(06-03-2014 02:15 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 02:08 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Last year the co-champs both should have gone to bowls first before anyone else. WKU at 7-5 also deserved a bowl. The Sun Belt just had no spot for them but more Sun Belt tie ins will take care of that in the future.

8 and 4 buddy...But 8 and 4 can easily be replaced by Idaho and New Mexico St. this upcoming season...haha...Glad we helped the Sun Belt win best G5 conference on our way out!

The state of Kentucky is horrible for football recruiting so I'm not too worried about losing WKU. If UK can barely field a Sun Belt level team, I don't see much from WKU. Now basketball, that's a different story, but I'm not all that interested in basketball.

The same can be said about the MTSU loss. I see their program struggling in football given they have to rely on out of state recruits and there are many more teams in FBS recruiting in Georgia now.

(06-03-2014 11:40 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 08:21 AM)ASUMountaineer Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 07:51 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 07:32 PM)Louisianafanrcajun90 Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 06:51 PM)Journeyman22 Wrote:  Perusing this thread is interesting, but the most surprising thing to me is everyone dissing on watching games via broadband internet vs. TV. Does anyone really make a distinction anymore? I have Netflix, Hulu, ESPN3, etc all on my big screen TV and in HD. I watch hockey and soccer on my Roku apps too. It's just not a big deal anymore.

Let's say TV money isn't a big deal to G5 schools, compared to butts in the seats. A debatable point, but not what concerns me as a fan.

I simply want to see my team on TV -- whether "real" TV or web TV. I don't care. If the SBC is getting all it's games on ESPN3, and C-USA is only getting the occasional televised game, this is a giant advantage to the SBC. And it's also the future, happening now.

The "TV" vs web argument reminds me of the old broadcast vs. cable debate. It's old-fashioned and nobody makes the distinction between the two anymore. Again, fans just want to see their teams.

+Excellent point between ESPN3 and the rest of vast sports channels, who watches broadcast sports?

The fans I know would 10x rather watch a game on TV than espn3. Believe it or not not everyone has xbox, or Netflix or the ability to connect it to the TV. And not everyone can get espn3...

I can see this as a bigger problem with the 30+ crowd than mid 20's down. But it's still not the same as pushing a button on the remote and getting a game or switching from game to game. My son has a $3500 TV and all the gadgets and with that it still seems like espn3 games have a lag when I watch them at his house.

What I like about espn3 is the ability to go back and watch a game. There's been many times when I watched a game in person I thought a lot of bad calls were made. When I watch it back a few days later or even that night...a lot of those bad calls were actually good calls.

But with Directv I still have to connect under my sons name using remote setting.

I'm 32, own a Roku, a wifi BluRay, and will soon be picking up an AppleTV. My parents (pushing 60) just got Roku, and replaced their desktop with a tablet and wireless printer. The future is here, and it's not just for younger people. Sure, the under 40 crowd will more willingly adapt to streaming the vast majority of their content, but since "cutting the cord" I don't see us ever going back to a pay-for-TV provider.

You will pay, maybe not, today, or this year...

but you will pay and in the end you'll find out you're paying more than the $56.00 a month I do for 200+ channels at Directv. Of Course 90% those channels are useless to me.

But after looking at the FREE channels you get on Roku, 90% are Religion & Spirituality and the other 10% are useless. I will stick with my $56.00 a month and watch the shows I like along with the DVR to record the games I want to. Like I said if you actually want to watch something....

even with Roku, you will end up paying for it. Do you think espn is going to give their sports away for free? Nope, not even espn3.

Cool story. I hope you're able to keep your promotion. My DirecTV bill was $105, and that was with no special packages. It was going to go up too. I am done playing the games these companies play. Also, I didn't say I didn't pay anything...but, I pay about $30/year for subscription services to Netflix, Hulu, etc. I'm good.

You seem to know a lot about the future, while saying no one can predict the future. Please, tell me more.

(06-03-2014 02:08 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Last year the co-champs both should have gone to bowls first before anyone else. WKU at 7-5 also deserved a bowl. The Sun Belt just had no spot for them but more Sun Belt tie ins will take care of that in the future.

Has anybody thought that maybe Western getting snubbed last bowl season was based in the bowl's perception of the WKU program and fan base, rather than any perception of the Sun Belt?

In the final game of the season last year, with a bowl bid still in play, WKU was only able to muster up 14,417 fans, with many of those being stAte fans.

