(05-15-2014 09:05 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Liberty does not make us look bad but JMU thumbing their noses at the Sun Belt does. JMU was who we wanted as #12 and they just weren't interested.

But that would still give the SBC a CCG, which apparently is now something to be avoided because 1 team will lose!

(05-15-2014 09:05 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Liberty does not make us look bad but JMU thumbing their noses at the Sun Belt does. JMU was who we wanted as #12 and they just weren't interested.

Outside of message boards nobody even knows JMU passed on on the SBC.

Have heard nothing stated that we are not going to add any teams
to the SBC.
Just because someone fears losing to a better team in the SBC Championship
game doesn't necessarily mean they are not adding anyone.

(05-15-2014 09:07 PM)panama Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:04 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:54 PM)panama Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:50 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:37 PM)panama Wrote:  Yeah, tell Case Keenum that genius...

I wouldn't be the first to tell him Houston was over rated and his stats were the direct result of a gimmick offense. But I'll be more than happy to take a number and wait in line.

Irrelevant

CCG ended there undefeated run. That is the point.

Poor Baby. I guess he would have felt better had it been given to him and not earned. It's Athletics. As a great man said 'You play to win the game'. If Houston couldn't win their CCG they weren't that good

It's an example genius. But it's not the first time the conversation about the CCG risk has come up. You do watch football right? By the way..the Big South is thataway ===>

It's a horrible example. The 'risk' of a CCG is a joke and an excuse made up by people who aren't as good as they thought they were. NIU and Houston come to mind. I don't see the SEC rethinking their CCG strategy. Nor the B1G. Only the SBC 'fears' a CCG.

(05-15-2014 09:07 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:05 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Liberty does not make us look bad but JMU thumbing their noses at the Sun Belt does. JMU was who we wanted as #12 and they just weren't interested.

But that would still give the SBC a CCG, which apparently is now something to be avoided because 1 team will lose!

To be clear, the decision made is that it's not worth adding Liberty just to get a championship game which is not the same thing.

(05-15-2014 09:10 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:07 PM)panama Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:04 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:54 PM)panama Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:50 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  I wouldn't be the first to tell him Houston was over rated and his stats were the direct result of a gimmick offense. But I'll be more than happy to take a number and wait in line.

Irrelevant

CCG ended there undefeated run. That is the point.

Poor Baby. I guess he would have felt better had it been given to him and not earned. It's Athletics. As a great man said 'You play to win the game'. If Houston couldn't win their CCG they weren't that good

It's an example genius. But it's not the first time the conversation about the CCG risk has come up. You do watch football right? By the way..the Big South is thataway ===>

It's a horrible example. The 'risk' of a CCG is a joke and an excuse made up by people who aren't as good as they thought they were. NIU and Houston come to mind. I don't see the SEC rethinking their CCG strategy. Nor the B1G. Only the SBC 'fears' a CCG.

Because their championship game makes MONEY!

I am not pessimistic about the Sun Belt however. If JMU didn't want to join, so be it.

I am a firm believer that the Sun Belt has good football and I remain convinced that us and App will make it better -- it just make take us a couple of years to get up to speed. Louisiana and Ark. St. are very good teams and teams like South Alabama, Texas St., Troy and ULM are also on the upswing. I also believe Ga. State has a good coach and better days are ahead for them. Idaho and NMSU -- I just don't know much about. But all in all I see no reason why the Sun Belt cannot continue to get better and better.

(05-15-2014 09:10 PM)panama Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:07 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:05 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Liberty does not make us look bad but JMU thumbing their noses at the Sun Belt does. JMU was who we wanted as #12 and they just weren't interested.

But that would still give the SBC a CCG, which apparently is now something to be avoided because 1 team will lose!

To be clear, the decision made is that it's not worth adding Liberty just to get a championship game which is not the same thing.

No. Mr Forward Thinking specifically cited teams that lost in their CCG's. He also cited BIG money. He didn't say a CCG wouldn't make money, he's just not convinced BIG money. Talk about risk averse.

(05-15-2014 09:17 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:10 PM)panama Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:07 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:05 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Liberty does not make us look bad but JMU thumbing their noses at the Sun Belt does. JMU was who we wanted as #12 and they just weren't interested.

But that would still give the SBC a CCG, which apparently is now something to be avoided because 1 team will lose!

To be clear, the decision made is that it's not worth adding Liberty just to get a championship game which is not the same thing.

No. Mr Forward Thinking specifically cited teams that lost in their CCG's. He also cited BIG money. He didn't say a CCG wouldn't make money, he's just not convinced BIG money. Talk about risk averse.

If it ain't BIG money then it ain't worth talking about.

