|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Oct 18, 2023 14:40:15 GMT -8
You state the part in BOLD above like this situation and one possible solution to it, are all just a giant ploy to deceive you. Who is trying to pull the wool over anyones eyes here? Please tell. No, that's not what I am saying. I contend that bringing the whole MWC into the Pac 2 is equivalent in many ways to the Pac 2 joining the MWC. And that calling it the Pac Whatever will deceive no one. They will all recognize that it really is the MWC + OSU & WSU.
I've been told that my thinking about this is wrong, but I haven't understood why anyone would think adding ALL of the MWC to the Pac 2 would create anything that resembles the Pac, except in name.
That is why I advocate to take only the best from the MWC. Sure it may cost more, but it might help keep the integrity of the conference.
If you can help me understand how people in New York and LA would not simply see it as a rebranded MWC, I am all ears.
Adding only the top MWC teams is not going to change that perception. We are going to need all of the MWC teams to substantial improve, including the top ones. The added money (if we get it) is the main difference between just joining the MWC or having them join us. It will potentially give them an opportunity to get better. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Oct 18, 2023 14:49:14 GMT -8
OK. Silence it is. If you won't listen to reason or logic, bully them out. I get it. Nice look. Sorry to bully, the question is, who's not listening to reason or logic? There's probably an argument to be made both ways. Wait. You told me that if I just looked in the past, I'd see that the MWC had ranked teams and the Pac 12 had fewer.
I did and I did so randomly. What I saw did not support your thesis. I said that.
So the solution to this is to ignore the data and ignore reality and hope to silence those who try to bring it up? I completely understand that you've accepted this move and are trying to put a positive spin on it. Kudos to you. Just be careful and don't overly spin things. It wasn't you who said that the MWC has been "flourishing" which got me going in the first place, but you defended that interpretation.
But don't get mad at others who won't accept it until it is rammed down our throats like Grandma's Caster Oil. And even then, I'm liable to spit it back out. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Oct 18, 2023 14:55:22 GMT -8
And I am just as frustrated by posters here who think it's a done deal that we are moving to the MW when there is so much that isn't being said. I know I have nothing to do with it, but that doesn't mean I don't care. Hell, you and I have NOTHING to do with the outcome of a football game but we still post here. We can't change a bad call on the field but we post about it. I think, Judge, that you see yourself as a holier-than-thou type (in everything), but you frequently miss how much of a hypocrite you are. You could go a long way towards not getting disagreeing comments if you would drop the OSU/WSU moving to the Mountain West commentary... the only people proposing this is you and a couple others. Not Murthy, not Barnes, not those you are arguing with. Bringing in the MWC is NOT the same thing as moving to the MWC. You'll get arguments every time you say it is. I could go a long way toward not getting disagreeing comments if other board members weren't so eager to push acceptance of the MWC onto everyone. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Oct 18, 2023 14:57:25 GMT -8
No, that's not what I am saying. I contend that bringing the whole MWC into the Pac 2 is equivalent in many ways to the Pac 2 joining the MWC. And that calling it the Pac Whatever will deceive no one. They will all recognize that it really is the MWC + OSU & WSU.
I've been told that my thinking about this is wrong, but I haven't understood why anyone would think adding ALL of the MWC to the Pac 2 would create anything that resembles the Pac, except in name.
That is why I advocate to take only the best from the MWC. Sure it may cost more, but it might help keep the integrity of the conference.
If you can help me understand how people in New York and LA would not simply see it as a rebranded MWC, I am all ears.
Adding only the top MWC teams is not going to change that perception. We are going to need all of the MWC teams to substantial improve, including the top ones. The added money (if we get it) is the main difference between just joining the MWC or having them join us. It will potentially give them an opportunity to get better. But adding fewer teams (already of quality) means that A) the goal is nearer and B) there's more money for them. Sounds like a win-win. Easier to create a real statement. |
|
|
|
Post by hottubbeaver on Oct 18, 2023 15:03:57 GMT -8
You state the part in BOLD above like this situation and one possible solution to it, are all just a giant ploy to deceive you. Who is trying to pull the wool over anyones eyes here? Please tell. No, that's not what I am saying. I contend that bringing the whole MWC into the Pac 2 is equivalent in many ways to the Pac 2 joining the MWC. And that calling it the Pac Whatever will deceive no one. They will all recognize that it really is the MWC + OSU & WSU.
I've been told that my thinking about this is wrong, but I haven't understood why anyone would think adding ALL of the MWC to the Pac 2 would create anything that resembles the Pac, except in name.
