist on internet message boards to troll UH. There are isolated examples of fans of P5 schools who frequently troll an in-state G5 program (or shall I say, feel the need to "put us in our place") but nothing to the degree that I see from those fans.

(07-27-2017 02:18 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 06:14 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 03:14 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 01:55 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 12:29 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  there was nothing to rebuild the SWC around back when it broke up

there was really no incentive to draw teams away from the conferences they were in to another conference especially one out of their region

the CUSA formed because there were teams in other conferences looking to break away from their dead weight, but they were not interested in a conference with a dying/dead name and a name that reflected a region they were not located in

there was not going to be any additional money for a conference made up of the same teams that were in the CUSA with the only exception being it was named the SWC

and the teams that did not go to the CUSA decided they had a better situation in the WAC Vs trying to start new with a dying/dead name or starting in the CUSA

Says the proven UH hater.

Every one of those 6 schools were looking for new opportunities in 1995.

Louisville having a recent and storied history with UH (not to mention being independent in 1995) would have come into the fold. Its not a big stretch to see a team in Louisville in what would have been a Texas heavy conference.

Cincinnati was also independent in 1995 so its an easy transition into any conference.

Memphis also an independent in 1995 looking for a home.

Tulane.... guess what an independent in 1995 as well.

Tulsa? you guessed it an independent......

The problem is you're looking at this from a 2017 POV and not from the time that these moves would have taken place.

The effects of NCAA vs. BOR OU (the decentralization of CFB TV deals) were hypothetical in 1995 and you can't apply the world we live in today to the early 90's.

At that time Louisville and TCU didn't and wouldn't get a sniff of a P5 conference. TCU was literally left behind.

While a reconstituted SWC would have lost a significant amount of cache as damaged as the corpse of the SWC was it would have provided a better landing spot than the made from scratch CUSA that every one of those teams went to.

One that these "upstarts" (at the time and from a power league perspective) would have cashed in on the name recognition (like Louisville and Cincinnati did with the dying but not dead Big East) to build their brand.

A conference "spread" from DFW to Cincinnati... Houston to Louisville... Memphis to Tulsa isn't a beast that couldn't be managed. It's actually pretty tight especially compared to CUSA 1.0 that was spread from Chicago to Tampa and from Charlotte to Houston.

^^^^ says a noted person that lacks reality

the CUSA was formed in 1995 and Louisville, Memphis, Cincy and Tulane were in the CUSA

it was not until 1996 that dem coogs doh, TCU, SMU and Rice became available

and I do not need to judge what happened based on a 2017 perspective (as you are actually doing not me)

I can judge based on what ACTUALLY happened

dem coogs doh totally sucked and had sucked for a LONG time and had 12 wins over the prior 5 seasons to prove it and only three winning seasons in the last dozen or so

SMU was still totally sucking from the death penalty

TCU had not had a winning season on forever and Rice looked like they were totally giving up (just like dem coogs doh)

so as I correctly stated there was NOTHING attractive about any other team or group of teams leaving their current situation to join into a conference with a dying/dead name and 4 programs that were content to ride the pine and contribute NOTHING other than easy wins for other members to a conference

it does not matter what happened prior to 1995 or what all these teams that you think would have joined the SWC were doing because the SWC was not going to add those teams

and in 1995 all these teams you think were dying to join the SWC had already formed a new conference and liked that conference better than leaving it and trying to join 4 programs that were in "we barely exist" mode in a conference with the stench of death

so as I stated none of the teams you listed were going to leave the conference they WERE ALREADY IN to join the likes of a terrible dem coogs doh, a terrible SMU, a terrible TCU and a terrible Rice in a conference with the label DEAD on it

and I know that to be a fact because I know that did not happen

Oh please, Houston was coming off probation. They kicked off C-USA with a bang by winning it, including going through a legit top 25 team.

