(05-14-2014 02:43 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 02:36 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  Liberty fans you do realize that the June 1st deadline doesn't matter to UMass. Having any other option other than Liberty is a BAD sign for you guys.

So there could be the following consensus reached.

1) Lets just wait on LU. They aren't ready now. And they'll still be there if we need them later
2) If the NCAA doesn't allow us to have a CCG at 11, then we can add UMass

This is a very good point. Why would a conference take a member not at the top of their list knowing they'll be around later. Taking Liberty now would like drafting them in second round knowing they'll be available in round 7.

For what its worth, from talking to who I know...There is nothing imminent with UMass, and its entirely likely they will never be invited at all. What did happen this week is UMass made their final pitch to the SBC before the Spring Meetings about why they should be considered for SBC Membership.

This is no different than Liberty's president jumping on a plane and flying to Monroe, Statesboro, Little Rock, and Jonesboro like he did a couple weeks ago. They both badly want spots and are both doing whatever they can to get that spot.

In fact, Reading between the lines, I don't think any of these national writers actually expect the SBC to invite UMass.

(05-14-2014 08:32 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  For what its worth, from talking to who I know...There is nothing imminent with UMass, and its entirely likely they will never be invited at all. What did happen this week is UMass made their final pitch to the SBC before the Spring Meetings about why they should be considered for SBC Membership.

This is no different than Liberty's president jumping on a plane and flying to Monroe, Statesboro, Little Rock, and Jonesboro like he did a couple weeks ago. They both badly want spots and are both doing whatever they can to get that spot.

In fact, Reading between the lines, I don't think any of these national writers actually expect the SBC to invite UMass.

Its UMASS or nothing this year.

(05-14-2014 08:35 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:32 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  For what its worth, from talking to who I know...There is nothing imminent with UMass, and its entirely likely they will never be invited at all. What did happen this week is UMass made their final pitch to the SBC before the Spring Meetings about why they should be considered for SBC Membership.

This is no different than Liberty's president jumping on a plane and flying to Monroe, Statesboro, Little Rock, and Jonesboro like he did a couple weeks ago. They both badly want spots and are both doing whatever they can to get that spot.

In fact, Reading between the lines, I don't think any of these national writers actually expect the SBC to invite UMass.

Its UMASS or nothing this year.

And my expectation is that its going to be nothing. That's what I am being told now at least. Neither UMass or Liberty has the Votes..

(05-14-2014 08:37 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:35 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:32 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  For what its worth, from talking to who I know...There is nothing imminent with UMass, and its entirely likely they will never be invited at all. What did happen this week is UMass made their final pitch to the SBC before the Spring Meetings about why they should be considered for SBC Membership.

This is no different than Liberty's president jumping on a plane and flying to Monroe, Statesboro, Little Rock, and Jonesboro like he did a couple weeks ago. They both badly want spots and are both doing whatever they can to get that spot.

In fact, Reading between the lines, I don't think any of these national writers actually expect the SBC to invite UMass.

Its UMASS or nothing this year.

And my expectation is that its going to be nothing. That's what I am being told now at least. Neither UMass or Liberty has the Votes..

UMASS is much closer than Liberty to get in.

1 of the people in our athletic department (who knows and works with our AD) said today anything can happen at the conference meetings but if he were a betting man his bets would be on no add this year.

(05-14-2014 08:41 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:37 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:35 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:32 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  For what its worth, from talking to who I know...There is nothing imminent with UMass, and its entirely likely they will never be invited at all. What did happen this week is UMass made their final pitch to the SBC before the Spring Meetings about why they should be considered for SBC Membership.

This is no different than Liberty's president jumping on a plane and flying to Monroe, Statesboro, Little Rock, and Jonesboro like he did a couple weeks ago. They both badly want spots and are both doing whatever they can to get that spot.

In fact, Reading between the lines, I don't think any of these national writers actually expect the SBC to invite UMass.

Its UMASS or nothing this year.

And my expectation is that its going to be nothing. That's what I am being told now at least. Neither UMass or Liberty has the Votes..

UMASS is much closer than Liberty to get in.

Yes...However its going to take some convincing that 12 schools are absolutely necessary.

I really believe the conference is coming around to the idea that 11 may not be such a bad number, especially if we can have a football championship game with 11.

(05-14-2014 08:45 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I really believe the conference is coming around to the idea that 11 may not be such a bad number, especially if we can have a football championship game with 11.

You don't want this. You really don't. Even if we don't bring on a 12th this year, the SBC will be at 12 members at some point. If the SBC decides to stay at 11 permanently, the eastern schools need to move lop off IDAHO as soon as the contract would allow it.

