(05-15-2014 10:02 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:58 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  Big XII > SBC. So that's not really a good comparison. They don't need a CCG at this point because they have 1 or 2 teams that are household names.
As for upset LU isn't in you are wrong. As I said if you didn't want them then come out and say it. Don't hide behind a lame 'We might ruin a special season with a CCG upset' excuse.

Fine I will say it they don't want you

Good. I didn't apply.

(05-15-2014 09:58 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  Big XII > SBC. So that's not really a good comparison. They don't need a CCG at this point because they have 1 or 2 teams that are household names.
As for upset LU isn't in you are wrong. As I said if you didn't want them then come out and say it. Don't hide behind a lame 'We might ruin a special season with a CCG upset' excuse.

You are taking a comment thrown in as an aside and making it the focus. I was there and there was no hiding behind that, it was tossed in after explaining if there was a windfall to be had, he'd support a team for the sake of a title game. Without a windfall, it has to be a quality team that fits but that doesn't fit your narrative.

(05-15-2014 10:10 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  Troy Schulte ‏@TroySchulteADG · 17m
Mohajir also stood firm on his stance against a champ. game for football, citing losses by Ohio State and Northern Illinois in 2013.

His words. Not mine.

Your spin, not at all how it was said. Wish I had my camera on at the time, I'd show you the video to show how wrong you are. But hey a tweet that paraphrased a comment is all you need to create this to be what you want.

(05-15-2014 10:07 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 10:03 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:50 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  70 would you rather them come out and alienate fanbases of those available or take the high road?

No one is scared, they are running a business. The assets available for acquisition do not produce returns great enough to justify their addition.

You know I agree with most of what you are saying. And the CCG is full of possibilities of a good team losing. However when your intent is to gain a spot for a national four team playoff, you have to go for it all. Half way will not get it done.

I dislike quick fixes, UMass or Liberty is a quick fix not a long term growth strategy. Wait for the right 12th or even better a ruling to allow a CCG without 12.

This is not about adding teams. Good chance we will be able to play a CCG without that.
The big reward some have written about will only come from our two best teams fighting it out to hopefully take their place in a decision to add the winner to compete for the national championship. Not having a CCG will probably forever exclude the SBC in any discussions. Even then they will have a hard time making the cut.

I'm very pleased to know that the stAte AD is not only bright, but also very right and hopefully will stand strong at this time against this 12th team issue. Bringing in some FCS school just to have a game is silly, particularly when rules may very well change to allow such a game. And I do not understand the App and Ga. Southern fans even remotely favoring such a move. You have good programs and have fought hard for the FBS status you earned. Why would you want to lower that value by bringing in a poor FCS team for the sake of some game that will cost money to your school and produce small ratings? We need to get off this FCS thing and grow the conference into a league worthy of much better member schools than have been mentioned here for what seems like the past two years.

(05-15-2014 10:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 09:58 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  Big XII > SBC. So that's not really a good comparison. They don't need a CCG at this point because they have 1 or 2 teams that are household names.
As for upset LU isn't in you are wrong. As I said if you didn't want them then come out and say it. Don't hide behind a lame 'We might ruin a special season with a CCG upset' excuse.

You are taking a comment thrown in as an aside and making it the focus. I was there and there was no hiding behind that, it was tossed in after explaining if there was a windfall to be had, he'd support a team for the sake of a title game. Without a windfall, it has to be a quality team that fits but that doesn't fit your narrative.

Supposedly, JMU and MoSt had the votes. What windfall would they bring? Of course if a CCG is nothing more than 'adding a game just to add a game' the SBC will probably never have a CCG. After all, no team can bring a windfall and it's just another game

(05-15-2014 10:17 PM)Brokeback Flamer Wrote:  Supposedly, JMU and MoSt had the votes. What windfall would they bring? Of course if a CCG is nothing more than 'adding a game just to add a game' the SBC will probably never have a CCG. After all, no team can bring a windfall and it's just another game

JMU has better football than Liberty.

MSU has MUCH better basketball than Liberty.

(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".

And so this dude takes it upon himself to speak for the conference before the schools meet next week? No. This is his personal opinion. Not wanting to play a championship game by citing upsets last year in championship games can be called a business decision if you want, but it is made out of fear. That is the Right word. NIU didn't deserve to be in a BCS bowl last year if they can't get it done on the field. Then he says something else: he WOULD risk a championship game if it was LUCRATIVE. Nothing to be proud of in anything that this guy said.