That is why I advocate to take only the best from the MWC. Sure it may cost more, but it might help keep the integrity of the conference.
If you can help me understand how people in New York and LA would not simply see it as a rebranded MWC, I am all ears.
I get it, so many parts to this story and twice as much disinformation to sift through. That said, bringing teams to the PAC vs going to the MWC will have nothing, zero, zilch, nada to do with an attempt to bolster anyone's "image" and will have everything to do with navigating through a forest full of contractual, legal, and other governing considerations. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Oct 18, 2023 15:06:03 GMT -8
Adding only the top MWC teams is not going to change that perception. We are going to need all of the MWC teams to substantial improve, including the top ones. The added money (if we get it) is the main difference between just joining the MWC or having them join us. It will potentially give them an opportunity to get better. But adding fewer teams (already of quality) means that A) the goal is nearer and B) there's more money for them. Sounds like a win-win. Easier to create a real statement. There's not more money if you blow it all paying buy-out fees for the better teams in the MWC |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 18, 2023 15:17:48 GMT -8
Where did he say in his post, "Shut up"? Nowhere did he say (or imply) that you shouldn't continue to post. He simply explained why he thinks that your ideas aren't popular.
No. You need to read it again.
He said that I shouldn't post my views on the MWC merger to avoid getting negative comments. This indeed implies that I either shut the hell up about the situation or continue to be harassed.
You're welcome to take my reading class. We just finished week four, though, so you'll have a bit of catch-up to do. Still, we haven't covered implied main ideas yet. Soon. Are you free on Mondays and Wednesdays?
Could your reading class potentially be descrbed as a reading between the lines for unintended intent class? |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Oct 18, 2023 15:38:34 GMT -8
The MWC is flourishing. At its own level, G5 FBS. Never compared it to the Pac-12, nor would I ever consider doing so.
It has had teams advance to, and win, major bowl games. It had a basketball team take 2nd in the country last year. Brand-new stadiums at SDSU and Colorado State; UNLV plays at an NFL venue. Major stadium upgrades at Wyoming and Utah State, major stadium upgrades planned at Boise State and Fresno State.
It is regularly the 6th- or 7th-ranked FBS football conference. Compared to the other P5 conferences, it has enjoyed far more success, has avoided the "small-time" stigma of playing Tuesday or Wednesday football, hasn't had transitional FCB teams joining, and has enjoyed more stability than any other P5 conference than the MAC.
It's not the Pac-12. However a reverse merger with the MWC might be our best remaining option, ether in 2024-25 or more likely in 2025-26..
|
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Oct 18, 2023 16:14:25 GMT -8
No. You need to read it again.
He said that I shouldn't post my views on the MWC merger to avoid getting negative comments. This indeed implies that I either shut the hell up about the situation or continue to be harassed.
You're welcome to take my reading class. We just finished week four, though, so you'll have a bit of catch-up to do. Still, we haven't covered implied main ideas yet. Soon. Are you free on Mondays and Wednesdays?
Could your reading class potentially be descrbed as a reading between the lines for unintended intent class? Are you blind to what you said?
Or rather, how would you suggest that I contribute without getting attacked? Your message states that to avoid getting attacked, I should not post about the merger/reverse-merger. It's plain as day. So what were you truly suggesting if not that I should shut up?
|
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Oct 18, 2023 16:15:27 GMT -8
But adding fewer teams (already of quality) means that A) the goal is nearer and B) there's more money for them. Sounds like a win-win. Easier to create a real statement. There's not more money if you blow it all paying buy-out fees for the better teams in the MWC That's true. So why blow it all? |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Oct 18, 2023 16:17:03 GMT -8
No, that's not what I am saying. I contend that bringing the whole MWC into the Pac 2 is equivalent in many ways to the Pac 2 joining the MWC. And that calling it the Pac Whatever will deceive no one. They will all recognize that it really is the MWC + OSU & WSU.
I've been told that my thinking about this is wrong, but I haven't understood why anyone would think adding ALL of the MWC to the Pac 2 would create anything that resembles the Pac, except in name.
That is why I advocate to take only the best from the MWC. Sure it may cost more, but it might help keep the integrity of the conference.
If you can help me understand how people in New York and LA would not simply see it as a rebranded MWC, I am all ears.