(05-15-2014 06:57 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:50 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  This is what I expected --- staying at 11. But it does seem a bit odd that in March when SBC leaders met at the basketball tourney our AD returned saying that the conference had voted to expand to 12.

Now we don't seem to want 12 or a championship game.

What I conclude here is that the prospective candidates (which appear to be Liberty and UMass at this point) are simply not very enticing to the membership. So instead of saying we don't have a good candidate it is easier to say that we don't think it is very lucrative to have a championship game.

Read the comments closely. This is one AD saying he is afraid of competition and doesn't want another home game during a good season because he is afraid of an upset. I'm so glad that A-State speaks for the entire league and has declared the search over... And that the conference has no interest in a championship game even if we can have one with 11 schools.

Afraid of competition? Among the stupidest things ever posted here. This is an AD who has signed Mizzou, Miami, Iowa State, Utah State, Toledo, home and home. An AD who said yesterday he is looking to move away from playing any FCS schools. An AD who has advocated forcefully to add NMSU all sports to make the competition tougher in men's and women's basketball and baseball.

Afraid of competition is what you got out of his comments? Pure silliness.

I know Terry quite well and have discussed the issue at length over the past few months. He doesn't want to add for the purpose of a title game but does favor expansion if it means adding programs that will make the league better.

Will UMass elevate SBC football's level of play? Will Liberty?

The only justification for either is a title game, not making it a better league. Adding for the sake of adding is about a few bucks, why do that when it lowers the level of competition, but nooooo he's afraid of competition.

So if AState runs the table 2 years from now, will their odds of making a good Bowl Game increased or decreased by not playing a CCG?

If the conference announces next week that we plan to stay at 11 (and I fully expect that to happen) it is clear that Liberty simply cannot get the required votes for membership in the Sun Belt. They could have been added last year or this year if the support was there.

I do understand the disappointment Liberty probably feels but the reality is they just are not regarded as a good fit for the conference of all public schools.

(05-15-2014 07:41 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:39 PM)statefanatic Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:57 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:50 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  This is what I expected --- staying at 11. But it does seem a bit odd that in March when SBC leaders met at the basketball tourney our AD returned saying that the conference had voted to expand to 12.

Now we don't seem to want 12 or a championship game.

What I conclude here is that the prospective candidates (which appear to be Liberty and UMass at this point) are simply not very enticing to the membership. So instead of saying we don't have a good candidate it is easier to say that we don't think it is very lucrative to have a championship game.

Read the comments closely. This is one AD saying he is afraid of competition and doesn't want another home game during a good season because he is afraid of an upset. I'm so glad that A-State speaks for the entire league and has declared the search over... And that the conference has no interest in a championship game even if we can have one with 11 schools.

A CCG has cost CUSA and the MAC a BCS bowl game before. Unless there is money gained from a CCG then why have one?

Wow. Just wow. If that is the way the SBC thinks I'm glad JMU took a pass. Those teams wouldn't have gone BCS Bowling without of CCG. The fact they lost speaks more about the actual quality of the MAC and CUSA teams than anything else.

Wow. Just wow. If that's how JMU thinks glad you took a pass as well. NIU had the BCS locked up last year and lost their title game. Houston had it locked up three years ago and lost their title game.

$6 million loss to each conference plus massive publicity.

Here's what is the true joke in this.

JMU didn't join the Sun Belt because your school didn't want to rub elbows with "inferior" programs but you think we should lower our standards and take a program that isn't up to snuff just for the sake of a title game that is just as likely to hurt the league as help it, but saddle us with a team we aren't in agreement should even be in the league.

JMU gets to take pass on the Sun Belt because we aren't worthy of your presence but if we don't act like $20 hookers for the sake of a title game there is something wrong with us?

(05-15-2014 08:59 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  Folks trying to read into this are just fooling themselves.

The answer is obvious: Anyone that is ready and willing to accept an invitation simply can't get the votes. He can't say that because... well, it makes us look bad. So instead, we say "there's no need for 12 now".

Agreed, this is the most polite way to communicate we aren't interested in the available options.

(05-15-2014 08:09 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:39 PM)statefanatic Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:57 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:50 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  This is what I expected --- staying at 11. But it does seem a bit odd that in March when SBC leaders met at the basketball tourney our AD returned saying that the conference had voted to expand to 12.

Now we don't seem to want 12 or a championship game.

What I conclude here is that the prospective candidates (which appear to be Liberty and UMass at this point) are simply not very enticing to the membership. So instead of saying we don't have a good candidate it is easier to say that we don't think it is very lucrative to have a championship game.

