(07-09-2014 03:48 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:33 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:21 PM)nert Wrote:  The author there uses the exact same "technically" argument to my comment that John uses here - so is that another coincidence?

ah so simply agreeing with the concept he was getting at means I am him. got it

Posters under two names using the same incorrect argument - with the same term, to the same comment, by itself might be a coincidence. When you are already being asked about other coincidences, it does seem to add credence to the argument.

Ohio State dominates it's own state better than anyone else including Texas/Texas and Syracuse/New York. That is what i am arguing and please tell me where I was wrong on that?

Can say the same thing for Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, etc..

You have to reread to where we were talking about large states

(07-09-2014 03:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:48 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:33 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  ah so simply agreeing with the concept he was getting at means I am him. got it

Posters under two names using the same incorrect argument - with the same term, to the same comment, by itself might be a coincidence. When you are already being asked about other coincidences, it does seem to add credence to the argument.

Ohio State dominates it's own state better than anyone else including Texas/Texas and Syracuse/New York. That is what i am arguing and please tell me where I was wrong on that?

Can say the same thing for Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, etc..

You have to reread to where we were talking about large states

ok. Maybe you, I mean the bloger lol, thought Rutgers was in New York also.

(07-09-2014 03:37 PM)MJG Wrote:  Big 12 doesn't want to add schools because none bring twenty million a year in value.

Simple solution add four pay them half shares for six to eight years. Once that period is over their value will have increased.
Works for the schools and the conference.

BYU
CINCINNATI
NEW MEXICO
UCLA

some West some East all bring new states and markets.

Good idea MJG.... but if the B12 was going to do that, it would have been better off (IMO) adding the remaining Big East schools (and UCF) while offering them lower payouts until the conference could be reevaluated by FOX. With an eastern division, a B16 network could have been started.

This is what the B16 could have been:

BIG EAST DIVISION: Cinci, Louisville, Rutgers, Temple, (UCF), UCONN, USF, WV

BIG EIGHT DIVISION: Baylor, Iowa St, KU, K St, OU, OSU, Texas, TT

A GOR would have kept this conference in place.....

(07-09-2014 03:51 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:48 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:33 PM)nert Wrote:  Posters under two names using the same incorrect argument - with the same term, to the same comment, by itself might be a coincidence. When you are already being asked about other coincidences, it does seem to add credence to the argument.

Ohio State dominates it's own state better than anyone else including Texas/Texas and Syracuse/New York. That is what i am arguing and please tell me where I was wrong on that?

Can say the same thing for Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, etc..

You have to reread to where we were talking about large states

ok. Maybe you, I mean the bloger lol, thought Rutgers was in New York also.

Yeah I totally believe rutgers is in NJ.

speaking of which, how the hell are you guys not putting two & two together on Nert arguing earlier in the thread that the blogger "overlooked syracuse?"

I was sticking around hoping for STX to own up to his stupid pointing to a thread I made that wasn't posted until after the article was published mistake.

he is MIA and now i see this thread is taking a turn to just general stupid all around.

(07-09-2014 03:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:33 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:21 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:07 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  What? Mike Davis is listed as the author of the article. If that's CardinalJim, then I would have no way of knowing. And even if it is, it doesn't change my premise that you asking UC fans for specific information made in the article just days before it is released is quite the coincidence at best. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest you collaborated on the article based on my argument.

If it's just a coincidence, explain yourself. Don't start getting all sarcastic defensive.

The author there uses the exact same "technically" argument to my comment that John uses here - so is that another coincidence?

ah so simply agreeing with the concept he was getting at means I am him. got it

Posters under two names using the same incorrect argument - with the same term, to the same comment, by itself might be a coincidence. When you are already being asked about other coincidences, it does seem to add credence to the argument.

Ohio State dominates it's own state better than anyone else including Texas/Texas and Syracuse/New York. That is what i am arguing and please tell me where I was wrong on that?

You're wrong because that wasn't the comment I made - or that the "author" originally made. It was that statement I commented on. He's said "Ohio was the largest state by far with only one P5 program". He was wrong. New York is. That's what I pointed out.

You've changed the argument to roughly "Ohio is the largest state where the one P5 school so dominates the hearts and minds of college football fans" or to "Ohio is the largest college football crazy state where there is only one P5 program". Those are very different comments than what the "author" made - or that I corrected. Yet both the "author" and you made the exact same incorrect comment back - that I was only correct on a "technicality".

