(04-05-2017 10:03 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:00 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 08:54 PM)ChooChoo Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 08:25 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 09:25 AM)rokamortis Wrote:  If that happened, would really screw up the travel partner plan in the SBC.

Not as much as you'd think

Ark State-ULM
ULL-Texas State
Troy-USA
Ga State-Ga Southern
App-CCU

ULL-Texas State is only a hour further than CCU-App

Y'all can take Little Rock, but I want to keep UTA and put that stadium back to work. Missouri State should be #12 in the all-sports SBC.

As for my regional word, I'm partial to the oddity following the pronunciation of pecan. It's strange to me that the Northeast pronounces it "pee-can", while much of the mid-Atlantic, mid-west, and south says "p'con". However, it appears those of us south of the Georgia gnat line that live closer to the coast, all the way up to Virginia goes back to being "pee-can"people.

I say both. Pcon for the nuts by themselves and P CAN for the pie.
Kind of like Route Road is ROOT 66 but its paper ROUT.
Don't get me started on Missouri and Missourah

In the west you say ROOT 66. In the east Route 66. In Iowa Rut 66

In New England, you say ROOT as well.

In Iowa we said CRICK. I got laughed at in Texas for saying that. It's CREEK I guess
In Iowa you don't go to DNA.com. Your Grandfather tells you about the town in Germany his family was from.
In New Mexico and Southern Colorado, never ever refer to a Hispanic person as MEXICAN. They consider themselves "SPANISH"
I've only heard pop in Iowa. Coke out West. Soda out East
In Greenville North Carolina I was called a "yankee" and I'd never been further East or North than Illinois at the time. A yankee from Iowa/Arizona/SW Texas
Y'all is never used in Iowa, or the Midwest, yet Okies refer to themselves as midwesterners.

That's all I have for now.

(04-05-2017 10:12 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:03 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:00 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 08:54 PM)ChooChoo Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 08:25 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Not as much as you'd think

Ark State-ULM
ULL-Texas State
Troy-USA
Ga State-Ga Southern
App-CCU

ULL-Texas State is only a hour further than CCU-App

Y'all can take Little Rock, but I want to keep UTA and put that stadium back to work. Missouri State should be #12 in the all-sports SBC.

As for my regional word, I'm partial to the oddity following the pronunciation of pecan. It's strange to me that the Northeast pronounces it "pee-can", while much of the mid-Atlantic, mid-west, and south says "p'con". However, it appears those of us south of the Georgia gnat line that live closer to the coast, all the way up to Virginia goes back to being "pee-can"people.

I say both. Pcon for the nuts by themselves and P CAN for the pie.
Kind of like Route Road is ROOT 66 but its paper ROUT.
Don't get me started on Missouri and Missourah

In the west you say ROOT 66. In the east Route 66. In Iowa Rut 66

In New England, you say ROOT as well.

Makes sense. Paper root right?

(04-05-2017 08:35 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  If you are plucking an OVC team - Murray State is the one.

Now that the Summit and MVC each have five in the MVFC, why would the Summit schools let the MVC regain an advantage?

(04-05-2017 11:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 08:35 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  If you are plucking an OVC team - Murray State is the one.

Now that the Summit and MVC each have five in the MVFC, why would the Summit schools let the MVC regain an advantage?

The MVC now has 5 MVFC spots, the Slummit has four (5 in 2020) and the Horizon has one. The MVC needs one more to maintain its edge and possibly get an FCS autobid for the MVC alone in the future.

(04-05-2017 10:12 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  In New Mexico and Southern Colorado, never ever refer to a Hispanic person as MEXICAN. They consider themselves "SPANISH"

As a native of Pueblo, CO, this is absolutely untrue. Even friends of mine whose ancestors settled in the San Luis Valley and Espanola, NM way before the country Mexico existed refer to themselves as Mexican. The only people I have ever heard of claiming to be Spanish also claim to be descendants of the holders of the original Spanish land grants.

Also, in that area highways are "roots", but the paperboy has a "rout" as in a massive defeat. And that nut is a pe KAHN. Soda and pop are both used.