Read the comments closely. This is one AD saying he is afraid of competition and doesn't want another home game during a good season because he is afraid of an upset. I'm so glad that A-State speaks for the entire league and has declared the search over... And that the conference has no interest in a championship game even if we can have one with 11 schools.

A CCG has cost CUSA and the MAC a BCS bowl game before. Unless there is money gained from a CCG then why have one?

No SBC school has ever won more than 10 games in a football season so is it a moot point?

Kitton you have of late taken a snotty condescending tone that is growing old.

(05-15-2014 08:15 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  So every other Conference that has a Championship Game is wrong, because it's another game that their best team could lose. Why have CCG at all? That's the backward thinking I'm talking about. Fear? Possibly. Lame excuse? Absolutely. If the SBC isn't about competing both JMU and LU will be glad to not be associated with them

And I suppose Big XII should add Sam Houston and Lamar so they can have a title game?

We've already made a mistake rejecting NMSU all sports and made a mistake doing the football only thing, but hey let's just roll with it.

(05-15-2014 09:05 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Liberty does not make us look bad but JMU thumbing their noses at the Sun Belt does. JMU was who we wanted as #12 and they just weren't interested.

You mean those same JMU posters who are still talking about how intelligent they are and so much more academically inclined?

(05-15-2014 09:27 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:41 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:39 PM)statefanatic Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:57 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:50 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  This is what I expected --- staying at 11. But it does seem a bit odd that in March when SBC leaders met at the basketball tourney our AD returned saying that the conference had voted to expand to 12.

Now we don't seem to want 12 or a championship game.

What I conclude here is that the prospective candidates (which appear to be Liberty and UMass at this point) are simply not very enticing to the membership. So instead of saying we don't have a good candidate it is easier to say that we don't think it is very lucrative to have a championship game.

Read the comments closely. This is one AD saying he is afraid of competition and doesn't want another home game during a good season because he is afraid of an upset. I'm so glad that A-State speaks for the entire league and has declared the search over... And that the conference has no interest in a championship game even if we can have one with 11 schools.

A CCG has cost CUSA and the MAC a BCS bowl game before. Unless there is money gained from a CCG then why have one?

Wow. Just wow. If that is the way the SBC thinks I'm glad JMU took a pass. Those teams wouldn't have gone BCS Bowling without of CCG. The fact they lost speaks more about the actual quality of the MAC and CUSA teams than anything else.

Wow. Just wow. If that's how JMU thinks glad you took a pass as well. NIU had the BCS locked up last year and lost their title game. Houston had it locked up three years ago and lost their title game.

$6 million loss to each conference plus massive publicity.

Here's what is the true joke in this.

JMU didn't join the Sun Belt because your school didn't want to rub elbows with "inferior" programs but you think we should lower our standards and take a program that isn't up to snuff just for the sake of a title game that is just as likely to hurt the league as help it, but saddle us with a team we aren't in agreement should even be in the league.

JMU gets to take pass on the Sun Belt because we aren't worthy of your presence but if we don't act like $20 hookers for the sake of a title game there is something wrong with us?

And if they'd have won....... You know it's why you play the game. JMU was right in their read of the SBC if this is truly the reason. Could have proved em wrong, but guess they don't have it in em to be anything other than parochial. All the off field crap that was spouted about LU doesn't make any difference. The SBC whiffed on their 1 and 2 choices and lost a chance to at least be relevant. Say what you will but in this day and age whe every other conference has a CCG and you don't.....well

(05-15-2014 08:42 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Not convinced this is the true feeling of the Sun Belt Conference,
but if it is then we will have a perception of being with a bunch of scared administrators.
Nothing ventured, nothing gained. You cannot hope to compete
in the four team playoff or have any chance of getting in without
going for the Hail Mary. You don't hit a home run by bunting.

Unbelievable.

So just any toad that hops up should be admitted?

Liberty tried for years to get in the Southern. Why weren't they admitted?

Did App advocate for Liberty?

Are we that screwed up of a league that we will take a team that the Southern turned down just for the magic number 12?

Hell let's just take anyone who applies, saves the trouble of bothering to evaluate them.

(05-15-2014 09:30 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:15 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  So every other Conference that has a Championship Game is wrong, because it's another game that their best team could lose. Why have CCG at all? That's the backward thinking I'm talking about. Fear? Possibly. Lame excuse? Absolutely. If the SBC isn't about competing both JMU and LU will be glad to not be associated with them

And I suppose Big XII should add Sam Houston and Lamar so they can have a title game?

We've already made a mistake rejecting NMSU all sports and made a mistake doing the football only thing, but hey let's just roll with it.

They did add WVU so they are not above making stupid decisions