(11-29-2020 06:07 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  

(11-28-2020 09:42 PM)Itinerant Texan Wrote:  

(11-28-2020 06:15 PM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  “Fact: Tarleton had negotiations with up to four D1 conferences, and chose to pursue the WAC after a 3rd meeting with Hurd & Co. in Denver. It came down to two: our AD preferred the SLC, our Prez and A&M Brass preferred the WAC. Reasons provided for WAC preference: 1. Raised Tarleton's institutional/academic profile. 2. Better national exposure (tv markets, conference championships, etc.)“

A fact supported by nothing more than rumor and conjecture isn’t a fact, particularly when contradicted by public comments from presidents and commissioners who were saying the SLC had no interest in adding any new schools.

Good grief. Drill back a few posts you'll see our Prez said it. On record. Factual statement, until proven otherwise.

Look again at exactly what your president said. He makes no mention of any invitation formal or otherwise from any conference other than the WAC. It was a carefully worded PR piece, nothing more.

Ok I'll bite, but this is the last I'll speak of this...

Again, name the last school to have multiple invitations (formal, or otherwise) from more than one conference. Unlike the ignorant one, you seem to be a fairly intelligent lad, but I don't think you really understand (or may have forgotten) how conference invitations work. They only come after the dust has settled and a winner has been chosen.

What we're really talking about here is courtship, not the actual invite, and Tarleton was definitely being courted by the WAC and the SLC for TWO YEARS.

During that period, I'm sure we did our due diligence and met with at least a few other conferences to see about parking our oly sports and continue on as an Indy in football. Our president said it happened, and there is no reason for him to PR it up, especially after we had already joined the WAC.

With regard to the SLC, there was always an inference of an invite, long before the WAC came calIing:

"Also in 2015, during an open forum held on the potential transition, Athletic Director Lonn Reisman said Southland Conference Chairman Tom Burnett told him during a visit that “The Southland Conference would love to have Tarleton State join.”

http://texannews.net/potential-division-...nvitation/

As time passed and the courtships began to get more serious, we soured on the SLC, and chose to snuggle up with the WAC. And that's just a fact, whether you choose to accept it or not.

I will say that to this day, nobody really knows exactly why things fell apart between Tarleton and the SLC. I will also say that looking at the SLC's state of affairs today, it is all beginning to make sense.

This is really the #Texas5 coming to the WAC. Had Tarleton moved forward with the SLC, we'd be in a real mess right now. Instead, we're in the WAC, paving the way for the "Texas4". You're welcome.

And if this #Texas5 does come to fruition, our collective voice will be VERY powerful in the WAC. But, I'm sure people with more degrees and higher pay scales than myself have already thought all of this out. And probably well before Tarleton ever joined the WAC.

I give you this to chew on:

“The WAC is reviving football,” said Reisman, “We will probably be an independent for about two years. Hopefully, by that third year,
we’re going to see how the WAC has established football.”

"An independent for about 2 years"...not four, but two.
Seems like Lonn, a very honest man by all measure, already knew something was in the works since the day we joined the WAC. A little ironic, don't you think?

https://jtacnews.com/11625/news/tarleton...ext-level/