And to stay on topic, none of the Colorado D2 schools are candidates to move to the MVC. :)

Valpo seems like the logical replacement if they are just going to fill a spot

(04-05-2017 08:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 08:55 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 08:35 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Belmont isn't coming to the MVC. It makes zero sense for them and it makes zero sense for the MVC. If you are plucking an OVC team - Murray State is the one.

Murray State I don't feel cuts it academically.

Lol

Murray State blows most of the MVC teams away academically

Who does Murray State "blow away" in the MVC academically?

(04-06-2017 07:27 AM)lew240z Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:12 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  In New Mexico and Southern Colorado, never ever refer to a Hispanic person as MEXICAN. They consider themselves "SPANISH"

As a native of Pueblo, CO, this is absolutely untrue. Even friends of mine whose ancestors settled in the San Luis Valley and Espanola, NM way before the country Mexico existed refer to themselves as Mexican. The only people I have ever heard of claiming to be Spanish also claim to be descendants of the holders of the original Spanish land grants.

Also, in that area highways are "roots", but the paperboy has a "rout" as in a massive defeat. And that nut is a pe KAHN. Soda and pop are both used.

And to stay on topic, none of the Colorado D2 schools are candidates to move to the MVC. :)

I guess I took it the other way: is this actually referring to identifying all Hispanics as Mexicans or idenitfying people from Mexico as Spanish? Both would be incorrect as applied generally. The former would be like identifying all Asians as Chinese (even if they're from Japan or other Asian countries) or identifying all Caucasians as Italian. That's applying a specific nationality incorrectly to an entire racial category. The latter is more along the lines of what you were thinking: if someone is actually from Mexico or is of Mexican heritage, then they generally identify as Mexican unless they can trace their roots back to Spanish landholders. If someone is actually from or has ancestors from another Latin American country and you call them "Mexican", that's obviously very wrong.

(04-06-2017 07:27 AM)lew240z Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:12 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  In New Mexico and Southern Colorado, never ever refer to a Hispanic person as MEXICAN. They consider themselves "SPANISH"

As a native of Pueblo, CO, this is absolutely untrue. Even friends of mine whose ancestors settled in the San Luis Valley and Espanola, NM way before the country Mexico existed refer to themselves as Mexican. The only people I have ever heard of claiming to be Spanish also claim to be descendants of the holders of the original Spanish land grants.

Also, in that area highways are "roots", but the paperboy has a "rout" as in a massive defeat. And that nut is a pe KAHN. Soda and pop are both used.

And to stay on topic, none of the Colorado D2 schools are candidates to move to the MVC. :)

I have family in Pueblo. Used to go there all the time time. My work territory covers Espanola, Santa Fe, and Albuquerque to the extreme west. Im a traveling oil salesman.
Im not talking about Denver, Pueblo and Colorado Springs. Im talking about Pagosa Springs, Durango, Chama etc. My wife is Spanish (From Albuquerque) many of my cousins and nephews are half Spanish. I have one sister in law from Texas but originally from Durango, Mexico. She of course refers to herself as MEXICAN. I stand 100 % by what I said.
And I agree, none of the Colorado D2 schools are going to the MVC. Nor is Northern Colorado or Denver.

(04-06-2017 08:36 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 07:27 AM)lew240z Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:12 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  In New Mexico and Southern Colorado, never ever refer to a Hispanic person as MEXICAN. They consider themselves "SPANISH"

As a native of Pueblo, CO, this is absolutely untrue. Even friends of mine whose ancestors settled in the San Luis Valley and Espanola, NM way before the country Mexico existed refer to themselves as Mexican. The only people I have ever heard of claiming to be Spanish also claim to be descendants of the holders of the original Spanish land grants.

Also, in that area highways are "roots", but the paperboy has a "rout" as in a massive defeat. And that nut is a pe KAHN. Soda and pop are both used.