What bowl, dependent on traveling fans to make their bowl a success, invites a program with so little support? If WKU football could draw more than flies to a football game, they probably would have received an invite last year.

In seeking to determine a cause for WKU's bowl snub, I would suggest one look no further than the WKU attendance numbers.

(06-03-2014 01:21 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 01:07 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 12:38 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 12:24 PM)runninjoe Wrote:  The defectors are the most insecure ones trying to justify how awesome their move was when nothing really changed. They turned into the fans they hated when they were members of this conference. The ones that spewed garbage about superiority when there wasn't much parody, especially in the middle of the pack. That was CUSA's golden years when they had the likes of Cincinnati, ECU, UCF, TCU, and UH. Look at their roster now and tell me with a straight face this is the same argument.

No one has turned into anything. The only one spewing garbage about superiority is SBC fans. I just don't know how anyone can ignore the below numbers from last year. If having a conference full of .500 teams is your goal there is no doubt the SBC was the best conference. If you're goal is to be strong at the top then look at the numbers

As for WKU fans...don't bring us into it and I for one will not jump into that topic

You are a piece of work. I've already explained that your numbers don't even relate to the argument at hand about the narrowing of the gap between CUSA and SBC. You shouldn't be surprised when people ignore numbers that aren't even related to the topic being discussed.

Plus, you are trotting out some sort of "strong at the top" for one year argument that goes entirely against your earlier arguments about not accepting ASU and ULL's recent strength at the top over three years as indicative!!!

And that is contrary to you chastising us about judging FIU only on the last three years as well.

Stop digging.

There's way more than one argument on this thread...

below is just one of those. I think after this I will just copy and paste two message for everything.

The below and the 1 FBS win in a combined 72 games for 3 SBC members. Nothing more than those two.

You do understand the below numbers? I want to make sure because you seem to have a problem keep up.

So, CUSA has two schools that have never played a down of FBS football and two schools that have combined for 5 FBS wins over the last two years. I see your point...CUSA is clearly better when measuring the worst teams. Point to WKUYG.

(06-03-2014 02:33 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 02:15 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 02:08 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Last year the co-champs both should have gone to bowls first before anyone else. WKU at 7-5 also deserved a bowl. The Sun Belt just had no spot for them but more Sun Belt tie ins will take care of that in the future.

8 and 4 buddy...But 8 and 4 can easily be replaced by Idaho and New Mexico St. this upcoming season...haha...Glad we helped the Sun Belt win best G5 conference on our way out!

The state of Kentucky is horrible for football recruiting so I'm not too worried about losing WKU. If UK can barely field a Sun Belt level team, I don't see much from WKU. Now basketball, that's a different story, but I'm not all that interested in basketball.The same can be said about the MTSU loss. I see their program struggling in football given they have to rely on out of state recruits and there are many more teams in FBS recruiting in Georgia now.

Yea it is, such a sad state of affairs in Kentucky....The 15 players or so from the Louisville area on our team are not very good neither are the other players from Alabama and Florida on our roster....Louisville produces 0 college football talent.....You are right! Ga Southern will have no problems recruiting now in FBS...Also our lack of talent only produced 9 guys on NFL rosters right now last 3 seasons.....Ask Navy and UK what kind of talent we had and if anyone of our players from Kentucky had any talent? Best of wishes to delusional Georgia Southern fan...

Says most Sun Belt fans, because your program sucks at basketball... good luck with being mediocre in basketball...

I understand WKU fans still pissed about no bowl last year--- I clearly said they deserved to go to a bowl. However the co-champs of the conference also deserved to go and I would argue the 2 co-champs should go first.

Good luck to WKU in CUSA. As a Ga. Southern fan I was hoping when we accepted our invitation that WKU would be our conference-mate in the Sun Belt.

(06-03-2014 02:33 PM)ASUMountaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 11:40 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 08:21 AM)ASUMountaineer Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 07:51 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 07:32 PM)Louisianafanrcajun90 Wrote:  +Excellent point between ESPN3 and the rest of vast sports channels, who watches broadcast sports?

The fans I know would 10x rather watch a game on TV than espn3. Believe it or not not everyone has xbox, or Netflix or the ability to connect it to the TV. And not everyone can get espn3...

I can see this as a bigger problem with the 30+ crowd than mid 20's down. But it's still not the same as pushing a button on the remote and getting a game or switching from game to game. My son has a $3500 TV and all the gadgets and with that it still seems like espn3 games have a lag when I watch them at his house.

