(04-21-2022 10:57 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  If you were truly happy you wouldn't be so sensitive about "others" posting on a specific board. Again the irony...

Apologies for derailing the thread while Rag sits on the couch, I'll send an invoice over for this therapy session, same time next week?

Not posting normal. You however try to start stuff and involve the SBC in things they aren't apart of. If we want to read about the SBC, we will go to that board.

Cusa finally got tired of it and took away mod privileges and favorable treatment towards the SBC because you guys are pests. Hope the AAC does the same

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

(04-21-2022 11:22 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(04-21-2022 10:57 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  If you were truly happy you wouldn't be so sensitive about "others" posting on a specific board. Again the irony...

Apologies for derailing the thread while Rag sits on the couch, I'll send an invoice over for this therapy session, same time next week?

Not posting normal. You however try to start stuff and involve the SBC in things they aren't apart of. If we want to read about the SBC, we will go to that board.

Cusa finally got tired of it and took away mod privileges and favorable treatment towards the SBC because you guys are pests. Hope the AAC does the same

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Please stop that

(04-21-2022 11:30 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(04-21-2022 11:22 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(04-21-2022 10:57 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  If you were truly happy you wouldn't be so sensitive about "others" posting on a specific board. Again the irony...

Apologies for derailing the thread while Rag sits on the couch, I'll send an invoice over for this therapy session, same time next week?

Not posting normal. You however try to start stuff and involve the SBC in things they aren't apart of. If we want to read about the SBC, we will go to that board.

Cusa finally got tired of it and took away mod privileges and favorable treatment towards the SBC because you guys are pests. Hope the AAC does the same

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Please stop that

They bring up the SBC in discussions that the SBC aren't a part of just to tout them. Sorry separated the words properly

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

(04-21-2022 08:52 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 10:54 PM)Eagle Talon Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 10:40 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 10:22 PM)Eagle Talon Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 10:00 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  No. You are delusional.

Best of luck proving me wrong. Glad to see you excited for your team.

Football
UNT has beaten Southern Miss in 4 of our last 6 games, including a 38-14 beat-down this past season.

Basketball
UNT has beaten Southern Miss in any of the last 6 games. UNT basketball has now beaten USM for about 4 years and counting.

Academics
UNT is a Tier 1 Research University ranked #277. Southern Miss is a Tier 1 Research University ranked somewhere in the group of #299-#391.

UNT's athletic Budget is about $41million. Southern Miss has an athletic budget of about $23million

Southern Miss just isn't that great anymore, and certainly not any better than UNT.

It appears No. Texas and USM are 6-6 all time in football. Perhaps we will meet in a bowl one day to settle the score. I’d bet on USM. Congrats on your opportunity in the AAC.

USM has 3 major issues: market, budget, and basketball.

you know it, we know it...it is what it is.

I agree with you about market, budget, and basketball. It was football coaching as well between 2011 and 2020. Thankfully we have got that one fixed. Miss our black and blue games and hope to see Memphis on some future OOC schedules. Y’all have really made the best of the money and exposure of the AAC after you got your own coaching situation sorted out.

.

The most common phrase uttered on this site in the past month:

"You are delusional!"

.

(04-20-2022 11:33 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, adding six weak CUSA schools was a very bad move for the conference, and yes, I know about ESPN and keeping the media money the same for the legacy members. Bad move.

IMO, the only way we should have added more than two teams is if the "MWC four" that were rumored to be in discussions with us had agreed to come.

But there weren't more than two schools from CUSA worth taking.

Heck, I would have taken two SBC schools - ULL and App State - over any of the CUSA schools we took, save possibly for Rice.

Don't be shocked if uab and FAU are competing with and beating usf plenty when entering the AAC.

Sadly, I won't be surprised if they do that. Our program is at a point right now where losing to just about anyone isn't a surprise.

But that's not the issue here, the issue is who we should have added to the conference, and IMO "ability to beat USF" isn't a valid criteria, LOL.

(04-20-2022 12:19 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, adding six weak CUSA schools was a very bad move for the conference, and yes, I know about ESPN and keeping the media money the same for the legacy members. Bad move.

IMO, the only way we should have added more than two teams is if the "MWC four" that were rumored to be in discussions with us had agreed to come.

But there weren't more than two schools from CUSA worth taking.

Heck, I would have taken two SBC schools - ULL and App State - over any of the CUSA schools we took, save possibly for Rice.

Yeah, but, heck, you've made it abundantly clear that you're not an AAC fan, so who cares?

All the trash-talking by non-AAC fans and all the griping and moaning by AAC fans about the new situation isn't going to change anything.

What's done is done. It's time to grow up, accept what has happened, and learn to make the best out of it.