And to stay on topic, none of the Colorado D2 schools are candidates to move to the MVC. :)

I guess I took it the other way: is this actually referring to identifying all Hispanics as Mexicans or idenitfying people from Mexico as Spanish? Both would be incorrect as applied generally. The former would be like identifying all Asians as Chinese (even if they're from Japan or other Asian countries) or identifying all Caucasians as Italian. That's applying a specific nationality incorrectly to an entire racial category. The latter is more along the lines of what you were thinking: if someone is actually from Mexico or is of Mexican heritage, then they generally identify as Mexican unless they can trace their roots back to Spanish landholders. If someone is actually from or has ancestors from another Latin American country and you call them "Mexican", that's obviously very wrong.

It's very confusing Frank. Even though New Mexico Hispanics are a big mix of everything, they have (not always of course) less mestizo blood usually than Hispanics from Texas or California. New Mexico was part of Spain for 300 years. Mexico for 12. Its own territory for decades and finally a state from 1912 until now. Is anyone 100% Spanish there? Probably not. It's a label they choose to use. I can give a ton of more info on this subject but unless you've been there, it's very hard to understand and I can already tell, believe. It's an interesting place.

(04-06-2017 08:36 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 07:27 AM)lew240z Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:12 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  In New Mexico and Southern Colorado, never ever refer to a Hispanic person as MEXICAN. They consider themselves "SPANISH"

As a native of Pueblo, CO, this is absolutely untrue. Even friends of mine whose ancestors settled in the San Luis Valley and Espanola, NM way before the country Mexico existed refer to themselves as Mexican. The only people I have ever heard of claiming to be Spanish also claim to be descendants of the holders of the original Spanish land grants.

Also, in that area highways are "roots", but the paperboy has a "rout" as in a massive defeat. And that nut is a pe KAHN. Soda and pop are both used.

And to stay on topic, none of the Colorado D2 schools are candidates to move to the MVC. :)

I guess I took it the other way: is this actually referring to identifying all Hispanics as Mexicans or idenitfying people from Mexico as Spanish? Both would be incorrect as applied generally. The former would be like identifying all Asians as Chinese (even if they're from Japan or other Asian countries) or identifying all Caucasians as Italian. That's applying a specific nationality incorrectly to an entire racial category. The latter is more along the lines of what you were thinking: if someone is actually from Mexico or is of Mexican heritage, then they generally identify as Mexican unless they can trace their roots back to Spanish landholders. If someone is actually from or has ancestors from another Latin American country and you call them "Mexican", that's obviously very wrong.

One other thing on this. Hispanic is not a "race" it's an ethnicity. So my wife checks "White" for her race, and "Hispanic/Latino" for her ethnicity. She has black hair, dark eyes and olive colored skin (not brown) Is she as "white looking" as a mostly German decent American like me? No. She would never refer to herself as white, simply "Spanish" or "Spanish New Mexican" but she hates it when Hispanic and "brown" are used interchangeably as she points out most people in her family aren't "brown" . Its tricky. Race and ethnicity is a man made thing, it evolves and it comes down to what people want to be called.

(04-06-2017 09:33 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 08:36 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 07:27 AM)lew240z Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:12 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  In New Mexico and Southern Colorado, never ever refer to a Hispanic person as MEXICAN. They consider themselves "SPANISH"

As a native of Pueblo, CO, this is absolutely untrue. Even friends of mine whose ancestors settled in the San Luis Valley and Espanola, NM way before the country Mexico existed refer to themselves as Mexican. The only people I have ever heard of claiming to be Spanish also claim to be descendants of the holders of the original Spanish land grants.

Also, in that area highways are "roots", but the paperboy has a "rout" as in a massive defeat. And that nut is a pe KAHN. Soda and pop are both used.

And to stay on topic, none of the Colorado D2 schools are candidates to move to the MVC. :)

I guess I took it the other way: is this actually referring to identifying all Hispanics as Mexicans or idenitfying people from Mexico as Spanish? Both would be incorrect as applied generally. The former would be like identifying all Asians as Chinese (even if they're from Japan or other Asian countries) or identifying all Caucasians as Italian. That's applying a specific nationality incorrectly to an entire racial category. The latter is more along the lines of what you were thinking: if someone is actually from Mexico or is of Mexican heritage, then they generally identify as Mexican unless they can trace their roots back to Spanish landholders. If someone is actually from or has ancestors from another Latin American country and you call them "Mexican", that's obviously very wrong.

One other thing on this. Hispanic is not a "race" it's an ethnicity. So my wife checks "White" for her race, and "Hispanic/Latino" for her ethnicity. She has black hair, dark eyes and olive colored skin (not brown) Is she as "white looking" as a mostly German decent American like me? No. She would never refer to herself as white, simply "Spanish" or "Spanish New Mexican" but she hates it when Hispanic and "brown" are used interchangeably as she points out most people in her family aren't "brown" . Its tricky. Race and ethnicity is a man made thing, it evolves and it comes down to what people want to be called.

Agreed - that is true about Hispanic being an ethnicity. I shouldn't have referred to it as a racial category.

Back on topic -

WSU has been wanting to explore football. Seems like the AAC gives them an opportunity, when they bite the bullet, to get that football program going and have games that actually attract some attention/revenue.

(04-06-2017 09:38 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  Back on topic -

WSU has been wanting to explore football. Seems like the AAC gives them an opportunity, when they bite the bullet, to get that football program going and have games that actually attract some attention/revenue.

I don't know about that. I don't think Wichita St is interested in starting up football anymore number 1. And number 2, I don't think the AAC would allow Wichita St to join a start up football program to the conference. I'd be surprised if the AAC didn't have that covered in the language of Wichita St's application info.

(04-06-2017 09:42 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 09:38 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  Back on topic -

WSU has been wanting to explore football. Seems like the AAC gives them an opportunity, when they bite the bullet, to get that football program going and have games that actually attract some attention/revenue.

I don't know about that. I don't think Wichita St is interested in starting up football anymore number 1. And number 2, I don't think the AAC would allow Wichita St to join a start up football program to the conference. I'd be surprised if the AAC didn't have that covered in the language of Wichita St's application info.

1. Getting into the American doesn't diminish the presidents interest in football as it would/could still go a long way in accomplishing his long term goals.

2. The AAC can't prevent Wichita from starting football. And nobody is saying the AAC would allow us easy entry into the conference for football. It is believed that having a football program may open that door down the road. Plus, if there are other shakeups in the future, having football could keep some doors open.

But outside of that, attracting and keeping students as well as creating a better on campus atmosphere for students is a big part of our president looking into football. He hasn't been shy about his personal desire for football.

I think if anything was in the contract with the AAC and Wichita it would be that the AAC would have right of first refusal for Wichita joining a FBS conference for football.

(04-06-2017 09:23 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 08:36 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 07:27 AM)lew240z Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:12 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  In New Mexico and Southern Colorado, never ever refer to a Hispanic person as MEXICAN. They consider themselves "SPANISH"

As a native of Pueblo, CO, this is absolutely untrue. Even friends of mine whose ancestors settled in the San Luis Valley and Espanola, NM way before the country Mexico existed refer to themselves as Mexican. The only people I have ever heard of claiming to be Spanish also claim to be descendants of the holders of the original Spanish land grants.

Also, in that area highways are "roots", but the paperboy has a "rout" as in a massive defeat. And that nut is a pe KAHN. Soda and pop are both used.

And to stay on topic, none of the Colorado D2 schools are candidates to move to the MVC. :)

I guess I took it the other way: is this actually referring to identifying all Hispanics as Mexicans or idenitfying people from Mexico as Spanish? Both would be incorrect as applied generally. The former would be like identifying all Asians as Chinese (even if they're from Japan or other Asian countries) or identifying all Caucasians as Italian. That's applying a specific nationality incorrectly to an entire racial category. The latter is more along the lines of what you were thinking: if someone is actually from Mexico or is of Mexican heritage, then they generally identify as Mexican unless they can trace their roots back to Spanish landholders. If someone is actually from or has ancestors from another Latin American country and you call them "Mexican", that's obviously very wrong.

It's very confusing Frank. Even though New Mexico Hispanics are a big mix of everything, they have (not always of course) less mestizo blood usually than Hispanics from Texas or California. New Mexico was part of Spain for 300 years. Mexico for 12. Its own territory for decades and finally a state from 1912 until now. Is anyone 100% Spanish there? Probably not. It's a label they choose to use. I can give a ton of more info on this subject but unless you've been there, it's very hard to understand and I can already tell, believe. It's an interesting place.

My Grandfather always called himself Latin, never Mexican, even though his family all came from Mexico (his grandparents) and lived there for many generations. That may be a generational thing (LULAC) as well as a status thing. They claimed to be originally from the Canary Islands, which many of the early San Antonio inhabitants were from as distinct from the flood of Mexicans who emigrated after the Mexican Revolution.

(04-06-2017 10:19 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 09:23 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 08:36 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 07:27 AM)lew240z Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 10:12 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  In New Mexico and Southern Colorado, never ever refer to a Hispanic person as MEXICAN. They consider themselves "SPANISH"

As a native of Pueblo, CO, this is absolutely untrue. Even friends of mine whose ancestors settled in the San Luis Valley and Espanola, NM way before the country Mexico existed refer to themselves as Mexican. The only people I have ever heard of claiming to be Spanish also claim to be descendants of the holders of the original Spanish land grants.

Also, in that area highways are "roots", but the paperboy has a "rout" as in a massive defeat. And that nut is a pe KAHN. Soda and pop are both used.

And to stay on topic, none of the Colorado D2 schools are candidates to move to the MVC. :)

I guess I took it the other way: is this actually referring to identifying all Hispanics as Mexicans or idenitfying people from Mexico as Spanish? Both would be incorrect as applied generally. The former would be like identifying all Asians as Chinese (even if they're from Japan or other Asian countries) or identifying all Caucasians as Italian. That's applying a specific nationality incorrectly to an entire racial category. The latter is more along the lines of what you were thinking: if someone is actually from Mexico or is of Mexican heritage, then they generally identify as Mexican unless they can trace their roots back to Spanish landholders. If someone is actually from or has ancestors from another Latin American country and you call them "Mexican", that's obviously very wrong.

It's very confusing Frank. Even though New Mexico Hispanics are a big mix of everything, they have (not always of course) less mestizo blood usually than Hispanics from Texas or California. New Mexico was part of Spain for 300 years. Mexico for 12. Its own territory for decades and finally a state from 1912 until now. Is anyone 100% Spanish there? Probably not. It's a label they choose to use. I can give a ton of more info on this subject but unless you've been there, it's very hard to understand and I can already tell, believe. It's an interesting place.

My Grandfather always called himself Latin, never Mexican, even though his family all came from Mexico (his grandparents) and lived there for many generations. That may be a generational thing (LULAC) as well as a status thing. They claimed to be originally from the Canary Islands, which many of the early San Antonio inhabitants were from as distinct from the flood of Mexicans who emigrated after the Mexican Revolution.

Agreed. I think your word "status" certainly has something to do with the labeling people apply to themselves. Interesting topic indeed.

(04-06-2017 10:11 AM)SubGod22 Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 09:42 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-06-2017 09:38 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  Back on topic -

WSU has been wanting to explore football. Seems like the AAC gives them an opportunity, when they bite the bullet, to get that football program going and have games that actually attract some attention/revenue.

I don't know about that. I don't think Wichita St is interested in starting up football anymore number 1. And number 2, I don't think the AAC would allow Wichita St to join a start up football program to the conference. I'd be surprised if the AAC didn't have that covered in the language of Wichita St's application info.

1. Getting into the American doesn't diminish the presidents interest in football as it would/could still go a long way in accomplishing his long term goals.

2. The AAC can't prevent Wichita from starting football. And nobody is saying the AAC would allow us easy entry into the conference for football. It is believed that having a football program may open that door down the road. Plus, if there are other shakeups in the future, having football could keep some doors open.

But outside of that, attracting and keeping students as well as creating a better on campus atmosphere for students is a big part of our president looking into football. He hasn't been shy about his personal desire for football.

Do you think Wichita St will reinstate football soon?