Cinci, Temple, UConn, and USF are the only voting members at this time. You need 3 of the 4 to get to the 75% threshold to get an invite. So, basically one school can stop it at this time. In July, the 4 current CUSA schools will get voting rights. That will change the voting dynamics completely. Six of 8 will be needed for a invite. I suspect the votes to get an invite for S Miss will be there once the newbies arrive.
[/quote]

It is my understanding that's the exact message USM administration is being told. Basically, be patient.

(01-13-2013 12:19 PM)MasMack Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 08:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

Cinci, Temple, UConn, and USF are the only voting members at this time. You need 3 of the 4 to get to the 75% threshold to get an invite. So, basically one school can stop it at this time. In July, the 4 current CUSA schools will get voting rights. That will change the voting dynamics completely. Six of 8 will be needed for a invite. I suspect the votes to get an invite for S Miss will be there once the newbies arrive.

It is my understanding that's the exact message USM administration is being told. Basically, be patient.
[/quote]

I am still not sold we are better off standing pat with pocket 4's...JMO....don't see how ACC/nBE doesn't get raided continually. ...and I see one not being able to emerge with either leg to stand on...again, JMO

...look at it this way...if I am right, and we are the last to be invited, then we will be pissing in a Katrina wind in the end...we have no reason at this point to move

(01-13-2013 12:25 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-13-2013 12:19 PM)MasMack Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 08:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

Cinci, Temple, UConn, and USF are the only voting members at this time. You need 3 of the 4 to get to the 75% threshold to get an invite. So, basically one school can stop it at this time. In July, the 4 current CUSA schools will get voting rights. That will change the voting dynamics completely. Six of 8 will be needed for a invite. I suspect the votes to get an invite for S Miss will be there once the newbies arrive.

It is my understanding that's the exact message USM administration is being told. Basically, be patient.

I am still not sold we are better off standing pat with pocket 4's...JMO....don't see how ACC/nBE doesn't get raided continually. ...and I see one not being able to emerge with either leg to stand on...again, JMO

...look at it this way...if I am right, and we are the last to be invited, then we will be pissing in a Katrina wind in the end...we have no reason at this point to move
[/quote]

I am against a move at this time. I don't see the conference without a name, being attractive enough at this point and frankly like at the beginning of C-USA it really is getting to the point it needs a football program known for winning football more than anything. It has some basketball appeal but football is the cash cow and if USM had better facilities, better crowd numbers, and if Hattiesburg wasn't so lackluster in it's appeal (airport, lodging, etc.) we would have moved long ago. We either have to start getting past our mindset in Hattiesburg or realize we won't be attractive to other conferences. I know USM gets a lot of respect outside of it's area, but the area really doesn't get what a gem it has, and because of the mindset, I doubt it ever will.

(01-13-2013 12:50 PM)SgtGoldenEagle Wrote:  

(01-13-2013 12:25 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(01-13-2013 12:19 PM)MasMack Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 08:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

Cinci, Temple, UConn, and USF are the only voting members at this time. You need 3 of the 4 to get to the 75% threshold to get an invite. So, basically one school can stop it at this time. In July, the 4 current CUSA schools will get voting rights. That will change the voting dynamics completely. Six of 8 will be needed for a invite. I suspect the votes to get an invite for S Miss will be there once the newbies arrive.

It is my understanding that's the exact message USM administration is being told. Basically, be patient.

I am still not sold we are better off standing pat with pocket 4's...JMO....don't see how ACC/nBE doesn't get raided continually. ...and I see one not being able to emerge with either leg to stand on...again, JMO

...look at it this way...if I am right, and we are the last to be invited, then we will be pissing in a Katrina wind in the end...we have no reason at this point to move

I am against a move at this time. I don't see the conference without a name, being attractive enough at this point and frankly like at the beginning of C-USA it really is getting to the point it needs a football program known for winning football more than anything. It has some basketball appeal but football is the cash cow and if USM had better facilities, better crowd numbers, and if Hattiesburg wasn't so lackluster in it's appeal (airport, lodging, etc.) we would have moved long ago. We either have to start getting past our mindset in Hattiesburg or realize we won't be attractive to other conferences. I know USM gets a lot of respect outside of it's area, but the area really doesn't get what a gem it has, and because of the mindset, I doubt it ever will.
[/quote]

lodging is acceptable...access is pretty good too....HBG people don't suck quite as much since attendance has grown by 50 percent over ten yr period (love to use those percentages...makes it look better...lmfao)

...your last statement said a mouthful...some would rather spend 20 dollars on sno-cones than 35 on a ticket

...studies have shown being 'po, keeps ya 'po...gd demographical makeup....just the way it are

...this is why almost all USM grads move...lack of dollars...not sno-cones

I don't see any reason to jump.
I don't see any reason to play any of the programs that left either.
Why use an OOC date to play in an empty venue.
Same access as any of the others, we will survive just fine without them in my honest opinion.