No. The conference took Idaho and NMSU to get to 12. These are the same school presidents that voted to take freaking IDAHO. UMASS has more going for it than IDAHO ever had.

It's a shame the vote is coming in about a week instead of Thanksgiving time. This way both parties would know how we do with getting games back on campus and our first year with Whipple back. Do expect attendance to increase again by 4-5 thousand.

UMass may be invited at some point but I don't believe at this point there are 9 schools ready to vote "yes" for UMass or for Liberty.

(05-14-2014 09:00 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  UMass may be invited at some point but I don't believe at this point there are 9 schools ready to vote "yes" for UMass or for Liberty.

We will see. Liberty is DONE. UMASS is not.

(05-14-2014 08:51 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:45 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I really believe the conference is coming around to the idea that 11 may not be such a bad number, especially if we can have a football championship game with 11.

You don't want this. You really don't. Even if we don't bring on a 12th this year, the SBC will be at 12 members at some point. If the SBC decides to stay at 11 permanently, the eastern schools need to move lop off IDAHO as soon as the contract would allow it.

No. The conference took Idaho and NMSU to get to 12. These are the same school presidents that voted to take freaking IDAHO. UMASS has more going for it than IDAHO ever had.

East Schools want 12. West Schools Don't.

As GS's AD has said in public comments, the hardest part of these meetings is going to be getting the two sides to agree because the two divisions are so total opposites. The West Schools Contain 4 teams who have been SBC Members for a long time, with a West leaning South Alabama as a 5th. The East is made up of three new programs and Troy.

If you are an Arkansas State or The Cajuns.../what incentive is there for you to go to 12 teams?

(05-14-2014 09:02 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:51 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:45 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I really believe the conference is coming around to the idea that 11 may not be such a bad number, especially if we can have a football championship game with 11.

You don't want this. You really don't. Even if we don't bring on a 12th this year, the SBC will be at 12 members at some point. If the SBC decides to stay at 11 permanently, the eastern schools need to move lop off IDAHO as soon as the contract would allow it.

No. The conference took Idaho and NMSU to get to 12. These are the same school presidents that voted to take freaking IDAHO. UMASS has more going for it than IDAHO ever had.

East Schools want 12. West Schools Don't.

As GS's AD has said in public comments, the hardest part of these meetings is going to be getting the two sides to agree because the two divisions are so total opposites. The West Schools Contain 4 teams who have been SBC Members for a long time, with a West leaning South Alabama as a 5th. The East is made up of three new programs and Troy.

Yeah. I sense where you are by your comments, and if your administration echoes them, there are going to be some real long term issues between the divisions. AppState is not going to allow the conference to be half pregnant. If we can't get to 12 next week with a perfectly viable option in front of us (UMASS), then I have real concerns for the ability of this conference to get anything done together.

I've read your posts over the last several months, and I can tell you have knowledge... I think you have read enough of my posts to know that I do too. This is a serious test in my book next week or so. The UMASS and potentially NMSU issue worked together would be a sign of reasonableness and compromise between both interests. If it doesn't happen, I don't think it bodes well... just my opinion.

(05-14-2014 09:09 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 09:02 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:51 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:45 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I really believe the conference is coming around to the idea that 11 may not be such a bad number, especially if we can have a football championship game with 11.

You don't want this. You really don't. Even if we don't bring on a 12th this year, the SBC will be at 12 members at some point. If the SBC decides to stay at 11 permanently, the eastern schools need to move lop off IDAHO as soon as the contract would allow it.

No. The conference took Idaho and NMSU to get to 12. These are the same school presidents that voted to take freaking IDAHO. UMASS has more going for it than IDAHO ever had.

East Schools want 12. West Schools Don't.

As GS's AD has said in public comments, the hardest part of these meetings is going to be getting the two sides to agree because the two divisions are so total opposites. The West Schools Contain 4 teams who have been SBC Members for a long time, with a West leaning South Alabama as a 5th. The East is made up of three new programs and Troy.

Yeah. I sense where you are by your comments, and if your administration echoes them, there are going to be some real long term issues between the divisions. AppState is not going to allow the conference to be half pregnant. If we can't get to 12 next week with a perfectly viable option in front of us (UMASS), then I have real concerns for the ability of this conference to get anything done together.

I've read your posts over the last several months, and I can tell you have knowledge... I think you have read enough of my posts to know that I do too. This is a serious test in my book next week. The UMASS and potentially NMSU issue worked together would be a sign of reasonableness and compromise between both interests. If it doesn't happen, I don't think it bodes well... just my opinion.

I don't think our administration is against 12...Iour administration just wants an option that helps our school grow.

We'd gladly take 12 if Missouri State was the 12th.