Having been a professor for many years, and corrected many papers and tests; I can tell you that incorrect answers tend not to use the same incorrect terms. When I see two with exactly the same incorrect answer (especially if it is "unusually off") the students either 1) studied together or 2) one cheated off the other.

So yes, it adds credence to stx's argument.

(07-09-2014 03:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  And if you want to talk about "credence" how about the fact that one of STXs threads he pointed to I didn't make until AFTER this article came out?

This is true. But you also make reference to a reddit post in that thread where you discussed the same thing with other UC fans. It sounds like you had already asked about it on there.

Just explain why you posted the threads, which were random at best, if you wanted to discredit that coincidence. You never once explained why you wanted the information.

then B-12 has to go after Buffalo

(07-09-2014 03:56 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:51 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:48 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Ohio State dominates it's own state better than anyone else including Texas/Texas and Syracuse/New York. That is what i am arguing and please tell me where I was wrong on that?

Can say the same thing for Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, etc..

You have to reread to where we were talking about large states

ok. Maybe you, I mean the bloger lol, thought Rutgers was in New York also.

Yeah I totally believe rutgers is in NJ.

speaking of which, how the hell are you guys not putting two & two together on Nert arguing earlier in the thread that the blogger "overlooked syracuse?"

I was sticking around hoping for STX to own up to his stupid pointing to a thread I made that wasn't posted until after the article was published mistake.

he is MIA and now i see this thread is taking a turn to just general stupid all around.

Calm yourself down, dude. I don't spend my entire time on here looking to argue with you. I just read the article, said 'Wow, that sounds familiar' and pointed out some coincidences. You defending the author so fiercely just seemed to support what I was already thinking so I pointed it out.

I've given you ample time to explain why you posted those threads and simply say 'I really didn't have anything to do with this, it was just a coincidence.' Instead, you've gotten heated and defensive, which actually makes you appear more guilty. I don't care if you wrote the article or not. It's not a big deal. The article makes some factual mistakes and I think the premise is a bit off, but it's just a random fansite. It's at least a supported argument. If it makes you feel better, there are some good articles there if you've written any past ones. I just pointed it out and now you are freaking out for some reason.

(07-09-2014 03:58 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  And if you want to talk about "credence" how about the fact that one of STXs threads he pointed to I didn't make until AFTER this article came out?

This is true. But you also make reference to a reddit post in that thread where you discussed the same thing with other UC fans. It sounds like you had already asked about it on there.

Just explain why you posted the threads, which were random at best, if you wanted to discredit that coincidence. You never once explained why you wanted the information.

the reddit link i posted was a reddit thread about the very same article. The two are related.....

now i know you are just full of ****. because first you didn't even look at the thread, now you are shown to have not even have looked at the link within the thread.

(07-09-2014 04:04 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:56 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:51 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:48 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Can say the same thing for Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, etc..

You have to reread to where we were talking about large states

ok. Maybe you, I mean the bloger lol, thought Rutgers was in New York also.

Yeah I totally believe rutgers is in NJ.

speaking of which, how the hell are you guys not putting two & two together on Nert arguing earlier in the thread that the blogger "overlooked syracuse?"

I was sticking around hoping for STX to own up to his stupid pointing to a thread I made that wasn't posted until after the article was published mistake.

he is MIA and now i see this thread is taking a turn to just general stupid all around.

Calm yourself down, dude. I don't spend my entire time on here looking to argue with you. I just read the article, said 'Wow, that sounds familiar' and pointed out some coincidences. You defending the author so fiercely just seemed to support what I was already thinking so I pointed it out.

I've given you ample time to explain why you posted those threads and simply say 'I really didn't have anything to do with this, it was just a coincidence.' Instead, you've gotten heated and defensive, which actually makes you appear more guilty. I don't care if you wrote the article or not. It's not a big deal. The article makes some factual mistakes and I think the premise is a bit off, but it's just a random fansite. It's at least a supported argument. If it makes you feel better, there are some good articles there if you've written any past ones. I just pointed it out and now you are freaking out for some reason.

stx: based on what has been posted here and on the comments on the article itself, (I haven't back searched the threads you pointed to - and I can't because I have to go teach a class in a few minutes), but I believe that one of your assumptions or the other is probable: he either wrote it or collaborated to write it.

(07-09-2014 04:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:58 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  And if you want to talk about "credence" how about the fact that one of STXs threads he pointed to I didn't make until AFTER this article came out?

