(03-23-2024 08:36 AM)ghostofclt! Wrote:  

(03-22-2024 11:01 PM)Thewavefan Wrote:  At what point do we take James Madison from the Sunbelt? They are building quite a program and have the market to go with it. They obviously do not want to be in the belt and would leave in a heartbeat to join the AAC. So what’s the hold up? I say strike while the iron is hot and scoop them up so they can continue to grow and build.

clt says they don't check all of the boxes to be AAC caliber, but could be interesting

small town
r2 status
small endowment

...and Panama agreed with CLT. Panama wants to die now. Panama has sad face.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

(03-27-2024 08:14 PM)panama Wrote:  All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

(03-28-2024 11:28 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 08:14 PM)panama Wrote:  All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

You're talking about what media values, Panama is talking about what President's value. Sure if media is saying there's 10's of millions of dollars in it, then the Presidents will value that. $1-2M? Not as much.

(03-27-2024 12:12 PM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 11:27 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 11:22 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 10:42 AM)lollaperuna Wrote:  It’s popular on here to dog on Aresco, but he’s the guy that had the TV background and got the AAC the exposure that made them the highest paid G5. He coined the P6 narrative, and in my opinion has done an excellent job pushing against the cartel and making the best moves possible. The only competition the American has is the Mountain West, and the AAC still has the major advantages over them. Money and Exposure.

The Sun Belt should be worried about C-USA, the little conference that was left for dead. They aren’t that far ahead.

Our exposure isn't that much greater and our money advantage will likely be gone by the next contract or maybe even in the negative.

Aresco gets wrung out here because he did a factually bad job, we lost two programs who agreed to take less money and pay us extra money to get out. He gambled on the first media contract and the schools made it work, then trapped us in a sweetheart deal for his buddies at the network. The man has one positive on his record adding Army football. We will see if any of the new schools gamble pay off, but the man was in no way good, at best if the cusa6 work out he was neutral. Of course if you add in his salary then it still will be an overall negative outcome regardless of the cusa6 performance, Wichita and Army included.

So you think that you'll take a hit on the next contract while also criticizing Aresco for signing too long of a contract?

There no way anybody truly believes we take a hit on the next contract. If anything, I think we are about get paid way more than our current contract. Markets, academics, and name brands do not take pay cuts. It’s that simple. The AAC is about to double or possibly triple our current deal in the next round of negotiations. You heard it here first.

When Memphis and USF inevitably leave, what does that contract look like?

(03-28-2024 03:45 PM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 12:12 PM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 11:27 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 11:22 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 10:42 AM)lollaperuna Wrote:  It’s popular on here to dog on Aresco, but he’s the guy that had the TV background and got the AAC the exposure that made them the highest paid G5. He coined the P6 narrative, and in my opinion has done an excellent job pushing against the cartel and making the best moves possible. The only competition the American has is the Mountain West, and the AAC still has the major advantages over them. Money and Exposure.

The Sun Belt should be worried about C-USA, the little conference that was left for dead. They aren’t that far ahead.

Our exposure isn't that much greater and our money advantage will likely be gone by the next contract or maybe even in the negative.

Aresco gets wrung out here because he did a factually bad job, we lost two programs who agreed to take less money and pay us extra money to get out. He gambled on the first media contract and the schools made it work, then trapped us in a sweetheart deal for his buddies at the network. The man has one positive on his record adding Army football. We will see if any of the new schools gamble pay off, but the man was in no way good, at best if the cusa6 work out he was neutral. Of course if you add in his salary then it still will be an overall negative outcome regardless of the cusa6 performance, Wichita and Army included.

So you think that you'll take a hit on the next contract while also criticizing Aresco for signing too long of a contract?

There no way anybody truly believes we take a hit on the next contract. If anything, I think we are about get paid way more than our current contract. Markets, academics, and name brands do not take pay cuts. It’s that simple. The AAC is about to double or possibly triple our current deal in the next round of negotiations. You heard it here first.