What I like about espn3 is the ability to go back and watch a game. There's been many times when I watched a game in person I thought a lot of bad calls were made. When I watch it back a few days later or even that night...a lot of those bad calls were actually good calls.

But with Directv I still have to connect under my sons name using remote setting.

I'm 32, own a Roku, a wifi BluRay, and will soon be picking up an AppleTV. My parents (pushing 60) just got Roku, and replaced their desktop with a tablet and wireless printer. The future is here, and it's not just for younger people. Sure, the under 40 crowd will more willingly adapt to streaming the vast majority of their content, but since "cutting the cord" I don't see us ever going back to a pay-for-TV provider.

You will pay, maybe not, today, or this year...

but you will pay and in the end you'll find out you're paying more than the $56.00 a month I do for 200+ channels at Directv. Of Course 90% those channels are useless to me.

But after looking at the FREE channels you get on Roku, 90% are Religion & Spirituality and the other 10% are useless. I will stick with my $56.00 a month and watch the shows I like along with the DVR to record the games I want to. Like I said if you actually want to watch something....

even with Roku, you will end up paying for it. Do you think espn is going to give their sports away for free? Nope, not even espn3.

Cool story. I hope you're able to keep your promotion. My DirecTV bill was $105, and that was with no special packages. It was going to go up too. I am done playing the games these companies play.

You seem to know a lot about the future, while saying no one can predict the future. Please, tell me more.

Well predicting the future is easy if you think espn and others that make their money SELLING their content to cable and others is just going to let you get it for free. Actually it's not predicting anything....

common sense is all it takes.

As for Directv, you have to know how to play their game. After my 12 month discount is up my bill will go up but if the past is any indication of the future...

you can bet Directv will have lose some channels or go a few days without them while they work to make a deal. The game is to call and make them think those are your favorite channels...the main reason you have Directv.

You can take it to the bank they will offer you 3 to 6 months of pay channels for free. Or anywhere between $10 and $20 off your monthly bill for 12 months. Usually $15.00.

So your bill will go up $5 at the most for the last 12 months of your contract. Once the 24 months are up...you cancel their service. At the same time it's being taken out in your wife's name. Two years later it goes back into your name.

That's the game and you get updated equipment every two years. This is our 5th year with Directv, switching contracts every two years.

They play games...you do the same.

But like I said it's not so much predicting the future to know other than your local channels that you can get with a antenna and the Religion & Spirituality channels...

at some point the others will cost you to connect to them.

(06-03-2014 02:36 PM)asuwon Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 02:08 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Last year the co-champs both should have gone to bowls first before anyone else. WKU at 7-5 also deserved a bowl. The Sun Belt just had no spot for them but more Sun Belt tie ins will take care of that in the future.

Has anybody thought that maybe Western getting snubbed last bowl season was based in the bowl's perception of the WKU program and fan base, rather than any perception of the Sun Belt?

In the final game of the season last year, with a bowl bid still in play, WKU was only able to muster up 14,417 fans, with many of those being stAte fans.
What bowl, dependent on traveling fans to make their bowl a success, invites a program with so little support? If WKU football could draw more than flies to a football game, they probably would have received an invite last year.

In seeking to determine a cause for WKU's bowl snub, I would suggest one look no further than the WKU attendance numbers.

That is a problem at most of any G5 programs.......You are acting like their were 5k+ ASU fans which is completely wrong, nowhere near 1k "state" fans much less 'many of those being State fans"....now you are just being a troll

Little Caesars Bowl in Detroit was pleased with WKU bringing 5k to Detroit in a blizzard....More than others have brought from Sun Belt school...

1 game in end of Nov and WKU drew flies? We have increased our attendance very season in FBS...Granted attend. has to be better in Nov, but it like that not just in BG but a lot of places where it turns cold in NOV. and people stay home and watch from comforts of their house...

(06-03-2014 02:39 PM)ASUMountaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 01:21 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 01:07 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 12:38 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 12:24 PM)runninjoe Wrote:  The defectors are the most insecure ones trying to justify how awesome their move was when nothing really changed. They turned into the fans they hated when they were members of this conference. The ones that spewed garbage about superiority when there wasn't much parody, especially in the middle of the pack. That was CUSA's golden years when they had the likes of Cincinnati, ECU, UCF, TCU, and UH. Look at their roster now and tell me with a straight face this is the same argument.