Ga. Southern wants the same as Ark. St. does-- a strong Sun Belt. Our AD just last week said he did not favor adding someone just for the sake of adding a 12th team. He is saying exactly what Ark. St.'s AD is saying.

(05-15-2014 10:14 PM)Florida Red Wolf Wrote:  I'm very pleased to know that the stAte AD is not only bright, but also very right and hopefully will stand strong at this time against this 12th team issue. Bringing in some FCS school just to have a game is silly, particularly when rules may very well change to allow such a game. And I do not understand the App and Ga. Southern fans even remotely favoring such a move. You have good programs and have fought hard for the FBS status you earned. Why would you want to lower that value by bringing in a poor FCS team for the sake of some game that will cost money to your school and produce small ratings? We need to get off this FCS thing and grow the conference into a league worthy of much better member schools than have been mentioned here for what seems like the past two years.

You have no high ground here. These are the same folks that extended an invitation to Idaho and NMSU. Not inviting Liberty is a separate issue. Can't claim the lowering value argument on UMASS with the two western members the SBC voted in last year. Something is rotten around here if we stay at 11 AND refuse to play a championship game after legislation passes to deregulate championships.

I have to yawn a lot here. Everyone is getting all bent out of shape over twitter comments and a CCG. No SBC for LU? No worries. We'll just schedule as many SBC teams as possible OOC in all sports and take it to you that way. Remember this day 20 years from now - we will be light years ahead of the SBC. I'm not sure you guys really understand what you're missing here and where Liberty is going. When you have a billion dollars cash, your own TV network, a first class AD who spent 13 years in the SEC, a President who loves to build, combined with a chip on your shoulder, watch out. This will be good fun, I really hope we schedule SBC schools in all sports quite often.

(05-15-2014 10:25 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(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".

And so this dude takes it upon himself to speak for the conference before the schools meet next week? No. This is his personal opinion. Not wanting to play a championship game by citing upsets last year in championship games can be called a business decision if you want, but it is made out of fear. That is the Right word. NIU didn't deserve to be in a BCS bowl last year if they can't get it done on the field. Then he says something else: he WOULD risk a championship game if it was LUCRATIVE. Nothing to be proud of in anything that this guy said.

Once again.

I was standing right there when he made the statement.

He said unless there is a big financial windfall there is no reason to add a team just to have a game. He noted that only a few make money and that they have cost leagues money and mentioned the two upsets.

Not wanting to add a member who has nothing to offer but be team #12 is far removed from being opposed to a title game. He has previously said to me directly he'd support JMU AND Missouri State saying if they both wanted in he'd be in favor of going to 13 and dealing with the issue of an odd number to get two good members but in your twisting this you are pretending he would oppose them out of fear of title game. This is the same guy who supported a title game last year and supported NMSU for full membership even though they would have (at the time) been member #13 for basketball even though it would have caused schedule problems.

(05-15-2014 10:33 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:  I have to yawn a lot here. Everyone is getting all bent out of shape over twitter comments and a CCG. No SBC for LU? No worries. We'll just schedule as many SBC teams as possible OOC in all sports and take it to you that way. Remember this day 20 years from now - we will be light years ahead of the SBC. I'm not sure you guys really understand what you're missing here and where Liberty is going. When you have a billion dollars cash, your own TV network, a first class AD who spent 13 years in the SEC, a President who loves to build, combined with a chip on your shoulder, watch out. This will be good fun, I really hope we schedule SBC schools in all sports quite often.

The grapes are turning sour already.

(05-15-2014 10:32 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 10:14 PM)Florida Red Wolf Wrote:  I'm very pleased to know that the stAte AD is not only bright, but also very right and hopefully will stand strong at this time against this 12th team issue. Bringing in some FCS school just to have a game is silly, particularly when rules may very well change to allow such a game. And I do not understand the App and Ga. Southern fans even remotely favoring such a move. You have good programs and have fought hard for the FBS status you earned. Why would you want to lower that value by bringing in a poor FCS team for the sake of some game that will cost money to your school and produce small ratings? We need to get off this FCS thing and grow the conference into a league worthy of much better member schools than have been mentioned here for what seems like the past two years.

You have no high ground here. These are the same folks that extended an invitation to Idaho and NMSU. Not inviting Liberty is a separate issue. Can't claim the lowering value argument on UMASS with the two western members the SBC voted in last year. Something is rotten around here if we stay at 11 AND refuse to play a championship game after legislation passes to deregulate championships.

The legislation hasn't passed and we haven't voted to not follow it so let's save that until it actually happens.

This is a nasty little thread.