Even with all you said, the SWC still carried weight, as much as the Big East five years ago. Maybe, just maybe they get included in the original BCS. Tulane's name still carried weight and Louisville, Cincinnati and Memphis were basketball powers. BYU wanted IN the club. I think the conference gets shoed aside like the old WAC but it's possible they get in based on seniority, granted, their tie-in bowl was not included in the BCS.

yea "kicked it off with a bang"

by winning the conference with a 7-5 record.......the dem coogs doh standards showing up again.....WHAT AN ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!!

and yea you beat a "legit top 25 team"

what "legit top 25 team" was that the one that lost their final 2 games and ended the season outside the top 25

or all the others you lost to

the wins for that "bang" of a 7 win kick off to the years in the CUSA consisted of Sam Houston, 4-7 Pitt, 5-7 Louisiana, 4-7 Memphis, 2-9 Tulane, 8-3 USM (legit top 25 doh except at the end of the season when the ranking actually matters) and 5-6 Louisville

so you beat a D1-AA team, 5 teams with a losing record and one team with a winning record to get that "bang" of a kick off to the CUSA years

but yea if only the conference had been called the SWC that season would have been "legit"

oh yea and then in typical dem coogs doh fashion after that "bang" of a kick off 7-5 season with wins against terrible teams you had 6 losing seasons out of the next nine with one season being 6-6 and the other two 7-4 and 7-6

hard to get more legit than that!

a 60% losing season ratio out of a decade to start off in the conference and a 70% ratio of not having a winning season in a decade

but if only the CUSA had been called the SWC it all would have been more respected

and what "weight" did Tulane carry coming into the CUSA......the "weight" of totally sucking because they had gone 15 straight seasons from 1981 to 1996 without having a single winning season

the one thing you are 100% correct on is the SWC carried the same weight as the BE did 5 years ago.....the weight of being a conference that is dead and gone and that was never to return with a couple of hangers on left over in the new conference formed from the ashes clinging to the leaky inner tube and telling everyone about basketball and da season doh and what would have happened IF ONLY!!!!!! or what will happen IF ONLY!!!!!!!

Nothing but a loud mouth Mean Green fan. lol...I cant believe a N Texas fan has the balls to dog ANYBODYS win loss record...No wonder you dont list your school.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-752483.html

(07-27-2017 03:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 02:18 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 06:14 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 03:14 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 01:55 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Says the proven UH hater.

Every one of those 6 schools were looking for new opportunities in 1995.

Louisville having a recent and storied history with UH (not to mention being independent in 1995) would have come into the fold. Its not a big stretch to see a team in Louisville in what would have been a Texas heavy conference.

Cincinnati was also independent in 1995 so its an easy transition into any conference.

Memphis also an independent in 1995 looking for a home.

Tulane.... guess what an independent in 1995 as well.

Tulsa? you guessed it an independent......

The problem is you're looking at this from a 2017 POV and not from the time that these moves would have taken place.

The effects of NCAA vs. BOR OU (the decentralization of CFB TV deals) were hypothetical in 1995 and you can't apply the world we live in today to the early 90's.

At that time Louisville and TCU didn't and wouldn't get a sniff of a P5 conference. TCU was literally left behind.

While a reconstituted SWC would have lost a significant amount of cache as damaged as the corpse of the SWC was it would have provided a better landing spot than the made from scratch CUSA that every one of those teams went to.

One that these "upstarts" (at the time and from a power league perspective) would have cashed in on the name recognition (like Louisville and Cincinnati did with the dying but not dead Big East) to build their brand.

A conference "spread" from DFW to Cincinnati... Houston to Louisville... Memphis to Tulsa isn't a beast that couldn't be managed. It's actually pretty tight especially compared to CUSA 1.0 that was spread from Chicago to Tampa and from Charlotte to Houston.