No one has turned into anything. The only one spewing garbage about superiority is SBC fans. I just don't know how anyone can ignore the below numbers from last year. If having a conference full of .500 teams is your goal there is no doubt the SBC was the best conference. If you're goal is to be strong at the top then look at the numbers

As for WKU fans...don't bring us into it and I for one will not jump into that topic

You are a piece of work. I've already explained that your numbers don't even relate to the argument at hand about the narrowing of the gap between CUSA and SBC. You shouldn't be surprised when people ignore numbers that aren't even related to the topic being discussed.

Plus, you are trotting out some sort of "strong at the top" for one year argument that goes entirely against your earlier arguments about not accepting ASU and ULL's recent strength at the top over three years as indicative!!!

And that is contrary to you chastising us about judging FIU only on the last three years as well.

Stop digging.

There's way more than one argument on this thread...

below is just one of those. I think after this I will just copy and paste two message for everything.

The below and the 1 FBS win in a combined 72 games for 3 SBC members. Nothing more than those two.

You do understand the below numbers? I want to make sure because you seem to have a problem keep up.

So, CUSA has two schools that have never played a down of FBS football and two schools that have combined for 5 FBS wins over the last two years. I see your point...CUSA is clearly better when measuring the worst teams. Point to WKUYG.

Nope at this point CUSA has ONE school and that one school is head and shoulder better than one of the new SBC adds and a shoulder better than the other...going by the past two seasons.

3 team 72 games vs 1 FBS win

two team 48 games vs 5 FBS wins

Neither one is very good but that's...27% of the SBC that's had 1 FBS win over the last 72 games.

Compared to 15% of CUSA that had 5 wins over 48 games

Now if you want to go back to 72 games for those two schools...

it's 25 wins

(06-03-2014 02:56 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 02:36 PM)asuwon Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 02:08 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Last year the co-champs both should have gone to bowls first before anyone else. WKU at 7-5 also deserved a bowl. The Sun Belt just had no spot for them but more Sun Belt tie ins will take care of that in the future.

Has anybody thought that maybe Western getting snubbed last bowl season was based in the bowl's perception of the WKU program and fan base, rather than any perception of the Sun Belt?

In the final game of the season last year, with a bowl bid still in play, WKU was only able to muster up 14,417 fans, with many of those being stAte fans.
What bowl, dependent on traveling fans to make their bowl a success, invites a program with so little support? If WKU football could draw more than flies to a football game, they probably would have received an invite last year.

In seeking to determine a cause for WKU's bowl snub, I would suggest one look no further than the WKU attendance numbers.

That is a problem at most of any G5 programs.......You are acting like their were 5k+ ASU fans which is completely wrong, nowhere near 1k "state" fans much less 'many of those being State fans".

Little Caesars Bowl in Detroit was pleased with WKU bringing 5k to Detroit in a blizzard....More than others have brought from Sun Belt school...

1 game in end of Nov and WKU drew flies? We have increased our attendance very season in FBS...Granted attend. has to be better in Nov, but it like that not just in BG but a lot of places where it turns cold in NOV. and people stay home and watch from comforts of their house...

400 maybe 500 about the same we took to Jonesboro two year ago

ASU had 18,512 at their last home game vs GST and it wasn't Thanksgiving weekend

Excellent point. WKU won over NAVY and A-StAte(both bowl winners)plus the win over uk along with an 8-4 finish.This excellent season helped(and probably was the difference) in propelling the SBC to the #1 rating among G5's.GO HILLTOPPERS!!!

(06-03-2014 03:28 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Excellent point. WKU won over NAVY and A-StAte(both bowl winners)plus the win over uk along with an 8-4 finish.This excellent season helped(and probably was the difference) in propelling the SBC to the #1 rating among G5's.GO HILLTOPPERS!!!

Wow...thank you. I am not sure what we will do in the future without you guys.

Now its deteriorating into a WKU argument.

WKU had a really bad time at first in FBS but got over it quickly.

Their stadium has fewer seats but it is very nice.

Their Detroit attendance was perfectly fine. Who wants Detroit in a blizzard?

They deserved a bowl last year. Just like MTSU before. But unfortunately not at the expense of either champion.

Most SBC fans regretted losing WKU.

Haha, This thread still going on?

