Howard Schnellenberger was the head coach at Louisville from 1985-1994. This is what we are talking about.

ad, Schnellenberger was grateful to WVU and its fans...

(10-17-2013 12:55 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(10-17-2013 11:14 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  If most sane people think most of our fans are crazy, those sane people are complete and utter morons. There are a few very vocal, and usually very drunk fans who pull the same crap over and over. And then some people go back to their big cities and say that all people in West Virginia are nuts - using the same stupid stereotypes that have been used for over a century - because they haven't the intelligence or creativity to think up something new...

Bit I have to tell you. I will not ever say everyone in WV is crazy, because I used toenjoy travelling thru there. But in my experience, and I have been to 8 West Virginia games; three WVU home games (versus Louisville, Pitt, and Maryland, 3 UofL home games vs. West Virginia, and two Maryland home games vs. West Virginia. And to a T, I'd say 25% of the fans I encountered matched the description above. That's eight separate experiences, not a small sample size. And a consistent response. I am not even talking about your digital fans and their shenanigans.

You may not see it, but I can tell you, your fans have a bad reputation. Deserved or not, this is an experience and perception about WVU fans. And in my experience, it is a well earned reputation. Your home fans better fit your description: a few drunken idiots causing trouble (though probably a but more than "a few). But your travelling fans: the ones who go to visiting stadiums. They are the ones who give you a bad name. I have never seen any other fanbase who's fans come to town and simply look to start shit. Everyone else it seems is cordial (even the Kentucky fans who come to Louisville games are far more respectful, and I generally would not piss on them to put out a fire), but WVU fans go out of their way to start fights, be unruly, and generally cause trouble. And I am referring to a large number of those fans who travel, much larger than anyone else. THAT is why you guys get this reputation. Because it is earned.

ad, a lot of it is because WVU fans are used to big city Yankees coming down to insult us with the same old stereotypical insults they've used from the beginning. It's completely different for us in the B12. Their fans have enjoyed their time in Morgantown, and every WVU fan that has gone to B12 country has been treated cordially. There have also been no incidents reported such as you describe...

So how much of what you talk about is due to WVU fans, and how much is due to the treatment we've received from eastern fans is open to question...

ad, if state and federal governments work together to oversee anything, it will be twice as screwed up than if they had stayed out of it altogether. Depending on the government to do anything right is like depending on crooks to guard a bank...

(10-17-2013 04:04 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  ad, Schnellenberger was grateful to WVU and its fans...

(10-17-2013 12:55 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(10-17-2013 11:14 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  If most sane people think most of our fans are crazy, those sane people are complete and utter morons. There are a few very vocal, and usually very drunk fans who pull the same crap over and over. And then some people go back to their big cities and say that all people in West Virginia are nuts - using the same stupid stereotypes that have been used for over a century - because they haven't the intelligence or creativity to think up something new...

Bit I have to tell you. I will not ever say everyone in WV is crazy, because I used toenjoy travelling thru there. But in my experience, and I have been to 8 West Virginia games; three WVU home games (versus Louisville, Pitt, and Maryland, 3 UofL home games vs. West Virginia, and two Maryland home games vs. West Virginia. And to a T, I'd say 25% of the fans I encountered matched the description above. That's eight separate experiences, not a small sample size. And a consistent response. I am not even talking about your digital fans and their shenanigans.

You may not see it, but I can tell you, your fans have a bad reputation. Deserved or not, this is an experience and perception about WVU fans. And in my experience, it is a well earned reputation. Your home fans better fit your description: a few drunken idiots causing trouble (though probably a but more than "a few). But your travelling fans: the ones who go to visiting stadiums. They are the ones who give you a bad name. I have never seen any other fanbase who's fans come to town and simply look to start shit. Everyone else it seems is cordial (even the Kentucky fans who come to Louisville games are far more respectful, and I generally would not piss on them to put out a fire), but WVU fans go out of their way to start fights, be unruly, and generally cause trouble. And I am referring to a large number of those fans who travel, much larger than anyone else. THAT is why you guys get this reputation. Because it is earned.

ad, a lot of it is because WVU fans are used to big city Yankees coming down to insult us with the same old stereotypical insults they've used from the beginning. It's completely different for us in the B12. Their fans have enjoyed their time in Morgantown, and every WVU fan that has gone to B12 country has been treated cordially. There have also been no incidents reported such as you describe...

So how much of what you talk about is due to WVU fans, and how much is due to the treatment we've received from eastern fans is open to question...

It takes two Bit. You know that. I've seen some downright retarded WVU fans an some terrific WVU fans. I'm sure every fanbase is the same way. Oh, except for Louisville........... I KID!!!!!

(10-14-2013 03:47 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  He says Cincinnati is in with UCF.