When Memphis and USF inevitably leave, what does that contract look like?

Depends on what we do, but part of the value is in the contract and the time slots, part of that is tied up in who is competing for the titles. NLH has the numbers, like literally years of them. Almost every team has gone to the championship game, except USF. Those two combined haven't competed for anything every year. Its the markets silly, their size matters so most schools bring a consitent amount of viewers depending on if they are competing by picking up secondary fans from their market. The numbers have been pretty consistent.

We don't have to take a hit, the mwc will likely sign two deals before we sign our next, so they will slowly pass us by. Particularly in the new adds as their ramp up is still years away and will likely lag the mwc for the majority of the next contract. If the MWC adds the pac 2 it will probably boost their contract as well. The length of the deal is an issue because we produce better numbers than the MWC does but our cost/payment is fixed, we're a great deal for ESPN. A perfect example is the use of our championship game as a buffer against cbs and fox showcase games. We still brought in good audiences but.they saved their p5 games for unopposed times to maximize viewership which continues to grow.

(03-28-2024 11:28 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 08:14 PM)panama Wrote:  All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

Read my last sentence.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

(03-28-2024 01:14 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 11:28 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 08:14 PM)panama Wrote:  All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

You're talking about what media values, Panama is talking about what President's value. Sure if media is saying there's 10's of millions of dollars in it, then the Presidents will value that. $1-2M? Not as much.

Yep and even with the B1G taking PAC schools, they ignored geography but went heavy on the other two criteria. ACC did the same in taking Stanford and Cal. Even the SBC has in the last 3 rounds taken schools mostly that look like yhe pre-existing members. The more things change....they dont...

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Geography doesn't matter much when you're making tens of millions of dollars for it. When you're making peanuts it matters.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

(03-28-2024 05:35 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 11:28 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 08:14 PM)panama Wrote:  All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

Read my last sentence.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

And yet here you sit with schools like southern miss and marshall who have what in common with your school?

Once again the sunbelt is only attractive to this varied schools because of close geography. The AAC continues the dominant theme of the big east which was based on metros/markets and competitiveness with little care for geography which went out the window as a serious factor with the first alignment surge of SWC and the Big 8 becoming the big 12. Rutgers and Maryland was not a geography decision. You all chose the MAC plan and got a slightly better than MAC deal, it is likely you will follow the MAC into obscurity, because the only thing that matters despite your diatribe is about money generated.

(03-28-2024 09:56 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 05:35 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 11:28 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 08:14 PM)panama Wrote:  All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

Read my last sentence.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

And yet here you sit with schools like southern miss and marshall who have what in common with your school?

Once again the sunbelt is only attractive to this varied schools because of close geography. The AAC continues the dominant theme of the big east which was based on metros/markets and competitiveness with little care for geography which went out the window as a serious factor with the first alignment surge of SWC and the Big 8 becoming the big 12. Rutgers and Maryland was not a geography decision. You all chose the MAC plan and got a slightly better than MAC deal, it is likely you will follow the MAC into obscurity, because the only thing that matters despite your diatribe is about money generated.

To be clear, the AAC didn’t take Marshall and Southern Miss because they are garbage programs who have never accomplished anything nor have the potential to accomplish anything. That’s the reason, no matter how their fans try to spin it.

(03-28-2024 09:56 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 05:35 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 11:28 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 08:14 PM)panama Wrote:  All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

Read my last sentence.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

And yet here you sit with schools like southern miss and marshall who have what in common with your school?

Once again the sunbelt is only attractive to this varied schools because of close geography. The AAC continues the dominant theme of the big east which was based on metros/markets and competitiveness with little care for geography which went out the window as a serious factor with the first alignment surge of SWC and the Big 8 becoming the big 12. Rutgers and Maryland was not a geography decision. You all chose the MAC plan and got a slightly better than MAC deal, it is likely you will follow the MAC into obscurity, because the only thing that matters despite your diatribe is about money generated.

lol

(03-29-2024 04:47 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 09:56 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 05:35 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 11:28 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 08:14 PM)panama Wrote:  All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

Read my last sentence.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

And yet here you sit with schools like southern miss and marshall who have what in common with your school?