(06-03-2014 02:36 PM)asuwon Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 02:08 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Last year the co-champs both should have gone to bowls first before anyone else. WKU at 7-5 also deserved a bowl. The Sun Belt just had no spot for them but more Sun Belt tie ins will take care of that in the future.

Has anybody thought that maybe Western getting snubbed last bowl season was based in the bowl's perception of the WKU program and fan base, rather than any perception of the Sun Belt?

In the final game of the season last year, with a bowl bid still in play, WKU was only able to muster up 14,417 fans, with many of those being stAte fans.

What bowl, dependent on traveling fans to make their bowl a success, invites a program with so little support? If WKU football could draw more than flies to a football game, they probably would have received an invite last year.

In seeking to determine a cause for WKU's bowl snub, I would suggest one look no further than the WKU attendance numbers.

AD AState's AD sent a text to the director of a photo showing the thousands of AState fans on the parade route the year before.

(06-03-2014 04:41 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Haha, This thread still going on?

Yeah WKU fans are getting pissy because we aren't offering CUSA and the 'Toppers sufficient respect.

(06-03-2014 05:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 04:41 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Haha, This thread still going on?

Yeah WKU fans are getting pissy because we aren't offering CUSA and the 'Toppers sufficient respect.

Looks to me like a bunch of ASU fans are the ones getting pissy. Seems like a few want to spew anything they want and don't like the answers they got back.

Quote:Newbie's, no one that even remotely follows college football would swap AppSt or GaSo for any of the schools joining CUSA when it comes to football(and I'm not convinced CUSA added any better than GaSt or TxSt) . I expect Idaho and NMSU to be very decent teams, going forward.You are the worse FBS football conference for a reason, and for whatever reasons, the people putting together the new CUSA are fine with that.

You have 2 teams that's never played a down in FBS football and 3 other teams that's won a total of 3 FBS games in the last two years COMBINED! But that doesn't tell the whole story...

two of those wins came against each other Idaho and NMST each beat the other. The only FBS win in 72 combined games over the last two ....

yes let me repeat that...other than beating each other once each the only other FBS win in 72 combined game...again IN 72 COMBINED GAME. I DON'T THINK I MADE MYSELF CLEAR.....

IN 72 COMBINED GAMES over the last two seasons..Idaho, NMST, and GST won 1 game against FBS teams Idaho beat a 2-10 Temple team.

(06-03-2014 11:40 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 08:21 AM)ASUMountaineer Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 07:51 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 07:32 PM)Louisianafanrcajun90 Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 06:51 PM)Journeyman22 Wrote:  Perusing this thread is interesting, but the most surprising thing to me is everyone dissing on watching games via broadband internet vs. TV. Does anyone really make a distinction anymore? I have Netflix, Hulu, ESPN3, etc all on my big screen TV and in HD. I watch hockey and soccer on my Roku apps too. It's just not a big deal anymore.

Let's say TV money isn't a big deal to G5 schools, compared to butts in the seats. A debatable point, but not what concerns me as a fan.

I simply want to see my team on TV -- whether "real" TV or web TV. I don't care. If the SBC is getting all it's games on ESPN3, and C-USA is only getting the occasional televised game, this is a giant advantage to the SBC. And it's also the future, happening now.

The "TV" vs web argument reminds me of the old broadcast vs. cable debate. It's old-fashioned and nobody makes the distinction between the two anymore. Again, fans just want to see their teams.

+Excellent point between ESPN3 and the rest of vast sports channels, who watches broadcast sports?

The fans I know would 10x rather watch a game on TV than espn3. Believe it or not not everyone has xbox, or Netflix or the ability to connect it to the TV. And not everyone can get espn3...

I can see this as a bigger problem with the 30+ crowd than mid 20's down. But it's still not the same as pushing a button on the remote and getting a game or switching from game to game. My son has a $3500 TV and all the gadgets and with that it still seems like espn3 games have a lag when I watch them at his house.

What I like about espn3 is the ability to go back and watch a game. There's been many times when I watched a game in person I thought a lot of bad calls were made. When I watch it back a few days later or even that night...a lot of those bad calls were actually good calls.

But with Directv I still have to connect under my sons name using remote setting.

I'm 32, own a Roku, a wifi BluRay, and will soon be picking up an AppleTV. My parents (pushing 60) just got Roku, and replaced their desktop with a tablet and wireless printer. The future is here, and it's not just for younger people. Sure, the under 40 crowd will more willingly adapt to streaming the vast majority of their content, but since "cutting the cord" I don't see us ever going back to a pay-for-TV provider.