If he did say that (and I didn't bother reading the article) UC would be the bridge to the rest of the Big 12 for WVU.

(10-17-2013 02:05 PM)RobUCF Wrote:  If they were proposing 1/2 revenue and UCF said know,

If TV is about Revenue then how about "TV Market" size.......

4. Philly - Temple
5. Dallas-Ft Worth (SMU-TCU)
10. Houston
13. Tampa-St Pete (USF)
19. Orlando-Daytona-Melbourne (UCF)
24. Charlotte, NC (Charlotte, some ECU fans say there is a large contingent there but probably wouldn't be counted towards their TV market)
30. Hartford-New Haven, CT (UCONN)
34. Cincinnati
37. San Antonio (UTSA)
38. WBP-Ft Pierce (northern ends of FAU territory, Miami-FTL is like #15 but is split with FIU and Miami obviously owns that coastline)
40. Birmingham (UAB)
43. Norfolk-Portsmouth-Newport News, VA (lots of ECU fans claim the southeastern portion for their fanbase, not sure how accurate)
48. Memphis
53. New Orleans (Tulane)
60. Mobile-Pensacola (USA, or UWF one day?)
61. Tulsa
62. Ft Myers-Naples (FGCU)
65. Charleston-Huntington, WV (Marshall)
91. Colorado Springs-Pueblo (Air Force)
98. El Paso (UTEP)
112. Boise
123. Lafayette, LA (UL-L)
163. Biloxi-Gulfport (kinda USM territory)
167. Hattiesburg (USM)

Louisville is #50, btw.

(10-17-2013 04:04 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  So how much of what you talk about is due to WVU fans, and how much is due to the treatment we've received from eastern fans is open to question...

At three different stadiums, against three different opponents, I saw the same thing. I am not casting excursions on the entire fanbase, but I am telling you a much larger than normal percentage of your fanbase are the drunken idiots people talk about than any I have ever seen.

(10-17-2013 06:44 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(10-17-2013 04:04 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  So how much of what you talk about is due to WVU fans, and how much is due to the treatment we've received from eastern fans is open to question...

At three different stadiums, against three different opponents, I saw the same thing. I am not casting excursions on the entire fanbase, but I am telling you a much larger than normal percentage of your fanbase are the drunken idiots people talk about than any I have ever seen.

Well, you don't have to see 'em no more...

I've only seen one WVU fan get pissed off and want to fight people in the late 90's loss to UL here. He didn't like the last TD We scored and gave Our fans the Finger while We celebrated. Never had an issue tailgating at old Cardinal stadium nor PJCS. Most were real friendly.

(10-17-2013 07:55 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  I've only seen one WVU fan get pissed off and want to fight people in the late 90's loss to UL here. He didn't like the last TD We scored and gave Our fans the Finger while We celebrated. Never had an issue tailgating at old Cardinal stadium nor PJCS. Most were real friendly.

CardFan, it's nice to see somebody who's willing to speak the truth. I've traveled to a number of stadiums and the only problems I've had are with drunken morons who throw out the same stupid insults and want to start something. But I've never started anything. I have seen an occasional drunken WVU fan get ignorant. But not an inordinate number. You can find plenty of instances at any school where similar things happen, especially when booze is involved...

(10-17-2013 04:14 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  ad, if state and federal governments work together to oversee anything, it will be twice as screwed up than if they had stayed out of it altogether. Depending on the government to do anything right is like depending on crooks to guard a bank...

Is this a sports discussion forum or a political forum. Can't be both

(10-17-2013 08:49 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  CardFan, it's nice to see somebody who's willing to speak the truth. I've traveled to a number of stadiums and the only problems I've had are with drunken morons who throw out the same stupid insults and want to start something.

Bit just because seemed to have avoided it, or turned a blind eye or whatever, doesn't mean we are lying. I know I am not, I witnessed it. I experienced those people starting trouble, and insulting me, and trying to start fights. And I resent you calling me a liar.

(10-17-2013 11:48 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(10-17-2013 08:49 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  CardFan, it's nice to see somebody who's willing to speak the truth. I've traveled to a number of stadiums and the only problems I've had are with drunken morons who throw out the same stupid insults and want to start something.

Bit just because seemed to have avoided it, or turned a blind eye or whatever, doesn't mean we are lying. I know I am not, I witnessed it. I experienced those people starting trouble, and insulting me, and trying to start fights. And I resent you calling me a liar.

I didn't call you anything, and I dare you to produce evidence saying I said anything about you. If I was going to call you a liar, I'd have said you were flat out lying...