LOL ..... Like most around here I imagine, I care about my school. And to the extent that what is good for the AAC is good for my school, and that is often the case, I care about the AAC. In this case, I care about who we should have added because to the extent new additions are perceived to weaken or strengthen the AAC, then that reflects on USF. IMO, the new additions weakened our conference moreso than adding just two or three schools would have.

Beyond that, we all know that what is done is done, but this thread is about discussing how many teams we should have added. So if you're not interested in discussing that or think its a waste of time, don't gripe and moan about others who are, just ignore this thread and read another.

(04-22-2022 07:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:33 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, adding six weak CUSA schools was a very bad move for the conference, and yes, I know about ESPN and keeping the media money the same for the legacy members. Bad move.

IMO, the only way we should have added more than two teams is if the "MWC four" that were rumored to be in discussions with us had agreed to come.

But there weren't more than two schools from CUSA worth taking.

Heck, I would have taken two SBC schools - ULL and App State - over any of the CUSA schools we took, save possibly for Rice.

Don't be shocked if uab and FAU are competing with and beating usf plenty when entering the AAC.

Sadly, I won't be surprised if they do that. Our program is at a point right now where losing to just about anyone isn't a surprise.

But that's not the issue here, the issue is who we should have added to the conference, and IMO "ability to beat USF" isn't a valid criteria, LOL.

USF has proven in the recent past the capacity to achieve at a high level in football. USF is building a new stadium - a sign of commitment. All it takes (like all old AAC members) is hiring the right coach.

The AAC is now patch-worked with schools providing little value to old AAC members. It is unfortunate the old AAC had to comply with ESPN. It could have been better, sadly.

(04-22-2022 07:48 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 07:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:33 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, adding six weak CUSA schools was a very bad move for the conference, and yes, I know about ESPN and keeping the media money the same for the legacy members. Bad move.

IMO, the only way we should have added more than two teams is if the "MWC four" that were rumored to be in discussions with us had agreed to come.

But there weren't more than two schools from CUSA worth taking.

Heck, I would have taken two SBC schools - ULL and App State - over any of the CUSA schools we took, save possibly for Rice.

Don't be shocked if uab and FAU are competing with and beating usf plenty when entering the AAC.

Sadly, I won't be surprised if they do that. Our program is at a point right now where losing to just about anyone isn't a surprise.

But that's not the issue here, the issue is who we should have added to the conference, and IMO "ability to beat USF" isn't a valid criteria, LOL.

USF has proven in the recent past the capacity to achieve at a high level in football. USF is building a new stadium - a sign of commitment. All it takes (like all old AAC members) is hiring the right coach.

The AAC is now patch-worked with schools providing little value to old AAC members. It is unfortunate the old AAC had to comply with ESPN. It could have been better, sadly.

Thanks, and well said.

(04-21-2022 12:55 PM)Eagle Talon Wrote:  

(04-21-2022 08:52 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 10:54 PM)Eagle Talon Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 10:40 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 10:22 PM)Eagle Talon Wrote:  Best of luck proving me wrong. Glad to see you excited for your team.

Football
UNT has beaten Southern Miss in 4 of our last 6 games, including a 38-14 beat-down this past season.

Basketball
UNT has beaten Southern Miss in any of the last 6 games. UNT basketball has now beaten USM for about 4 years and counting.

Academics
UNT is a Tier 1 Research University ranked #277. Southern Miss is a Tier 1 Research University ranked somewhere in the group of #299-#391.

UNT's athletic Budget is about $41million. Southern Miss has an athletic budget of about $23million

Southern Miss just isn't that great anymore, and certainly not any better than UNT.

It appears No. Texas and USM are 6-6 all time in football. Perhaps we will meet in a bowl one day to settle the score. I’d bet on USM. Congrats on your opportunity in the AAC.

USM has 3 major issues: market, budget, and basketball.

you know it, we know it...it is what it is.

I agree with you about market, budget, and basketball. It was football coaching as well between 2011 and 2020. Thankfully we have got that one fixed. Miss our black and blue games and hope to see Memphis on some future OOC schedules. Y’all have really made the best of the money and exposure of the AAC after you got your own coaching situation sorted out.

No school has done more with less in the past than USM. Our bruising football games still leave a mark on the psyche of Tiger fans.

(04-22-2022 08:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 07:48 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 07:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:33 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, adding six weak CUSA schools was a very bad move for the conference, and yes, I know about ESPN and keeping the media money the same for the legacy members. Bad move.

IMO, the only way we should have added more than two teams is if the "MWC four" that were rumored to be in discussions with us had agreed to come.

But there weren't more than two schools from CUSA worth taking.

Heck, I would have taken two SBC schools - ULL and App State - over any of the CUSA schools we took, save possibly for Rice.

Don't be shocked if uab and FAU are competing with and beating usf plenty when entering the AAC.