You will pay, maybe not, today, or this year...

but you will pay and in the end you'll find out you're paying more than the $56.00 a month I do for 200+ channels at Directv. Of Course 90% those channels are useless to me.

But after looking at the FREE channels you get on Roku, 90% are Religion & Spirituality and the other 10% are useless. I will stick with my $56.00 a month and watch the shows I like along with the DVR to record the games I want to. Like I said if you actually want to watch something....

even with Roku, you will end up paying for it. Do you think espn is going to give their sports away for free? Nope, not even espn3.

I haven't actually cut the cord. My point is that "web" TV, "broadcast" TV, and "cable" TV are all just TV. They all look great on my 50" HDTV. So the distinctions are fading... fast.

(06-03-2014 05:48 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 05:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 04:41 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Haha, This thread still going on?

Yeah WKU fans are getting pissy because we aren't offering CUSA and the 'Toppers sufficient respect.

Looks to me like a bunch of ASU fans are the ones getting pissy. Seems like a few want to spew anything they want and don't like the answers they got back.

Quote:Newbie's, no one that even remotely follows college football would swap AppSt or GaSo for any of the schools joining CUSA when it comes to football(and I'm not convinced CUSA added any better than GaSt or TxSt) . I expect Idaho and NMSU to be very decent teams, going forward.You are the worse FBS football conference for a reason, and for whatever reasons, the people putting together the new CUSA are fine with that.

You have 2 teams that's never played a down in FBS football and 3 other teams that's won a total of 3 FBS games in the last two years COMBINED! But that doesn't tell the whole story...

two of those wins came against each other Idaho and NMST each beat the other. The only FBS win in 72 combined games over the last two ....

yes let me repeat that...other than beating each other once each the only other FBS win in 72 combined game...again IN 72 COMBINED GAME. I DON'T THINK I MADE MYSELF CLEAR.....

IN 72 COMBINED GAMES over the last two seasons..Idaho, NMST, and GST won 1 game against FBS teams Idaho beat a 2-10 Temple team.

Georgia state is WKU south so they get a pass for a few years like WKU got.. Your right in 1 aspect Idaho and NMSU don't belong in FBS outside of those 3 sun belt is okay..don't forget to look at CUSA bottom 4 and their very bad record funny one of those is previous belt teams ROFL

Southern miss 1 win in 2 years!
FIU 4 wins in 2 years!
UAB, UTEP 5 wins in 2 years

You sir deserve an applaus for overlooking how bad CUSA is

(06-03-2014 05:48 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 05:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 04:41 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Haha, This thread still going on?

Yeah WKU fans are getting pissy because we aren't offering CUSA and the 'Toppers sufficient respect.

Looks to me like a bunch of ASU fans are the ones getting pissy. Seems like a few want to spew anything they want and don't like the answers they got back.

Quote:Newbie's, no one that even remotely follows college football would swap AppSt or GaSo for any of the schools joining CUSA when it comes to football(and I'm not convinced CUSA added any better than GaSt or TxSt) . I expect Idaho and NMSU to be very decent teams, going forward.You are the worse FBS football conference for a reason, and for whatever reasons, the people putting together the new CUSA are fine with that.

You have 2 teams that's never played a down in FBS football and 3 other teams that's won a total of 3 FBS games in the last two years COMBINED! But that doesn't tell the whole story...

two of those wins came against each other Idaho and NMST each beat the other. The only FBS win in 72 combined games over the last two ....

yes let me repeat that...other than beating each other once each the only other FBS win in 72 combined game...again IN 72 COMBINED GAME. I DON'T THINK I MADE MYSELF CLEAR.....

IN 72 COMBINED GAMES over the last two seasons..Idaho, NMST, and GST won 1 game against FBS teams Idaho beat a 2-10 Temple team.

He says "the last two years combined!" but earlier he said we couldn't judge FIU or FAU on "just the last three years!". And of course what ASU and ULL have done in the last few years don't mean anything because after all, they could fall back.

And we have teams who "haven't played a down" of FBS football, but of course Charlotte doesn't count.

And a lot of talk about Idaho...but not much in comparison to UAB's last 10 years.

And I'm going THROW IN SOME ALL CAPS in case he misunderstands or I didn't MAKE MYSELF CLEAR.