This is true. But you also make reference to a reddit post in that thread where you discussed the same thing with other UC fans. It sounds like you had already asked about it on there.

Just explain why you posted the threads, which were random at best, if you wanted to discredit that coincidence. You never once explained why you wanted the information.

the reddit link i posted was a reddit thread about the very same article. The two are related.....

now i know you are just full of ****. because first you didn't even look at the thread, now you are shown to have not even have looked at the link within the thread.

John, the reddit thread is from 2 days ago, and the blog article is from yesterday. It is impossible that they are related.

(07-09-2014 04:09 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 04:04 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:56 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:51 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  You have to reread to where we were talking about large states

ok. Maybe you, I mean the bloger lol, thought Rutgers was in New York also.

Yeah I totally believe rutgers is in NJ.

speaking of which, how the hell are you guys not putting two & two together on Nert arguing earlier in the thread that the blogger "overlooked syracuse?"

I was sticking around hoping for STX to own up to his stupid pointing to a thread I made that wasn't posted until after the article was published mistake.

he is MIA and now i see this thread is taking a turn to just general stupid all around.

Calm yourself down, dude. I don't spend my entire time on here looking to argue with you. I just read the article, said 'Wow, that sounds familiar' and pointed out some coincidences. You defending the author so fiercely just seemed to support what I was already thinking so I pointed it out.

I've given you ample time to explain why you posted those threads and simply say 'I really didn't have anything to do with this, it was just a coincidence.' Instead, you've gotten heated and defensive, which actually makes you appear more guilty. I don't care if you wrote the article or not. It's not a big deal. The article makes some factual mistakes and I think the premise is a bit off, but it's just a random fansite. It's at least a supported argument. If it makes you feel better, there are some good articles there if you've written any past ones. I just pointed it out and now you are freaking out for some reason.

stx: based on what has been posted here and on the comments on the article itself, (I haven't back searched the threads you pointed to - and I can't because I have to go teach a class in a few minutes), but I believe that one of your assumptions or the other is probable: he either wrote it or collaborated to write it.

And John you always have been anti Cincinnati, for reasons unknown to me.

(07-09-2014 04:04 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:56 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:51 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:48 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Can say the same thing for Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, etc..

You have to reread to where we were talking about large states

ok. Maybe you, I mean the bloger lol, thought Rutgers was in New York also.

Yeah I totally believe rutgers is in NJ.

speaking of which, how the hell are you guys not putting two & two together on Nert arguing earlier in the thread that the blogger "overlooked syracuse?"

I was sticking around hoping for STX to own up to his stupid pointing to a thread I made that wasn't posted until after the article was published mistake.

he is MIA and now i see this thread is taking a turn to just general stupid all around.

Calm yourself down, dude. I don't spend my entire time on here looking to argue with you. I just read the article, said 'Wow, that sounds familiar' and pointed out some coincidences. You defending the author so fiercely just seemed to support what I was already thinking so I pointed it out.

I've given you ample time to explain why you posted those threads and simply say 'I really didn't have anything to do with this, it was just a coincidence.' Instead, you've gotten heated and defensive, which actually makes you appear more guilty. I don't care if you wrote the article or not. It's not a big deal. The article makes some factual mistakes and I think the premise is a bit off, but it's just a random fansite. It's at least a supported argument. If it makes you feel better, there are some good articles there if you've written any past ones. I just pointed it out and now you are freaking out for some reason.

i am only heated because it is a pretty bold accusation and implying that I am spamming csnbbs with a personal blog and something that would lead to either an uncomfortable conversation with GTS or getting stuck with an inaccurate label.

It is frustrating when you do so, disappear, and everyone jumps on me because you decided to very publicly make an accusation that normal posters would of reserved for PM.

(07-09-2014 04:11 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 04:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:58 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  And if you want to talk about "credence" how about the fact that one of STXs threads he pointed to I didn't make until AFTER this article came out?

This is true. But you also make reference to a reddit post in that thread where you discussed the same thing with other UC fans. It sounds like you had already asked about it on there.

Just explain why you posted the threads, which were random at best, if you wanted to discredit that coincidence. You never once explained why you wanted the information.

the reddit link i posted was a reddit thread about the very same article. The two are related.....

now i know you are just full of ****. because first you didn't even look at the thread, now you are shown to have not even have looked at the link within the thread.