I get it, so many parts to this story and twice as much disinformation to sift through. That said, bringing teams to the PAC vs going to the MWC will have nothing, zero, zilch, nada to do with an attempt to bolster anyone's "image" and will have everything to do with navigating through a forest full of contractual, legal, and other governing considerations. And that's precisely what I'm talking about--how the move will be perceived because, in the end, it is the perception of the program that matters; hence, we are in this situation. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Oct 18, 2023 16:33:10 GMT -8
But adding fewer teams (already of quality) means that A) the goal is nearer and B) there's more money for them. Sounds like a win-win. Easier to create a real statement. There's not more money if you blow it all paying buy-out fees for the better teams in the MWC So allow me to expand upon my comment.
Either the Pac 2 is a valuable commodity or it isn't. If it isn't, then, sure, we take the whole league in order to avoid paying anything. But if the Pac has value and prestige, there may be schools in the MW (or other places) that are willing to leave their conferences for the greener pastures that the Pac has to offer.
If the Pac is valuable, then we will get the schools. If our status as a Power 5 is valuable, we should be able to recruit the schools that wish to live up to the standard.
Part of it is marketing. Can we sell a dream to other universities? I think we should be able to, but it will take leadership and skill. I hope OSU and WSU can provide that.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 18, 2023 16:39:47 GMT -8
Sorry to bully, the question is, who's not listening to reason or logic? There's probably an argument to be made both ways. Wait. You told me that if I just looked in the past, I'd see that the MWC had ranked teams and the Pac 12 had fewer.
I did and I did so randomly. What I saw did not support your thesis. I said that.
So the solution to this is to ignore the data and ignore reality and hope to silence those who try to bring it up? I completely understand that you've accepted this move and are trying to put a positive spin on it. Kudos to you. Just be careful and don't overly spin things. It wasn't you who said that the MWC has been "flourishing" which got me going in the first place, but you defended that interpretation.
But don't get mad at others who won't accept it until it is rammed down our throats like Grandma's Caster Oil. And even then, I'm liable to spit it back out. The way I look at it, everyone is free to accept or not accept whatever they want, post it too. You seem to be saying I'm ignoring data and reality, that I'm thinking is cherry picked. This whole thing started when I responded to your use of the word "finally". The reality is that joining the MWC and doing a reverse merger with the MWC are completely different things and result in different outcomes - likely to the tune of millions of dollars to all of the participants, different media contracts, different bowl agreements, power 5 status and the payouts involved with it, and yes, likely perception across the nation among both recruits and football fans. It was not my intent to keep you from posting, I was just trying to explain a different point of view. Unfortunately, it's extremely difficult to write things in a manner that comes clear to everyone reading message boards, as we all have somewhat different views, backgroundsn and ways of reading things. I'll admit I have some passive aggressive ways of responding on occasion when there are disagreements on this board, I hope I'm not the only one guilty of that. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Oct 18, 2023 18:38:47 GMT -8
No, that's not what I am saying. I contend that bringing the whole MWC into the Pac 2 is equivalent in many ways to the Pac 2 joining the MWC. And that calling it the Pac Whatever will deceive no one. They will all recognize that it really is the MWC + OSU & WSU.
I've been told that my thinking about this is wrong, but I haven't understood why anyone would think adding ALL of the MWC to the Pac 2 would create anything that resembles the Pac, except in name.
That is why I advocate to take only the best from the MWC. Sure it may cost more, but it might help keep the integrity of the conference.
If you can help me understand how people in New York and LA would not simply see it as a rebranded MWC, I am all ears.
Adding only the top MWC teams is not going to change that perception. We are going to need all of the MWC teams to substantial improve, including the top ones. The added money (if we get it) is the main difference between just joining the MWC or having them join us. It will potentially give them an opportunity to get better. And, like folks in NY & LA give a rip about OSU/WSU in any conference. They certainly aren't a factor in making a decision. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 18, 2023 20:02:58 GMT -8
Adding only the top MWC teams is not going to change that perception. We are going to need all of the MWC teams to substantial improve, including the top ones. The added money (if we get it) is the main difference between just joining the MWC or having them join us. It will potentially give them an opportunity to get better. And, like folks in NY & LA give a rip about OSU/WSU in any conference. They certainly aren't a factor in making a decision. A lot of the folks in NYC probably barely know the MWC exists, it's flyover country. "Joining" the PAC will catch at least a little notice, especially if it retains Power 5 status. Having 3 schools IN California will help with the LA folk, especially with recruiting in California. I think there's going to be a certain amount of recruits wanting to play near home, where family can go to nearby road games. The PAC will need to rebuild it's identity, but it should be more newsworthy and catch more eyes in those areas than the current MWC. |
|