(05-14-2014 09:11 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 09:09 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 09:02 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:51 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:45 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I really believe the conference is coming around to the idea that 11 may not be such a bad number, especially if we can have a football championship game with 11.

You don't want this. You really don't. Even if we don't bring on a 12th this year, the SBC will be at 12 members at some point. If the SBC decides to stay at 11 permanently, the eastern schools need to move lop off IDAHO as soon as the contract would allow it.

No. The conference took Idaho and NMSU to get to 12. These are the same school presidents that voted to take freaking IDAHO. UMASS has more going for it than IDAHO ever had.

East Schools want 12. West Schools Don't.

As GS's AD has said in public comments, the hardest part of these meetings is going to be getting the two sides to agree because the two divisions are so total opposites. The West Schools Contain 4 teams who have been SBC Members for a long time, with a West leaning South Alabama as a 5th. The East is made up of three new programs and Troy.

Yeah. I sense where you are by your comments, and if your administration echoes them, there are going to be some real long term issues between the divisions. AppState is not going to allow the conference to be half pregnant. If we can't get to 12 next week with a perfectly viable option in front of us (UMASS), then I have real concerns for the ability of this conference to get anything done together.

I've read your posts over the last several months, and I can tell you have knowledge... I think you have read enough of my posts to know that I do too. This is a serious test in my book next week. The UMASS and potentially NMSU issue worked together would be a sign of reasonableness and compromise between both interests. If it doesn't happen, I don't think it bodes well... just my opinion.

I don't think our administration is against 12...Iour administration just wants an option that helps our school grow.

We'd gladly take 12 if Missouri State was the 12th.

MSU is not ready. In 3-4 years they will be, and so will possibly 1-2 eastern teams we could choose from. No need to languish all that time.

(05-14-2014 09:15 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 09:11 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 09:09 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 09:02 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:51 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  You don't want this. You really don't. Even if we don't bring on a 12th this year, the SBC will be at 12 members at some point. If the SBC decides to stay at 11 permanently, the eastern schools need to move lop off IDAHO as soon as the contract would allow it.

No. The conference took Idaho and NMSU to get to 12. These are the same school presidents that voted to take freaking IDAHO. UMASS has more going for it than IDAHO ever had.

East Schools want 12. West Schools Don't.

As GS's AD has said in public comments, the hardest part of these meetings is going to be getting the two sides to agree because the two divisions are so total opposites. The West Schools Contain 4 teams who have been SBC Members for a long time, with a West leaning South Alabama as a 5th. The East is made up of three new programs and Troy.

Yeah. I sense where you are by your comments, and if your administration echoes them, there are going to be some real long term issues between the divisions. AppState is not going to allow the conference to be half pregnant. If we can't get to 12 next week with a perfectly viable option in front of us (UMASS), then I have real concerns for the ability of this conference to get anything done together.

I've read your posts over the last several months, and I can tell you have knowledge... I think you have read enough of my posts to know that I do too. This is a serious test in my book next week. The UMASS and potentially NMSU issue worked together would be a sign of reasonableness and compromise between both interests. If it doesn't happen, I don't think it bodes well... just my opinion.

I don't think our administration is against 12...Iour administration just wants an option that helps our school grow.

We'd gladly take 12 if Missouri State was the 12th.

MSU is not ready. In 3-4 years they will be, and so will possibly 1-2 eastern teams we could choose from. No need to languish all that time.

However, with the NCAA looking at Deregulation of the Championship Game...what effective reason do we have to go to 12 when we could just wait 3 or 4 years and get the Candidate we want without having to mess around with booting someone?

Who is languishing? Certainly not UL. No reason to add anyone unless they are a good fit and bring added value to the conference. Right now, NMSU all sports is the only add that does that.

We had 12 until WKU bolted. It only stands to reason that their replacement, if possible, should be in the east. The problem is the school we wanted (JMU) is not interested. Liberty is problematic for a number of schools so it looks like their chances are not good. So there is really no outstanding other candidate who is ready. So therein lies the problem.

(05-14-2014 08:51 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:45 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I really believe the conference is coming around to the idea that 11 may not be such a bad number, especially if we can have a football championship game with 11.

You don't want this. You really don't. Even if we don't bring on a 12th this year, the SBC will be at 12 members at some point. If the SBC decides to stay at 11 permanently, the eastern schools need to move lop off IDAHO as soon as the contract would allow it.

No. The conference took Idaho and NMSU to get to 12. These are the same school presidents that voted to take freaking IDAHO. UMASS has more going for it than IDAHO ever had.

You failed to acknowledged that we, the SBC would be taking the worst of U Mass without any of the good. That is why the MAC said goodbye. Their football is not needed. Kick out Idaho seems like you not even in yet and wanting to kick out the other guys.