^^^^ says a noted person that lacks reality

the CUSA was formed in 1995 and Louisville, Memphis, Cincy and Tulane were in the CUSA

it was not until 1996 that dem coogs doh, TCU, SMU and Rice became available

and I do not need to judge what happened based on a 2017 perspective (as you are actually doing not me)

I can judge based on what ACTUALLY happened

dem coogs doh totally sucked and had sucked for a LONG time and had 12 wins over the prior 5 seasons to prove it and only three winning seasons in the last dozen or so

SMU was still totally sucking from the death penalty

TCU had not had a winning season on forever and Rice looked like they were totally giving up (just like dem coogs doh)

so as I correctly stated there was NOTHING attractive about any other team or group of teams leaving their current situation to join into a conference with a dying/dead name and 4 programs that were content to ride the pine and contribute NOTHING other than easy wins for other members to a conference

it does not matter what happened prior to 1995 or what all these teams that you think would have joined the SWC were doing because the SWC was not going to add those teams

and in 1995 all these teams you think were dying to join the SWC had already formed a new conference and liked that conference better than leaving it and trying to join 4 programs that were in "we barely exist" mode in a conference with the stench of death

so as I stated none of the teams you listed were going to leave the conference they WERE ALREADY IN to join the likes of a terrible dem coogs doh, a terrible SMU, a terrible TCU and a terrible Rice in a conference with the label DEAD on it

and I know that to be a fact because I know that did not happen

Oh please, Houston was coming off probation. They kicked off C-USA with a bang by winning it, including going through a legit top 25 team.

Even with all you said, the SWC still carried weight, as much as the Big East five years ago. Maybe, just maybe they get included in the original BCS. Tulane's name still carried weight and Louisville, Cincinnati and Memphis were basketball powers. BYU wanted IN the club. I think the conference gets shoed aside like the old WAC but it's possible they get in based on seniority, granted, their tie-in bowl was not included in the BCS.

yea "kicked it off with a bang"

by winning the conference with a 7-5 record.......the dem coogs doh standards showing up again.....WHAT AN ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!!

and yea you beat a "legit top 25 team"

what "legit top 25 team" was that the one that lost their final 2 games and ended the season outside the top 25

or all the others you lost to

the wins for that "bang" of a 7 win kick off to the years in the CUSA consisted of Sam Houston, 4-7 Pitt, 5-7 Louisiana, 4-7 Memphis, 2-9 Tulane, 8-3 USM (legit top 25 doh except at the end of the season when the ranking actually matters) and 5-6 Louisville

so you beat a D1-AA team, 5 teams with a losing record and one team with a winning record to get that "bang" of a kick off to the CUSA years

but yea if only the conference had been called the SWC that season would have been "legit"

oh yea and then in typical dem coogs doh fashion after that "bang" of a kick off 7-5 season with wins against terrible teams you had 6 losing seasons out of the next nine with one season being 6-6 and the other two 7-4 and 7-6

hard to get more legit than that!

a 60% losing season ratio out of a decade to start off in the conference and a 70% ratio of not having a winning season in a decade

but if only the CUSA had been called the SWC it all would have been more respected

and what "weight" did Tulane carry coming into the CUSA......the "weight" of totally sucking because they had gone 15 straight seasons from 1981 to 1996 without having a single winning season

the one thing you are 100% correct on is the SWC carried the same weight as the BE did 5 years ago.....the weight of being a conference that is dead and gone and that was never to return with a couple of hangers on left over in the new conference formed from the ashes clinging to the leaky inner tube and telling everyone about basketball and da season doh and what would have happened IF ONLY!!!!!! or what will happen IF ONLY!!!!!!!