Once again the sunbelt is only attractive to this varied schools because of close geography. The AAC continues the dominant theme of the big east which was based on metros/markets and competitiveness with little care for geography which went out the window as a serious factor with the first alignment surge of SWC and the Big 8 becoming the big 12. Rutgers and Maryland was not a geography decision. You all chose the MAC plan and got a slightly better than MAC deal, it is likely you will follow the MAC into obscurity, because the only thing that matters despite your diatribe is about money generated.

To be clear, the AAC didn’t take Marshall and Southern Miss because they are garbage programs who have never accomplished anything nor have the potential to accomplish anything. That’s the reason, no matter how their fans try to spin it.

clt says don't forget poor academics as well

(03-29-2024 04:47 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 09:56 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 05:35 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 11:28 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-27-2024 08:14 PM)panama Wrote:  All of these fan perspectives and criteria are cute. But that isn't how any of this works
Presidents decide. And they decide based on cultural, intentional and geographic fit unless molten lava is flowing down a mountain threatening to destroy them.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

Read my last sentence.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

And yet here you sit with schools like southern miss and marshall who have what in common with your school?

Once again the sunbelt is only attractive to this varied schools because of close geography. The AAC continues the dominant theme of the big east which was based on metros/markets and competitiveness with little care for geography which went out the window as a serious factor with the first alignment surge of SWC and the Big 8 becoming the big 12. Rutgers and Maryland was not a geography decision. You all chose the MAC plan and got a slightly better than MAC deal, it is likely you will follow the MAC into obscurity, because the only thing that matters despite your diatribe is about money generated.

To be clear, the AAC didn’t take Marshall and Southern Miss because they are garbage programs who have never accomplished anything nor have the potential to accomplish anything. That’s the reason, no matter how their fans try to spin it.

I'll be respectful to the AAC members that are respectful to our program, but you are delusional. Wanna talk a bout a garbage program? Lets do it...

540-651-35... That is your losing program record.

0-4... Your Record against that "garbage" program you keep bringing up.

You've been FBS football since 1902 and only have 5 conference championships to your name. Marshall has been in FBS football for half of that time (Starting in 1947 and coming back up fully in 1997) and has 6 conference championships.

You've only had 5 winning season in the 21 CENTURY... Besides a could of good seasons as of late, you have done absolutely nothing. No one cares about Tulane. You are in a big market with a cool logo. That is literally it. You have no national brand and will be past over by other schools like your were Marshall and the countless others you shared a conference with for years. By the way, Marshall has had 15 winning seasons in that same timespan.

Again, I have respect for many AAC programs, especially ECU, Memphis, and the ones we shared a conference with for years. It's not that I dislike Tulane, its that I honestly don't care about them. They have been and will always be irrelevant in FBS. A couple of good seasons are not going to change that. Tulane's most well-known attribute is once being in the SEC, but leaving because they were terrible then... Not much has changed. You are literally nothing but a troll.

(03-29-2024 08:31 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 04:47 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 09:56 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 05:35 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 11:28 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Oh geographic fit you say lol if that was true you would be making double your current pay out....geography has nothing to do with this and hasn't for at least 15 years. Geography was the first part broken, then it was history, now competition, finally its all about what it was always about, money. Thats why OU sued in the 80s and why OU annd Texas made the SEC jump, the big 10 took the PAC schools they did, the ACC took a texas and two cali teams, its why the AAC didn't take the sunbelt schools or Marshall/Southern Miss.

Read my last sentence.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

And yet here you sit with schools like southern miss and marshall who have what in common with your school?