Nobody has yet made the case for the benefits of a championship game other than "we need one" and "it may help one of our teams get into the playoff".

Well, there isn't a sponsor lined up for a championship game and nobody with the league has really made a case for whether the championship game will actually make enough money to be worth adding another team, or any money for that matter. Even then we don't know if 12 will even be required for a championship game.

Even then we've yet to have a Top 25 team and are worried about hurrying up to have a championship game so we have a better chance of getting into the playoffs? A favored team beating a lesser SBC team in a championship game isn't going to really impress the playoff selection committee.

Our main worry is starting to get teams into the Top 25 and we'll do that on the back of beating P5 OOC teams along with not stumbling in conference. Beating the P5 teams is the key....losing to another SBC team is the stumbling block to overcome. Now if we start making some noise in the Top 25 with a couple of teams then maybe a championship game starts to look like the next step in starting to convince a playoff committee. But that is not our situation right now.

This whole thing seems to be more "we want the same toy the big boys have" rather than any sort of actual logical case made for how a championship game is actually going to get us where we want to go.

Do any sponsors want to PAY US to have a championship game? Has anybody expressed a desire to PAY US to televise a championship game? Where is the actual neutral study by an outside party showing that we will all be financially better off adding a random 12th school and having a championship game? Is that alleged financial windfall worth the risk of losing an access bowl slot because of a USM/Houston situation?

It's up to those advocating for a championship game and quick addition to run the numbers and show the money and I haven't yet seen it.

(05-15-2014 10:30 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Ga. Southern wants the same as Ark. St. does-- a strong Sun Belt. Our AD just last week said he did not favor adding someone just for the sake of adding a 12th team. He is saying exactly what Ark. St.'s AD is saying.

No one is advocating inviting warm bodies to make 12. No one. But please don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. This group voted to invite Idaho and NMSU which when it comes to football are barely alive, yet bringing UMASS in is some strength of schedule ending crisis?

(05-15-2014 10:33 PM)Campaign4Liberty Wrote:  I have to yawn a lot here. Everyone is getting all bent out of shape over twitter comments and a CCG. No SBC for LU? No worries. We'll just schedule as many SBC teams as possible OOC in all sports and take it to you that way. Remember this day 20 years from now - we will be light years ahead of the SBC. I'm not sure you guys really understand what you're missing here and where Liberty is going. When you have a billion dollars cash, your own TV network, a first class AD who spent 13 years in the SEC, a President who loves to build, combined with a chip on your shoulder, watch out. This will be good fun, I really hope we schedule SBC schools in all sports quite often.

(05-15-2014 10:39 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 10:30 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Ga. Southern wants the same as Ark. St. does-- a strong Sun Belt. Our AD just last week said he did not favor adding someone just for the sake of adding a 12th team. He is saying exactly what Ark. St.'s AD is saying.

No one is advocating inviting wam bodies to make 12. No one. But please don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. This group voted to invite Idaho and NMSU which when it comes to football are barely alive, yet bringing UMASS in is some strength of schedule ending crisis?

Idaho and NMSU were added because there was an existential crisis going on at the time.

(05-15-2014 10:39 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 10:30 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Ga. Southern wants the same as Ark. St. does-- a strong Sun Belt. Our AD just last week said he did not favor adding someone just for the sake of adding a 12th team. He is saying exactly what Ark. St.'s AD is saying.

No one is advocating inviting warm bodies to make 12. No one. But please don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. This group voted to invite Idaho and NMSU which when it comes to football are barely alive, yet bringing UMASS in is some strength of schedule ending crisis?

Keep in mind the voting dynamic was very different back when Idaho and NMSU were added.

Lots of over reactions on this thread. Mohajir is not scared. He's simply saying he's not for a CCG just to have one. He wants the 12th team to be the right team. Anyone whose looked at ASU's football nonconference schedule should know we are not scared of anyone.

(05-15-2014 10:43 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 10:39 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 10:30 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  Ga. Southern wants the same as Ark. St. does-- a strong Sun Belt. Our AD just last week said he did not favor adding someone just for the sake of adding a 12th team. He is saying exactly what Ark. St.'s AD is saying.

No one is advocating inviting wam bodies to make 12. No one. But please don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. This group voted to invite Idaho and NMSU which when it comes to football are barely alive, yet bringing UMASS in is some strength of schedule ending crisis?

Idaho and NMSU were added because there was an existential crisis going on at the time.

Also the 12 million cap on g5 conferences was not in place and there was still talk of conferences going to 16 members.