A loud mouth racist and a Mean Green fan. lol...I cant believe a N Texas fan has the balls to dog ANYBODYS win loss record...No wonder you dont list your school.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-752483.html

you are not even intelligent enough to understand what you were reading there

north Texas state got throttled by a D1-AA team

but like a dem coogs doh fan you believe that a fan of a program would actually brag about playing a "nationally ranked" D1-AA program

sort of like bragging about winning a conference with a 7-5 record with only one win out of the 7 over a program that had a winning record......and trying to call that program a 'legit top 25 team" even though they finished the season unranked

(07-27-2017 04:13 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 03:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 02:18 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 06:14 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 03:14 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  ^^^^ says a noted person that lacks reality

the CUSA was formed in 1995 and Louisville, Memphis, Cincy and Tulane were in the CUSA

it was not until 1996 that dem coogs doh, TCU, SMU and Rice became available

and I do not need to judge what happened based on a 2017 perspective (as you are actually doing not me)

I can judge based on what ACTUALLY happened

dem coogs doh totally sucked and had sucked for a LONG time and had 12 wins over the prior 5 seasons to prove it and only three winning seasons in the last dozen or so

SMU was still totally sucking from the death penalty

TCU had not had a winning season on forever and Rice looked like they were totally giving up (just like dem coogs doh)

so as I correctly stated there was NOTHING attractive about any other team or group of teams leaving their current situation to join into a conference with a dying/dead name and 4 programs that were content to ride the pine and contribute NOTHING other than easy wins for other members to a conference

it does not matter what happened prior to 1995 or what all these teams that you think would have joined the SWC were doing because the SWC was not going to add those teams

and in 1995 all these teams you think were dying to join the SWC had already formed a new conference and liked that conference better than leaving it and trying to join 4 programs that were in "we barely exist" mode in a conference with the stench of death

so as I stated none of the teams you listed were going to leave the conference they WERE ALREADY IN to join the likes of a terrible dem coogs doh, a terrible SMU, a terrible TCU and a terrible Rice in a conference with the label DEAD on it

and I know that to be a fact because I know that did not happen

Oh please, Houston was coming off probation. They kicked off C-USA with a bang by winning it, including going through a legit top 25 team.

Even with all you said, the SWC still carried weight, as much as the Big East five years ago. Maybe, just maybe they get included in the original BCS. Tulane's name still carried weight and Louisville, Cincinnati and Memphis were basketball powers. BYU wanted IN the club. I think the conference gets shoed aside like the old WAC but it's possible they get in based on seniority, granted, their tie-in bowl was not included in the BCS.

yea "kicked it off with a bang"

by winning the conference with a 7-5 record.......the dem coogs doh standards showing up again.....WHAT AN ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!!

and yea you beat a "legit top 25 team"

what "legit top 25 team" was that the one that lost their final 2 games and ended the season outside the top 25

or all the others you lost to

the wins for that "bang" of a 7 win kick off to the years in the CUSA consisted of Sam Houston, 4-7 Pitt, 5-7 Louisiana, 4-7 Memphis, 2-9 Tulane, 8-3 USM (legit top 25 doh except at the end of the season when the ranking actually matters) and 5-6 Louisville

so you beat a D1-AA team, 5 teams with a losing record and one team with a winning record to get that "bang" of a kick off to the CUSA years

but yea if only the conference had been called the SWC that season would have been "legit"

oh yea and then in typical dem coogs doh fashion after that "bang" of a kick off 7-5 season with wins against terrible teams you had 6 losing seasons out of the next nine with one season being 6-6 and the other two 7-4 and 7-6

hard to get more legit than that!

a 60% losing season ratio out of a decade to start off in the conference and a 70% ratio of not having a winning season in a decade

but if only the CUSA had been called the SWC it all would have been more respected

and what "weight" did Tulane carry coming into the CUSA......the "weight" of totally sucking because they had gone 15 straight seasons from 1981 to 1996 without having a single winning season

the one thing you are 100% correct on is the SWC carried the same weight as the BE did 5 years ago.....the weight of being a conference that is dead and gone and that was never to return with a couple of hangers on left over in the new conference formed from the ashes clinging to the leaky inner tube and telling everyone about basketball and da season doh and what would have happened IF ONLY!!!!!! or what will happen IF ONLY!!!!!!!