Once again the sunbelt is only attractive to this varied schools because of close geography. The AAC continues the dominant theme of the big east which was based on metros/markets and competitiveness with little care for geography which went out the window as a serious factor with the first alignment surge of SWC and the Big 8 becoming the big 12. Rutgers and Maryland was not a geography decision. You all chose the MAC plan and got a slightly better than MAC deal, it is likely you will follow the MAC into obscurity, because the only thing that matters despite your diatribe is about money generated.

To be clear, the AAC didn’t take Marshall and Southern Miss because they are garbage programs who have never accomplished anything nor have the potential to accomplish anything. That’s the reason, no matter how their fans try to spin it.

I'll be respectful to the AAC members that are respectful to our program, but you are delusional. Wanna talk a bout a garbage program? Lets do it...

540-651-35... That is your losing program record.

0-4... Your Record against that "garbage" program you keep bringing up.

You've been FBS football since 1902 and only have 5 conference championships to your name. Marshall has been in FBS football for half of that time (Starting in 1947 and coming back up fully in 1997) and has 6 conference championships.

You've only had 5 winning season in the 21 CENTURY... Besides a could of good seasons as of late, you have done absolutely nothing. No one cares about Tulane. You are in a big market with a cool logo. That is literally it. You have no national brand and will be past over by other schools like your were Marshall and the countless others you shared a conference with for years. By the way, Marshall has had 15 winning seasons in that same timespan.

Again, I have respect for many AAC programs, especially ECU, Memphis, and the ones we shared a conference with for years. It's not that I dislike Tulane, its that I honestly don't care about them. They have been and will always be irrelevant in FBS. A couple of good seasons are not going to change that. Tulane's most well-known attribute is once being in the SEC, but leaving because they were terrible then... Not much has changed. You are literally nothing but a troll.

lol grow up. Nobody cares about wins or losses. The ACC and Big 12 certainly don’t and that’s why Tulane is on the wish list and not a single team from the SunBelt is. Markets and academics are the glory here not some arbitrary win or loss from 30 years ago. Even if you wanted to bring that kind of dated talk into this discussion, okay fine let’s do it. Tulane has a NY6 bowl win, there that’s it, I win. Nobody from the belt even comes close to that. Enough of this nonsense. There is nothing the belt fans can say or do that will all of a sudden make them relevant. Never gonna happen.

I was about to write, "There's almost zero chance Thewavefan is a real person typing real opinions."

Then I looked at their rep. What a weird game.

EDIT: To be clear, I think folks should do whatever floats their boats, I just think it's a shame when they think being an ahole is a fun game to play.

(03-29-2024 09:58 AM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  I was about to write, "There's almost zero chance Thewavefan is a real person typing real opinions."

Then I looked at their rep. What a weird game.

EDIT: To be clear, I think folks should do whatever floats their boats, I just think it's a shame when they think being an ahole is a fun game to play.

By far his worse persona.

(03-29-2024 09:25 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 08:31 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 04:47 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 09:56 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 05:35 PM)panama Wrote:  Read my last sentence.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

And yet here you sit with schools like southern miss and marshall who have what in common with your school?

Once again the sunbelt is only attractive to this varied schools because of close geography. The AAC continues the dominant theme of the big east which was based on metros/markets and competitiveness with little care for geography which went out the window as a serious factor with the first alignment surge of SWC and the Big 8 becoming the big 12. Rutgers and Maryland was not a geography decision. You all chose the MAC plan and got a slightly better than MAC deal, it is likely you will follow the MAC into obscurity, because the only thing that matters despite your diatribe is about money generated.

To be clear, the AAC didn’t take Marshall and Southern Miss because they are garbage programs who have never accomplished anything nor have the potential to accomplish anything. That’s the reason, no matter how their fans try to spin it.

I'll be respectful to the AAC members that are respectful to our program, but you are delusional. Wanna talk a bout a garbage program? Lets do it...

540-651-35... That is your losing program record.

0-4... Your Record against that "garbage" program you keep bringing up.

You've been FBS football since 1902 and only have 5 conference championships to your name. Marshall has been in FBS football for half of that time (Starting in 1947 and coming back up fully in 1997) and has 6 conference championships.