IMO if you've had so many problems with WVU fans, there's probably a good reason for it. The antagonistic tone in your latest post is a good indicator...

http://www.herald-dispatch.com/sports/x6...the-nation

#3 on this list here:
http://www.gq.com/sports/lists/201104/wo...a#slide=13
Referencing the article, looks like y'all made the news:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=862umOB9Dbw

http://www.lostlettermen.com/6-17-2011-w...-fanbases/

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...inia-game/

Really? The AD has to ask you guys to dress appropriately even?:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/fo...index.html

#9 right here:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/95415...ts/page/13

Do I really need to keep going Bit, or do you get the point? Your fans suck, present company aside, and for the most part I'm truly glad to be rid of 'em.

(10-18-2013 08:51 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(10-17-2013 11:48 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(10-17-2013 08:49 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  CardFan, it's nice to see somebody who's willing to speak the truth.

Bit just because seemed to have avoided it, or turned a blind eye or whatever, doesn't mean we are lying. I know I am not, I witnessed it. I experienced those people starting trouble, and insulting me, and trying to start fights. And I resent you calling me a liar.

I didn't call you anything, and I dare you to produce evidence saying I said anything about you.

It is right above. When you say that Cardfan is the only one "speaking the truth" on this subject, then by proxy, you are saying the rest of us are not. Thus you called me, and the others, a liar. And there are no two ways about that. Your words are right here.

What, did you think we would not notice that.

(10-17-2013 03:58 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  A better analogy would be is money better spent when each city does everything individually, including redundancies, or does having the state oversee a portion of it to ensure everyone thrives individually and together.

Also using your analogy, it would be best to ask, is it best to have both the federal government and the local government over see things, or for every local government to survive on their own, with no one to oversee what happens from one city to another. You are suggesting it is best for the local government to do everything. I am suggesting it is best as a joint venture.

You can believe which way you want, but imperial evidence shows that the joint venture is far to the local side as you will see work, with many examples going further the other way. The purely local options are known as Amish Farms and Native American reservations. Well, and maybe California

"Imperial" or "Empirical" evidence? I'm not trying to be the grammar police, but when the discussion veers toward a discussion of the appropriate scope of government, that's an amusing choice of words

(10-17-2013 08:38 AM)SMUfrat Wrote:  

(10-17-2013 08:08 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(10-16-2013 06:25 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(10-16-2013 12:28 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(10-16-2013 09:38 AM)bluesox Wrote:  I don't see why the big 12 and byu don't agree to a football only deal right now and they just jump to 11 football school's like the big 10 did for years. BYU has about a 70,000 seat stadium that would fill up for a big 12 schedule with a national following, seems like an easy move.

Because BYU had their chance and blew it. They were unwilling to make a compromise to the B12. So why should the B12 compromise on their position in order to benefit BYU?

If all the compromises are on the side holding all the cards, it should be one heck of a benefit for the conference in order for that compromise to be made. BYU doesn't fit the bill, and never will...

Ding, ding, ding. Someone gets it. The Big 12 will not expand unless we can get a Florida St, Clemson type school. The last time I checked NO ONE comes close to adding what those schools would add.

The Big 12 will not expand unless the playoff committee tells us we have to. If that happens, the Big 12 will get a permanent death sentence with no possible stay of execution.

Let's assume this is true for a moment. IF this is true, then you see the very reasoning that will destroy the B12 long term. Note the B1G added Rutgers and Maryland. These two schools, vs many many other schools brought nothing in terms of national appeal and on field performance. Let's be honest. The B1G was looking for additions for other reasons. The B12, if what you are saying is true, is looking ONLY for teams that have some national sexiness and bring immediate on field weight. Those teams are not available. Therefore they will not expand. This very reasoning is why you have WVA on an island right now and also the very reason that of the P5 conferences, your the one's on constant topic about losing teams, imploding, etc. Note the B1G, Pac12, SEC, and ACC are not talked about in this light like the B12 is. If the B12 wants to expand, and do it right they need to take a different attitude/approach. They need to look at markets, recruiting areas, strategic additions. The B12 is viewed currently as being very short sighted. UT/OU can take this approach because they could care less. THey can bolt at any time, they both have golden parachutes (Texas Tech and Oks st by virtue of your connection to UT/OU respectively). So I can understand you four not wanting to add anybody but a "FSU/CLEMSON" type duo. The rest of the teams in the B12 are the ones going to be hurt. Nebraska, TAMU, Mizzou, CU all saw the this and the hand writing that was on the wall...notice they bolted because they COULD. If the B12 was smart, they would act as a conference, not just in the best interest of UT/OU and would have added UofL, WVA, Cincy, and TCU when they had the chance. None of this would be a discussion right now had they done this. B12 has another shot, we will see if they make the same mistake or learn.

amen brother.

to a lesser extent. the PAC should do the same.

…and hallelujah.... Btw… OU and OSU also saw the hand writing on the wall an bolted to the PAC 12, but had the door slammed in their faces. The PAC 12 unquestionably made the worst realignment mistake ever—period!