A loud mouth racist and a Mean Green fan. lol...I cant believe a N Texas fan has the balls to dog ANYBODYS win loss record...No wonder you dont list your school.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-752483.html

you are not even intelligent enough to understand what you were reading there

north Texas state got throttled by a D1-AA team

but like a dem coogs doh fan you believe that a fan of a program would actually brag about playing a "nationally ranked" D1-AA program

sort of like bragging about winning a conference with a 7-5 record with only one win out of the 7 over a program that had a winning record......and trying to call that program a 'legit top 25 team" even though they finished the season unranked

Im smart of enough to see your basically talking to yourself for virtually the entire thread. Now piss off and go back to cutting holes in sheets. Tired of your racism.

(07-27-2017 03:46 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Here's another "Left Behind": Rutgers

Teams that Left Rutgers Behind (Conference at the time / Conference school left for / Present conference)

2004
Miami-FL (Big East / ACC / ACC)
Virginia Tech (Big East / ACC / ACC)

2005
Boston College (Big East / ACC / ACC)
Temple (Big East / FBS Ind / American) -- it was really the conference that left Temple behind

2012
West Virginia (Big East / Big 12 / Big 12)

2013
Pittsburgh (Big East / ACC / ACC)
Syracuse (Big East / ACC / ACC)

Teams Rutgers Left Behind (Conference at the time / Present conference)

2014 (Rutgers left American for Big Ten)
Central Florida (American / American)
Cincinnati (American / American)
Connecticut (American / American)
Houston (American / American)
Memphis (American / American)
SMU (American / American)
South Florida (American / American)
Temple (American / American)

ALSO:

1975 (breakup of the Middle Three)

Lehigh (Independent/Patriot)
Lafayette (independent/Patriot)

(07-27-2017 04:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 04:13 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 03:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 02:18 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 06:14 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Oh please, Houston was coming off probation. They kicked off C-USA with a bang by winning it, including going through a legit top 25 team.

Even with all you said, the SWC still carried weight, as much as the Big East five years ago. Maybe, just maybe they get included in the original BCS. Tulane's name still carried weight and Louisville, Cincinnati and Memphis were basketball powers. BYU wanted IN the club. I think the conference gets shoed aside like the old WAC but it's possible they get in based on seniority, granted, their tie-in bowl was not included in the BCS.

yea "kicked it off with a bang"

by winning the conference with a 7-5 record.......the dem coogs doh standards showing up again.....WHAT AN ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!!

and yea you beat a "legit top 25 team"

what "legit top 25 team" was that the one that lost their final 2 games and ended the season outside the top 25

or all the others you lost to

the wins for that "bang" of a 7 win kick off to the years in the CUSA consisted of Sam Houston, 4-7 Pitt, 5-7 Louisiana, 4-7 Memphis, 2-9 Tulane, 8-3 USM (legit top 25 doh except at the end of the season when the ranking actually matters) and 5-6 Louisville

so you beat a D1-AA team, 5 teams with a losing record and one team with a winning record to get that "bang" of a kick off to the CUSA years

but yea if only the conference had been called the SWC that season would have been "legit"

oh yea and then in typical dem coogs doh fashion after that "bang" of a kick off 7-5 season with wins against terrible teams you had 6 losing seasons out of the next nine with one season being 6-6 and the other two 7-4 and 7-6

hard to get more legit than that!

a 60% losing season ratio out of a decade to start off in the conference and a 70% ratio of not having a winning season in a decade

but if only the CUSA had been called the SWC it all would have been more respected

and what "weight" did Tulane carry coming into the CUSA......the "weight" of totally sucking because they had gone 15 straight seasons from 1981 to 1996 without having a single winning season

the one thing you are 100% correct on is the SWC carried the same weight as the BE did 5 years ago.....the weight of being a conference that is dead and gone and that was never to return with a couple of hangers on left over in the new conference formed from the ashes clinging to the leaky inner tube and telling everyone about basketball and da season doh and what would have happened IF ONLY!!!!!! or what will happen IF ONLY!!!!!!!