You've only had 5 winning season in the 21 CENTURY... Besides a could of good seasons as of late, you have done absolutely nothing. No one cares about Tulane. You are in a big market with a cool logo. That is literally it. You have no national brand and will be past over by other schools like your were Marshall and the countless others you shared a conference with for years. By the way, Marshall has had 15 winning seasons in that same timespan.

Again, I have respect for many AAC programs, especially ECU, Memphis, and the ones we shared a conference with for years. It's not that I dislike Tulane, its that I honestly don't care about them. They have been and will always be irrelevant in FBS. A couple of good seasons are not going to change that. Tulane's most well-known attribute is once being in the SEC, but leaving because they were terrible then... Not much has changed. You are literally nothing but a troll.

lol grow up. Nobody cares about wins or losses. The ACC and Big 12 certainly don’t and that’s why Tulane is on the wish list and not a single team from the SunBelt is. Markets and academics are the glory here not some arbitrary win or loss from 30 years ago. Even if you wanted to bring that kind of dated talk into this discussion, okay fine let’s do it. Tulane has a NY6 bowl win, there that’s it, I win. Nobody from the belt even comes close to that. Enough of this nonsense. There is nothing the belt fans can say or do that will all of a sudden make them relevant. Never gonna happen.

You were the one that brought up Marshall and Southern Miss out of no where even though they were not mentioned beforehand and had nothing to do with the conversation. You specifically keep using the term "Garbage Programs" which I think 99.9% of people would say that is judged on winning and tradition, not markets and money. Yes, the SEC and Big 10 are looking at those things as of recent, but neither Marshall, Southern Miss, or your dear Tulane is getting into either of those conferences. Again, I think you are nothing more than a troll, but you could just be butt hurt as well. I probably would be too if Marshall and Southern Miss beat down my program on a regular basis for years.

(03-29-2024 10:48 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 09:25 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 08:31 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 04:47 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-28-2024 09:56 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  And yet here you sit with schools like southern miss and marshall who have what in common with your school?

Once again the sunbelt is only attractive to this varied schools because of close geography. The AAC continues the dominant theme of the big east which was based on metros/markets and competitiveness with little care for geography which went out the window as a serious factor with the first alignment surge of SWC and the Big 8 becoming the big 12. Rutgers and Maryland was not a geography decision. You all chose the MAC plan and got a slightly better than MAC deal, it is likely you will follow the MAC into obscurity, because the only thing that matters despite your diatribe is about money generated.

To be clear, the AAC didn’t take Marshall and Southern Miss because they are garbage programs who have never accomplished anything nor have the potential to accomplish anything. That’s the reason, no matter how their fans try to spin it.

I'll be respectful to the AAC members that are respectful to our program, but you are delusional. Wanna talk a bout a garbage program? Lets do it...

540-651-35... That is your losing program record.

0-4... Your Record against that "garbage" program you keep bringing up.

You've been FBS football since 1902 and only have 5 conference championships to your name. Marshall has been in FBS football for half of that time (Starting in 1947 and coming back up fully in 1997) and has 6 conference championships.

You've only had 5 winning season in the 21 CENTURY... Besides a could of good seasons as of late, you have done absolutely nothing. No one cares about Tulane. You are in a big market with a cool logo. That is literally it. You have no national brand and will be past over by other schools like your were Marshall and the countless others you shared a conference with for years. By the way, Marshall has had 15 winning seasons in that same timespan.

Again, I have respect for many AAC programs, especially ECU, Memphis, and the ones we shared a conference with for years. It's not that I dislike Tulane, its that I honestly don't care about them. They have been and will always be irrelevant in FBS. A couple of good seasons are not going to change that. Tulane's most well-known attribute is once being in the SEC, but leaving because they were terrible then... Not much has changed. You are literally nothing but a troll.

lol grow up. Nobody cares about wins or losses. The ACC and Big 12 certainly don’t and that’s why Tulane is on the wish list and not a single team from the SunBelt is. Markets and academics are the glory here not some arbitrary win or loss from 30 years ago. Even if you wanted to bring that kind of dated talk into this discussion, okay fine let’s do it. Tulane has a NY6 bowl win, there that’s it, I win. Nobody from the belt even comes close to that. Enough of this nonsense. There is nothing the belt fans can say or do that will all of a sudden make them relevant. Never gonna happen.