John, the reddit thread is from 2 days ago, and the blog article is from yesterday. It is impossible that they are related.

read that thread, click on the reddit to get to reddit, click on the reddit title and it is ==> a link to the article.

it is this kind of stupidity that is really starting to frustrate me.

(07-09-2014 04:13 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 04:09 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 04:04 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:56 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:51 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  ok. Maybe you, I mean the bloger lol, thought Rutgers was in New York also.

Yeah I totally believe rutgers is in NJ.

speaking of which, how the hell are you guys not putting two & two together on Nert arguing earlier in the thread that the blogger "overlooked syracuse?"

I was sticking around hoping for STX to own up to his stupid pointing to a thread I made that wasn't posted until after the article was published mistake.

he is MIA and now i see this thread is taking a turn to just general stupid all around.

Calm yourself down, dude. I don't spend my entire time on here looking to argue with you. I just read the article, said 'Wow, that sounds familiar' and pointed out some coincidences. You defending the author so fiercely just seemed to support what I was already thinking so I pointed it out.

I've given you ample time to explain why you posted those threads and simply say 'I really didn't have anything to do with this, it was just a coincidence.' Instead, you've gotten heated and defensive, which actually makes you appear more guilty. I don't care if you wrote the article or not. It's not a big deal. The article makes some factual mistakes and I think the premise is a bit off, but it's just a random fansite. It's at least a supported argument. If it makes you feel better, there are some good articles there if you've written any past ones. I just pointed it out and now you are freaking out for some reason.

stx: based on what has been posted here and on the comments on the article itself, (I haven't back searched the threads you pointed to - and I can't because I have to go teach a class in a few minutes), but I believe that one of your assumptions or the other is probable: he either wrote it or collaborated to write it.

And John you always have been anti Cincinnati, for reasons unknown to me.

don't forget TCU, ECU, UCONN, the whole damn big 12, the whole damn AAC, and the whole damn SEC

(07-09-2014 04:19 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 04:11 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 04:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:58 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  And if you want to talk about "credence" how about the fact that one of STXs threads he pointed to I didn't make until AFTER this article came out?

This is true. But you also make reference to a reddit post in that thread where you discussed the same thing with other UC fans. It sounds like you had already asked about it on there.

Just explain why you posted the threads, which were random at best, if you wanted to discredit that coincidence. You never once explained why you wanted the information.

the reddit link i posted was a reddit thread about the very same article. The two are related.....

now i know you are just full of ****. because first you didn't even look at the thread, now you are shown to have not even have looked at the link within the thread.

John, the reddit thread is from 2 days ago, and the blog article is from yesterday. It is impossible that they are related.

read that thread, click on the reddit to get to reddit, click on the reddit title and it is ==> a link to the article.

it is this kind of stupidity that is really starting to frustrate me.

The reddit thread was not based on the blog article, because the thread was started prior to the date of the blog article, just saying.

(07-09-2014 04:25 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 04:19 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 04:11 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 04:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-09-2014 03:58 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  This is true. But you also make reference to a reddit post in that thread where you discussed the same thing with other UC fans. It sounds like you had already asked about it on there.

Just explain why you posted the threads, which were random at best, if you wanted to discredit that coincidence. You never once explained why you wanted the information.

the reddit link i posted was a reddit thread about the very same article. The two are related.....

now i know you are just full of ****. because first you didn't even look at the thread, now you are shown to have not even have looked at the link within the thread.

John, the reddit thread is from 2 days ago, and the blog article is from yesterday. It is impossible that they are related.

read that thread, click on the reddit to get to reddit, click on the reddit title and it is ==> a link to the article.

it is this kind of stupidity that is really starting to frustrate me.

The reddit thread was not based on the blog article, because the thread was started prior to the date of the blog article, just saying.

please put on an "i am stupid" shirt

1. I post a thread + the reddit link. that specific link is a reddit link to the article. this makes the dates irrelevant because by that standard alone, it is already proof that the csnbbs thread i made was not made until after the article came out.

2. the times on the article are off hence the reason it looks that way. I just posted a comment at 5:28 PM est and the comment came up at 9:28 est. on sportspolitico, and yet according to the csnbbs clock this very post was made at 3:30 PM est.

John, even if you wrote I don't care. I believe you

(07-09-2014 04:44 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  John, even if you wrote I don't care. I believe you

i am not even sure what that means.

I for one hope that the Big12 never adds Cincy. Mostly due to the fact that I would like to see Cincy and SMU added to the SEC. This would solve a lot of problems in scheduling and would add a very valuable media market.