A loud mouth racist and a Mean Green fan. lol...I cant believe a N Texas fan has the balls to dog ANYBODYS win loss record...No wonder you dont list your school.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-752483.html

you are not even intelligent enough to understand what you were reading there

north Texas state got throttled by a D1-AA team

but like a dem coogs doh fan you believe that a fan of a program would actually brag about playing a "nationally ranked" D1-AA program

sort of like bragging about winning a conference with a 7-5 record with only one win out of the 7 over a program that had a winning record......and trying to call that program a 'legit top 25 team" even though they finished the season unranked

Im smart of enough to see your basically talking to yourself for virtually the entire thread. Now piss off and go back to cutting holes in sheets. Tired of your racism.

yes that is why multiple dem coogs doh fans have quoted my post and replied to them.....because "I am talking to myself"

what you should actually figure out is that the CUSA being called the SWC was still going to be the CUSA

ans what you should be intelligent enough to figure out is that this thread (in your feeble mind) became "about dem coogs doh" because only dem coogs doh fans sit around believing that a name on the conference is enough to overcome poor facilities, poor fan support, losing records and a terrible administration

you do not see anyone from Rice, SMU or especially TCU in here pretending that their program would have flourished in the CUSA had been called the SWC

and that is because rice fans have brains, intelligence and reason, SMU fans understand that their administration gave up on athletics after the death penalty and until the hiring of June Jones and TCU fans understand that programs make a conference a conference does not make programs and that is it not the job of Texas and Texas A&M to hold their hand and watch out for them

and TCU fans also understood the time for action was a decade and a half ago not several years after major realignment

stupid P6 branding campaigns, thinking the CUSA with the SWC name, pretending a season or two is equal to a prolonged record of success and trying to overstate the relevance of a bowl win and talking about what might have been or what could have happened if only is just ignoring REALITY and pretending that history has not already been written

Texas Tech and Baylor did what was needed to keep their programs in major conferences, Texas and Texas A&M look out for their programs as they should, TCU made meaningful changes and had LONG TERM SUCCESS and they did so WELL BEFORE the time to make a move was available to them

dem coogs doh talk about what if, pretend that the SWC was not a dead brand, cry that other programs do not hold their hand or look out for them and try and massively overstate their very spotty record of achievement all while crying conspiracy and unfair and ignoring their own fans, donors, alumni and administrations lack of action and involvement

the fact that some call BS on that and point out the failures of that argument does not mean they are after "dem coogs doh" it just means they do not buy into the BS

the CUSA with any other name including the SWC was still the CUSA and it would not have been in the BCS nor would it have had a major TV deal or a bunch of successful programs......because it was made up of programs that were mostly doing everything they could do to not have success or that were looking to GTFO as soon as they had any success and being called the SWC would not have changed that.....just like programs would GTFO the AAC right now if they could.....but they can't because they are not bringing the value which is why they are not getting the call

(07-27-2017 04:34 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 04:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 04:13 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 03:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 02:18 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  yea "kicked it off with a bang"

by winning the conference with a 7-5 record.......the dem coogs doh standards showing up again.....WHAT AN ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!!

and yea you beat a "legit top 25 team"

what "legit top 25 team" was that the one that lost their final 2 games and ended the season outside the top 25

or all the others you lost to

the wins for that "bang" of a 7 win kick off to the years in the CUSA consisted of Sam Houston, 4-7 Pitt, 5-7 Louisiana, 4-7 Memphis, 2-9 Tulane, 8-3 USM (legit top 25 doh except at the end of the season when the ranking actually matters) and 5-6 Louisville

so you beat a D1-AA team, 5 teams with a losing record and one team with a winning record to get that "bang" of a kick off to the CUSA years

but yea if only the conference had been called the SWC that season would have been "legit"

oh yea and then in typical dem coogs doh fashion after that "bang" of a kick off 7-5 season with wins against terrible teams you had 6 losing seasons out of the next nine with one season being 6-6 and the other two 7-4 and 7-6

hard to get more legit than that!