You were the one that brought up Marshall and Southern Miss out of no where even though they were not mentioned beforehand and had nothing to do with the conversation. You specifically keep using the term "Garbage Programs" which I think 99.9% of people would say that is judged on winning and tradition, not markets and money. Yes, the SEC and Big 10 are looking at those things as of recent, but neither Marshall, Southern Miss, or your dear Tulane is getting into either of those conferences. Again, I think you are nothing more than a troll, but you could just be butt hurt as well. I probably would be too if Marshall and Southern Miss beat down my program on a regular basis for years.

Brother, do yourself a favor and just block him. This is just CLT’s Tulane burner. Whether you make reasonable arguments or not, you’re just gonna get this.

(03-29-2024 12:01 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 10:48 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 09:25 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 08:31 AM)Surbadger Wrote:  

(03-29-2024 04:47 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  To be clear, the AAC didn’t take Marshall and Southern Miss because they are garbage programs who have never accomplished anything nor have the potential to accomplish anything. That’s the reason, no matter how their fans try to spin it.

I'll be respectful to the AAC members that are respectful to our program, but you are delusional. Wanna talk a bout a garbage program? Lets do it...

540-651-35... That is your losing program record.

0-4... Your Record against that "garbage" program you keep bringing up.

You've been FBS football since 1902 and only have 5 conference championships to your name. Marshall has been in FBS football for half of that time (Starting in 1947 and coming back up fully in 1997) and has 6 conference championships.

You've only had 5 winning season in the 21 CENTURY... Besides a could of good seasons as of late, you have done absolutely nothing. No one cares about Tulane. You are in a big market with a cool logo. That is literally it. You have no national brand and will be past over by other schools like your were Marshall and the countless others you shared a conference with for years. By the way, Marshall has had 15 winning seasons in that same timespan.

Again, I have respect for many AAC programs, especially ECU, Memphis, and the ones we shared a conference with for years. It's not that I dislike Tulane, its that I honestly don't care about them. They have been and will always be irrelevant in FBS. A couple of good seasons are not going to change that. Tulane's most well-known attribute is once being in the SEC, but leaving because they were terrible then... Not much has changed. You are literally nothing but a troll.

lol grow up. Nobody cares about wins or losses. The ACC and Big 12 certainly don’t and that’s why Tulane is on the wish list and not a single team from the SunBelt is. Markets and academics are the glory here not some arbitrary win or loss from 30 years ago. Even if you wanted to bring that kind of dated talk into this discussion, okay fine let’s do it. Tulane has a NY6 bowl win, there that’s it, I win. Nobody from the belt even comes close to that. Enough of this nonsense. There is nothing the belt fans can say or do that will all of a sudden make them relevant. Never gonna happen.

You were the one that brought up Marshall and Southern Miss out of no where even though they were not mentioned beforehand and had nothing to do with the conversation. You specifically keep using the term "Garbage Programs" which I think 99.9% of people would say that is judged on winning and tradition, not markets and money. Yes, the SEC and Big 10 are looking at those things as of recent, but neither Marshall, Southern Miss, or your dear Tulane is getting into either of those conferences. Again, I think you are nothing more than a troll, but you could just be butt hurt as well. I probably would be too if Marshall and Southern Miss beat down my program on a regular basis for years.

Brother, do yourself a favor and just block him. This is just CLT’s Tulane burner. Whether you make reasonable arguments or not, you’re just gonna get this.

You are on the AAC board saying to ignore an AAC poster. Prob easier to stay on the sun belt board to avoid him

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk