CSNbbs
Why UMass? - Printable Version

+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: SunBeltbbs (/forum-317.html)
+---- Forum: Sun Belt Conference Talk (/forum-296.html)
+---- Thread: Why UMass? (/thread-687479.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11


RE: Why UMass? - boroeagle2 - 04-29-2014 10:42 AM

I have to agree with the Liberty guys that there is not a lot of smoke (media reports, or even twitter gossip) about the UMASS move. But the logic of it--temporarily get to 12 while allowing more desirable all-sports members to ramp up--is easy to see. Combine that with mentions by several posters who are legitimately "plugged in" at their respective schools and the comments from EKU, and I think this pretty close to a done deal.


RE: Why UMass? - FIUFan - 04-29-2014 11:12 AM

(04-29-2014 09:37 AM)AtlantaJag Wrote:  I'm sure Liberty administrators are still working their tails off to try and wrangle that invitation. Since one of them is no doubt Lang's source, of course he has heard that they are still in it because Liberty has not surrendered and has obviously been told there is some circumstance where they could still get invited.
You're being obtuse if you don't think UMass and the SBC are talking.

Haven't heard from this Lang guy in a while. Did he go on vacation or something? He should be reassuring us that he knows something given the meeting is only two weeks away.


RE: Why UMass? - TheRevSWT - 04-29-2014 11:14 AM

(04-29-2014 10:42 AM)boroeagle2 Wrote:  I have to agree with the Liberty guys that there is not a lot of smoke (media reports, or even twitter gossip) about the UMASS move. But the logic of it--temporarily get to 12 while allowing more desirable all-sports members to ramp up--is easy to see. Combine that with mentions by several posters who are legitimately "plugged in" at their respective schools and the comments from EKU, and I think this pretty close to a done deal.

A UMass FB/NMSU Oly sets the stage for the eventual add of EKU and MSU in the future.

When MSU/EKU are ready, Idaho & UMass are asked to move on, and the two slide right in.

That then puts the league at a 12/14 lineup. Dunno if the 14 is desirable for OLY sports, but it seems that's the way they are eyeballing it. But if MSU & NMSU are in the league for basketball, it certainly strengthens the league.


RE: Why UMass? - SlyFox - 04-29-2014 11:53 AM

And how would bringing in Liberty in any fashion impact the ability to invite MSU or EKU down the road? You would still have two football affiliates and the same number of olympic members. Frankly this balance and future growth discussion is the least worthy topic in regard to the expansion decision.


RE: Why UMass? - TheRevSWT - 04-29-2014 12:04 PM

(04-29-2014 11:53 AM)SlyFox Wrote:  And how would bringing in Liberty in any fashion impact the ability to invite MSU or EKU down the road? You would still have two football affiliates and the same number of olympic members. Frankly this balance and future growth discussion is the least worthy topic in regard to the expansion decision.

It creates an uneven split.

You have two FB only teams in the west, that would then (theoretically) be replaced by one in the west and one in the east.

And it may be the least worthy topic in your eyes, but it's certainly not overall.


RE: Why UMass? - buryyourduke - 04-29-2014 12:10 PM

(04-29-2014 11:12 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  
(04-29-2014 09:37 AM)AtlantaJag Wrote:  I'm sure Liberty administrators are still working their tails off to try and wrangle that invitation. Since one of them is no doubt Lang's source, of course he has heard that they are still in it because Liberty has not surrendered and has obviously been told there is some circumstance where they could still get invited.
You're being obtuse if you don't think UMass and the SBC are talking.

Haven't heard from this Lang guy in a while. Did he go on vacation or something? He should be reassuring us that he knows something given the meeting is only two weeks away.

This is your most hysterical post yet. Lang is a writer, and doesn't exist to justify his information to a bunch of dudes on a message board. As has been stated multiple times, Lang isn't going to post a ton. If he knows something he will write it. If he doesn't, don't look for him to come and speculate.


RE: Why UMass? - ASUMountaineer - 04-29-2014 01:23 PM

(04-28-2014 09:15 PM)Libertygrad01 Wrote:  
(04-28-2014 09:12 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  
(04-28-2014 09:10 PM)Libertygrad01 Wrote:  
(04-28-2014 09:05 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  
(04-28-2014 08:50 PM)Libertygrad01 Wrote:  Serious question. HAs there been any official statement from anywhere that says the SB and UMass are in negotiations? Has Benson, an AD, or a beat writer reported it? I've not seen the first thing. Over the past month a handful of schools are been declared the next member of the SB. So where does all the UMass info come from?

No FCS liminates Liberty.

So you can't answer the question. Where is the UMass to the SB info coming from?

I don't have to answer your question.

Just face it...Liberty has missed out again.

I'll "face it" when Benson or our AD makes a statement, not when several blowhards on a message board say so.

EKU president says there are no spots for FCS schools = 100% speculation.

Liberty beat writer says Liberty is still under consideration = 100% fact.

I don't know why these blowhards don't understand this simple truth. 03-phew


RE: Why UMass? - ASUMountaineer - 04-29-2014 01:23 PM

(04-28-2014 09:56 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:  Liberty is still in play. Meetings still happening. Votes to come in May.

Thanks for the solid info. I did hate to hear that JMU applied and then pulled back their application. Crazy stuff.