(01-13-2013 01:11 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  I don't see any reason to jump.
I don't see any reason to play any of the programs that left either.
Why use an OOC date to play in an empty venue.
Same access as any of the others, we will survive just fine without them in my honest opinion.

...agree with #1 & #4

...why does them leaving not give us easy scheduling of continual rivalry games...just OOC now? (covers point #2)

Tulane was pretty much a home game for us BTW....maybe MEM will figure out FB one day (sorry, just stating facts) (finishes your point #3)

...how much fun would it be to go to a Tulane game ON CAMPUS? I mean really? That would just be a kick in the arse! (continuation of #3)

...or are you saying we should be little biatches like UM fans?

...sorry about the last one, but damn chief

(01-13-2013 11:57 AM)usmjournalism Wrote:  Sigma Chis were the most decent, upstanding guys on frat row (followed closely by the ATOs) when I was USM. Has that changed?

I am a Sigma Chi (we don't say we were, even though my collegiate time has come and gone). No slam on them, it just sounded gaudy yet funny, something you'd here at the (insert any frat here) house.

Thank you for the compliment of the USM Theta Delta chapter of Sigma Chi, though.

(01-13-2013 12:01 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 09:19 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 08:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Cinci, Temple, UConn, and USF are the only voting members at this time. You need 3 of the 4 to get to the 75% threshold to get an invite. So, basically one school can stop it at this time. In July, the 4 current CUSA schools will get voting rights. That will change the voting dynamics completely. Six of 8 will be needed for a invite. I suspect the votes to get an invite for S Miss will be there once the newbies arrive.

But surely you would agree that it's odd that the same group of presidents participated in the successful Tulane vote and now don't have any support for USM. I'm not being critical of the Tulane addition at all, but merely questioning the logic of having support for one and not the other.

Wasn't there an article stating that UConn and Cincinatti abstained on the Tulane vote, because those two schools were waiting on invitations form the ACC?

Marv, there may have been. There's been so speculation about who did or didn't do what in that process, I can't remember. I trust your memory more than mine.

(01-13-2013 02:07 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(01-13-2013 12:01 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 09:19 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 08:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Cinci, Temple, UConn, and USF are the only voting members at this time. You need 3 of the 4 to get to the 75% threshold to get an invite. So, basically one school can stop it at this time. In July, the 4 current CUSA schools will get voting rights. That will change the voting dynamics completely. Six of 8 will be needed for a invite. I suspect the votes to get an invite for S Miss will be there once the newbies arrive.

Don't trust my memory. That is just what I thought that I remembered reading.
But surely you would agree that it's odd that the same group of presidents participated in the successful Tulane vote and now don't have any support for USM. I'm not being critical of the Tulane addition at all, but merely questioning the logic of having support for one and not the other.

Wasn't there an article stating that UConn and Cincinatti abstained on the Tulane vote, because those two schools were waiting on invitations form the ACC?

Marv, there may have been. There's been so speculation about who did or didn't do what in that process, I can't remember. I trust your memory more than mine.

(01-13-2013 11:57 AM)usmjournalism Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 08:46 PM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  

(01-12-2013 08:43 PM)EagleX Wrote:  we would jump on it like it was kate upton on roofies.

You're either a poet or live at the Sigma Chi house.

Oh how the times have apparently changed. It used to be that the Kappa Sigs couldn't go more than a decade without being accused of some major rape/sexual assault scandal.

Sigma Chis were the most decent, upstanding guys on frat row (followed closely by the ATOs) when I was USM. Has that changed?

My time at USM, the Kappa Sigs were a pretty good bunch of guys.. Pikes were potheads.. And ATOs were clueless.. We had to go repair their roof numerous times because we couldn't get them to understand that driving a 6" spike in the roof would cause it to leak.. We'd fix it, tell them, and they'd do it again. It finally stopped when we presented them with the bill.