a 60% losing season ratio out of a decade to start off in the conference and a 70% ratio of not having a winning season in a decade

but if only the CUSA had been called the SWC it all would have been more respected

and what "weight" did Tulane carry coming into the CUSA......the "weight" of totally sucking because they had gone 15 straight seasons from 1981 to 1996 without having a single winning season

the one thing you are 100% correct on is the SWC carried the same weight as the BE did 5 years ago.....the weight of being a conference that is dead and gone and that was never to return with a couple of hangers on left over in the new conference formed from the ashes clinging to the leaky inner tube and telling everyone about basketball and da season doh and what would have happened IF ONLY!!!!!! or what will happen IF ONLY!!!!!!!

A loud mouth racist and a Mean Green fan. lol...I cant believe a N Texas fan has the balls to dog ANYBODYS win loss record...No wonder you dont list your school.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-752483.html

you are not even intelligent enough to understand what you were reading there

north Texas state got throttled by a D1-AA team

but like a dem coogs doh fan you believe that a fan of a program would actually brag about playing a "nationally ranked" D1-AA program

sort of like bragging about winning a conference with a 7-5 record with only one win out of the 7 over a program that had a winning record......and trying to call that program a 'legit top 25 team" even though they finished the season unranked

Im smart of enough to see your basically talking to yourself for virtually the entire thread. Now piss off and go back to cutting holes in sheets. Tired of your racism.

yes that is why multiple dem coogs doh fans have quoted my post and replied to them.....because "I am talking to myself"

what you should actually figure out is that the CUSA being called the SWC was still going to be the CUSA

ans what you should be intelligent enough to figure out is that this thread (in your feeble mind) became "about dem coogs doh" because only dem coogs doh fans sit around believing that a name on the conference is enough to overcome poor facilities, poor fan support, losing records and a terrible administration

you do not see anyone from Rice, SMU or especially TCU in here pretending that their program would have flourished in the CUSA had been called the SWC

and that is because rice fans have brains, intelligence and reason, SMU fans understand that their administration gave up on athletics after the death penalty and until the hiring of June Jones and TCU fans understand that programs make a conference a conference does not make programs and that is it not the job of Texas and Texas A&M to hold their hand and watch out for them

and TCU fans also understood the time for action was a decade and a half ago not several years after major realignment

stupid P6 branding campaigns, thinking the CUSA with the SWC name, pretending a season or two is equal to a prolonged record of success and trying to overstate the relevance of a bowl win and talking about what might have been or what could have happened if only is just ignoring REALITY and pretending that history has not already been written

Texas Tech and Baylor did what was needed to keep their programs in major conferences, Texas and Texas A&M look out for their programs as they should, TCU made meaningful changes and had LONG TERM SUCCESS and they did so WELL BEFORE the time to make a move was available to them

dem coogs doh talk about what if, pretend that the SWC was not a dead brand, cry that other programs do not hold their hand or look out for them and try and massively overstate their very spotty record of achievement all while crying conspiracy and unfair and ignoring their own fans, donors, alumni and administrations lack of action and involvement

the fact that some call BS on that and point out the failures of that argument does not mean they are after "dem coogs doh" it just means they do not buy into the BS

the CUSA with any other name including the SWC was still the CUSA and it would not have been in the BCS nor would it have had a major TV deal or a bunch of successful programs......because it was made up of programs that were mostly doing everything they could do to not have success or that were looking to GTFO as soon as they had any success and being called the SWC would not have changed that.....just like programs would GTFO the AAC right now if they could.....but they can't because they are not bringing the value which is why they are not getting the call

Didnt read another of your racist rants beyond the first sentence. Just one sentence made it clear your too stupid to know Im referring to the thread referenced in the post I responded to. Now, you can go back to admiring skin head tatoos. Now that we know your just a racist disgruntled N Texas fan, theres nothing you can write that will ever be of any interest to me.