RE: Why UMass? - FIUFan - 04-29-2014 02:05 PM

(04-29-2014 12:10 PM)buryyourduke Wrote:  This is your most hysterical post yet. Lang is a writer, and doesn't exist to justify his information to a bunch of dudes on a message board. As has been stated multiple times, Lang isn't going to post a ton. If he knows something he will write it. If he doesn't, don't look for him to come and speculate.

or maybe he's full of crap and is distancing himself from this whole thing.

p.s. a "writer" should back up what he says and not just throw stuff out there with nothing to support it.


RE: Why UMass? - buryyourduke - 04-29-2014 02:39 PM

I know he's not full of crap on this. 100% fact. Keep believing what you want.


RE: Why UMass? - FIUFan - 04-29-2014 02:41 PM

(04-29-2014 02:39 PM)buryyourduke Wrote:  I know he's not full of crap on this. 100% fact. Keep believing what you want.

I will, and you put your faith in this writer....at least there's hope.


RE: Why UMass? - SlyFox - 04-29-2014 02:57 PM

Since you are so connected into your former league, you probably are hearing the same thing about Liberty still being in play. Clearly you still harbor plenty of connections to your former league rivals.


RE: Why UMass? - asupatch - 04-29-2014 03:02 PM

(04-29-2014 02:57 PM)SlyFox Wrote:  Since you are so connected into your former league, you probably are hearing the same thing about Liberty still being in play. Clearly you still harbor plenty of connections to your former league rivals.

Or perhaps he is not emotionally involved in the decision and can look at the situation without rose shaded glasses?


RE: Why UMass? - FIUFan - 04-29-2014 03:04 PM

(04-29-2014 02:57 PM)SlyFox Wrote:  Since you are so connected into your former league, you probably are hearing the same thing about Liberty still being in play. Clearly you still harbor plenty of connections to your former league rivals.

Not really sure what you're trying to say here. Realignment's have interested me since the mid-90's, esp. for conferences that I consider myself an alumni of. A strong Sun Belt makes for a strong G5. And lor...ahem, goodenss knows we need as strong a G5 as we can possibly have to ward off the P5 advances.


RE: Why UMass? - arkstfan - 04-29-2014 03:09 PM

FIU folks are always welcome here in my book unless they want to start a tussle.

FIU starting football then later agreeing to accelerate their move to FBS was a key moment in Sun Belt history.

Western Kentucky, South Alabama, now Georgia State, and soon App and Georgia Southern all owe their FBS status to FIU's Rick Mello pushing FIU football forward. The league would have fallen apart in 2005 with AState, North Texas, Louisiana, ULM, MTSU, Troy all casting about as independents and ULM would never have joined the Sun Belt all-sports.


RE: Why UMass? - FIUFan - 04-29-2014 03:14 PM

(04-29-2014 03:09 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  FIU folks are always welcome here in my book unless they want to start a tussle.FIU starting football then later agreeing to accelerate their move to FBS was a key moment in Sun Belt history.
Western Kentucky, South Alabama, now Georgia State, and soon App and Georgia Southern all owe their FBS status to FIU's Rick Mello pushing FIU football forward. The league would have fallen apart in 2005 with AState, North Texas, Louisiana, ULM, MTSU, Troy all casting about as independents and ULM would never have joined the Sun Belt all-sports.

whajutalk'n about asf'. 05-mafia


04-cheers


RE: Why UMass? - Eagleditka - 04-29-2014 03:29 PM

I don't think it's a stretch to believe Liberty is still under consideration. Yeah Karl Benson said the addition won't come from FCS, but this process is fluid. If UMass doesn't have the votes, or is unwilling to commit to the SBC, then guess who's left? Liberty. All the better options are either not ready or unwilling. They have resources and facilities. Still don't think the conference votes them in. But I think the conference will work up until June 1, if they have to, in order to get #12.


RE: Why UMass? - buryyourduke - 04-29-2014 03:37 PM

(04-29-2014 02:41 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  
(04-29-2014 02:39 PM)buryyourduke Wrote:  I know he's not full of crap on this. 100% fact. Keep believing what you want.

I will, and you put your faith in this writer....at least there's hope.

You still aren't grasping this are you? I'm not putting faith in a beat writer. I am confirming what that beat writer said.


RE: Why UMass? - knucklehead - 04-29-2014 03:45 PM

(04-29-2014 03:29 PM)Eagleditka Wrote:  I don't think it's a stretch to believe Liberty is still under consideration. Yeah Karl Benson said the addition won't come from FCS, but this process is fluid. If UMass doesn't have the votes, or is unwilling to commit to the SBC, then guess who's left? Liberty. All the better options are either not ready or unwilling. They have resources and facilities. Still don't think the conference votes them in. But I think the conference will work up until June 1, if they have to, in order to get #12.

Wasn't Karl Benson that said that. Was EKU Pres Benson, who'd just been Jilted.


RE: Why UMass? - FIUFan - 04-29-2014 03:46 PM

(04-29-2014 03:37 PM)buryyourduke Wrote:  You still aren't grasping this are you? I'm not putting faith in a beat writer. I am confirming what that beat writer said.

07-coffee3 ....ok... Liberty is still under consideration. I guess we're going to have to do this one s..t..e..p at a time.