(10-17-2013 10:58 AM)adcorbet Wrote:  

(10-17-2013 08:08 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(10-16-2013 06:25 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  The Big 12 will not expand unless the playoff committee tells us we have to. If that happens, the Big 12 will get a permanent death sentence with no possible stay of execution.

Let's assume this is true for a moment. IF this is true, then you see the very reasoning that will destroy the B12 long term. Note the B1G added Rutgers and Maryland. These two schools, vs many many other schools brought nothing in terms of national appeal and on field performance. Let's be honest. The B1G was looking for additions for other reasons.

I am not a big fan of the Big Ten by any stretch. But my goodness their leadership is top notch. Instead of seeing what works best for each program, they truly all look to see what is best for the whole, knowing that what I best for the whole, is best for the individual in the long run. The NFL does a lot of this too. The Big Ten made two ingenious moves. One, we all know the history of the Big Ten Network. Who each school forgave extra revenue they could have pocketed and invested it in the network and are not reaping the benefits. But you know what move they made that shows sheer genius: adding Rutgers and Maryland. Why was it such a good move? Because with the playoffs coming up, the new contracts for bowls, the NCAA tournament contract steadily increasing, they had a chance at a low risk investment with potentially high rewards, and they took it. Instead of just paying everyone a little more, they decide to expand with two expansion franchises who don’t offer an immediate increase in revenue. Why is this important Because now the Big Ten can pay them an equal share (or close), not have to prematurely extend media rights, and lose the free agent leverage, while still paying everyone what they were making before. Essentially the playoff money is being used to finance their expansion, while they wait to monetize them. To me, that is genius.

Now let’s take a look around the rest of the college landscape, and to see what everyone else did with their newfound money.

• • SEC – not wanting to extend its TV contract out, they use the extra revenue to slightly increase payouts, but work an agreement with ESPN to start an SEC Network of which some of the new money will be used to help fund start-up costs.
  • PAC 12 – Distribute some of the excess revenue and encourage teams to invest in their infrastructure, such as bad teams hiring new, well known coaches. Encourage teams to schedule more home and home games to improve the profile of the conference (does result in loss of 0.5 home games) and invest in improving PAC 12 Network.
  • Big East – Use the money to buy freedom and retain its most valuable asset: the name
  • ACC – Use money as a way to profit share and encourage Notre Dame to join as a partial member in, which in terms increases TV contract, and creates interest in a possible conference TV Network to go with digital network. Small increases to each team.
  • Big 12 – Hold press conferences were it rains money and Champaign, and brag about how much money each school will be paid, and telling everyone there is no need to expand because each team will receive a few less gold plates.

One of these is unlike the others.

Preach on apostle adcorbet…. The B12's love of $$$ is the root of all.....

(10-17-2013 12:51 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  The Big 12 doesn't have a conference network and needs big name schools that have fans. Simple as that.

So explain why this school...




...was selected over this one:



An illustration of epic expansion ineptitude by the @10 but B12….

TCU was immediately available. Louisville was not. The Big 12 needed two schools to keep the tv contracts. They couldn't wait 27 months for Louisville.

(10-16-2013 09:51 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(10-16-2013 09:06 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(10-16-2013 05:47 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Christopher Lambert ‏@theDudeofWV 15m
Fox & ESPN will not reopen the Big 12's contract.

They don't have to. There's already a clause built into the contract for expansion that keeps the per school payout the same if the XII adds schools.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...0-12-or-14

Quote:The new Big 12 TV deal is expected to be announced any day, perhaps here this week as a celebration of the league's new-found strength. Within that deal is a clause that will give any new expansion candidates the same money as the current members (estimated to be at least $20 million per year).

One industry source said that number applies whether the Big 12 invites, "Appalachian State or Florida State." And according to another industry source, ESPN wouldn't stand in the way of Big 12 expansion even after negotiating a new deal with the ACC.

This changes things dramatically, if true (which it appears to be). They can now focus solely on adding the best programs available to them without regard for markets (at this time).

If schools are added, they might go to as many as 16 teams to (1) mitigate any potential damage done by future defections and (2) keep TX and Oklahoma in the same division (along with many other current B12 teams).

If they add BYU, Memphis, Cincinnati, UConn, UCF, USF and (I'll throw our hat into the ring) ECU they would add new markets, a good mix of basketball-first schools and football-first schools and the best available teams without having to deal with the headaches of raiding the only conference they could raid: the ACC... and I'm not so sure that the ACC would even be a viable option at this point.

They'll probably just add BYU and one of UCF, USF, Cinci or UConn if they do add anyone.

This can't be true because Dodds wouldn't have been so adamant about only adding schools that would generate $20 mil per year each for the B12. Moreover, there’s no way FOX and ESPN would pay the B12 for selecting any school from the huge pool of G5 schools that don’t meet certain criteria....