Sadly, I won't be surprised if they do that. Our program is at a point right now where losing to just about anyone isn't a surprise.

But that's not the issue here, the issue is who we should have added to the conference, and IMO "ability to beat USF" isn't a valid criteria, LOL.

USF has proven in the recent past the capacity to achieve at a high level in football. USF is building a new stadium - a sign of commitment. All it takes (like all old AAC members) is hiring the right coach.

The AAC is now patch-worked with schools providing little value to old AAC members. It is unfortunate the old AAC had to comply with ESPN. It could have been better, sadly.

Thanks, and well said.

Quo, I have always respected your opinion but in this case I disagree. Any or all of the CUSA-6 are as good as Cincy, UCF, or Houston or any of the other AAC members were in 2013 or when they joined the AAC. The conference has improved a lot since then, and there is no reason to believe, that given time, the CUSA-6 will not do the same.

We should have added ODU over a couple of the schools we offered. Big market, big fanbase, traditionally solid in hoops, growing football, good baseball.

A couple of the new additions were flat out cringey.

Can't wait for the "SIX" new members to come in and beat the $HIT out of the "Overconfident" and "Underachieving" egomaniacs in this conference!

(04-22-2022 09:21 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  Can't wait for the "SIX" new members to come in and beat the $HIT out of the "Overconfident" and "Underachieving" egomaniacs in this conference!

Realistically, the present state of the CUSA (UAB excepted) schools does not support your assertion- particularly Rice which is among the dregs in FB and BB.

(04-22-2022 09:43 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 09:21 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  Can't wait for the "SIX" new members to come in and beat the $HIT out of the "Overconfident" and "Underachieving" egomaniacs in this conference!

Realistically, the present state of the CUSA (UAB excepted) schools does not support your assertion- particularly Rice which is among the dregs in FB and BB.

Rice has great potential should they decide to do something athletically.

(04-22-2022 09:43 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 09:21 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  Can't wait for the "SIX" new members to come in and beat the $HIT out of the "Overconfident" and "Underachieving" egomaniacs in this conference!

Realistically, the present state of the CUSA (UAB excepted) schools does not support your assertion- particularly Rice which is among the dregs in FB and BB.

Eh, judging by last year's results, I feel like we probably would have lost to one of UAB or UTSA in conference last year (whichever game was away probably).

UABs results at Marshall were pretty similar to ours (1 score game), and UTSA also had a really tight win at Memphis.

(04-22-2022 09:09 AM)SMUstang Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 08:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 07:48 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 07:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:33 AM)Ragu Wrote:  Don't be shocked if uab and FAU are competing with and beating usf plenty when entering the AAC.

Sadly, I won't be surprised if they do that. Our program is at a point right now where losing to just about anyone isn't a surprise.

But that's not the issue here, the issue is who we should have added to the conference, and IMO "ability to beat USF" isn't a valid criteria, LOL.

USF has proven in the recent past the capacity to achieve at a high level in football. USF is building a new stadium - a sign of commitment. All it takes (like all old AAC members) is hiring the right coach.

The AAC is now patch-worked with schools providing little value to old AAC members. It is unfortunate the old AAC had to comply with ESPN. It could have been better, sadly.

Thanks, and well said.

Quo, I have always respected your opinion but in this case I disagree. Any or all of the CUSA-6 are as good as Cincy, UCF, or Houston or any of the other AAC members were in 2013 or when they joined the AAC. The conference has improved a lot since then, and there is no reason to believe, that given time, the CUSA-6 will not do the same.

Absolutely ridiculous take. None have the history of Cincy, Houston or UCF. All 3 had fairly recent top 25 finishes in football and conference championships. That says nothing of Cincy and Houston’s basketball history which completely dwarfs the CUSA6 probably combined. UNCC and Rice in particular bring nothing to revenue sports. UTSA is somehow even worse in hoops than ECU, USF and Tulane historically


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(04-22-2022 10:09 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 09:43 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(04-22-2022 09:21 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  Can't wait for the "SIX" new members to come in and beat the $HIT out of the "Overconfident" and "Underachieving" egomaniacs in this conference!

Realistically, the present state of the CUSA (UAB excepted) schools does not support your assertion- particularly Rice which is among the dregs in FB and BB.

Eh, judging by last year's results, I feel like we probably would have lost to one of UAB or UTSA in conference last year (whichever game was away probably).

UABs results at Marshall were pretty similar to ours (1 score game), and UTSA also had a really tight win at Memphis.

I am not addressing the ups and downs of a particular season, but the vitality of a program over a span of time. For example UTSA had a good team last season, but it is a rarity.

The legacy AAC members should not delude ourselves. We are counting on the CUSA adds to reach or expand their potential, but I have read nothing here concrete about their plans. Instead, we are regaled with renditions of their present worthiness and subject to personal attacks.