SportsAndLady;899641 wrote:It was a hypothetical lol holy shit how stupid are you
IF the landscape changes to 16 team conferences...IF...
That is exactly my point this entire timejordo212000;899652 wrote:If they go to 16, which seems like a huge if, then you might see non football powers added to the mix. However until the Big 10 and PAC 12 come around to that, football will continue to drive realignment
SMH. I just posted yesterday or the day before that Rutgers isn't much of a target at all. (although Rutgers and UCONN were reported looked at by the ACC, so it's not that far fetched that they could move to the ACC). So please let me know where I said Rutgers is a viable, big time player in realignment talk.jordo212000;899656 wrote:Lol at the guy who thinks Rutgers is a viable, big time player in realignment lecturing me about realignment.
and my point is that Jim Delany and Larry Scott have both said that they are not probably interested in expanding to that extent. And until the Big 10, SEC, and Pac 12 look to expand to that extent, football will continue to drive realignment. That's been my point all along.SportsAndLady;899655 wrote:That is exactly my point this entire time
But keep in mind, a non-football power just went to a major conference...so it's not like football is the ONLY thing that is driving this.
LOL oh has it? So you didn't say this:jordo212000;899682 wrote:And until the Big 10, SEC, and Pac 12 look to expand to that extent, football will continue to drive realignment. That's been my point all along.
I'm pretty sure the ACC just submitted a basketball school...soooooo, what you meant to say was "the SEC, B1G, and Pac12 realignment are all about football", right?jordo212000;895038 wrote:Realignment is all about football.
You're so dense. No wonder you sell tickets for Rutgers.SportsAndLady;899686 wrote:LOL oh has it? So you didn't say this:
I'm pretty sure the ACC just submitted a basketball school...soooooo, what you meant to say was "the SEC, B1G, and Pac12 realignment are all about football", right?
LOL waht does that even mean???jordo212000;899718 wrote:You're so dense. No wonder you sell tickets for Rutgers.
SportsAndLady;899750 wrote:LOL waht does that even mean???
u made 0 sensejordo212000;899753 wrote:Exactly. Haha
LMFAO, you went to Marietta. What a joke.jordo212000;899718 wrote:You're so dense. No wonder you sell tickets for Rutgers.
Nothing is official with the ACC yet. Let's hold off there.
Yup. Exactly.krambman;899831 wrote:How about we settle all of this right here.
No future super-conference is going to take a school as it's first choice primarily because of basketball. Schools with good and lucrative football programs will always be coveted over schools with good and lucrative basketball programs and weak football programs.
yawnlike_that;899835 wrote:LMFAO, you went to Marietta. What a joke.
We've established that...that was the never the issue. The issue was jordo from the start saying NO CONFERENCE will take a school based on basketball...then Syracuse is taken by the ACC completely contradicting jordo, then he backpedals.krambman;899831 wrote:How about we settle all of this right here.
No future super-conference is going to take a school as it's first choice primarily because of basketball. Schools with good and lucrative football programs will always be coveted over schools with good and lucrative basketball programs and weak football programs.
Then write it off as hyperbole, sarcasm, or stupidity, but continuing to harp on the issue isn't going to do anyone any good or get him to admit what he said was wrong. Whenever anyone makes an absolute statement (football is the only sport driving expansion, no one wants Kansas, etc) I always write it off as hyperbole. I suggest you begin doing to the same. This is the internet and it's serious business, and you're just wasting server space at this point.SportsAndLady;899874 wrote:We've established that...that was the never the issue. The issue was jordo from the start saying NO CONFERENCE will take a school based on basketball...then Syracuse is taken by the ACC completely contradicting jordo, then he backpedals.
He can't admit he was wrong
SportsAndLady;899874 wrote:We've established that...that was the never the issue. The issue was jordo from the start saying NO CONFERENCE will take a school based on basketball...then Syracuse is taken by the ACC completely contradicting jordo, then he backpedals.
He can't admit he was wrong
I heard this on Gameday and really liked it but someone said just what you did then someone else replied "You don't ask someone to marry you unless you already know the answer you'll get in return." They will get into the ACC.jordo212000;899916 wrote:Clearly what happened with the ACC was an exception to the rule. Those always exist.
However just because it happened once, it doesn't mean it is going to happen in all of the other conferences. This is the first non-football focused school to move. How many schools have moved between the beginning of realignment and now?
Also, there is no guarantee that they even get in. They asked for entrance. Meaning the ACC didn't ask them...
a) Okay, dad.krambman;899892 wrote:Then write it off as hyperbole, sarcasm, or stupidity, but continuing to harp on the issue isn't going to do anyone any good or get him to admit what he said was wrong. Whenever anyone makes an absolute statement (football is the only sport driving expansion, no one wants Kansas, etc) I always write it off as hyperbole. I suggest you begin doing to the same. This is the internet and it's serious business, and you're just wasting server space at this point.
SportsAndLady;899939 wrote:a) Okay, dad.
b) i usually follow what you are saying with hyperbole...but with jordo, the guy actually meant NO ONE will take a school b/c of basketball....well when it just happened, he is writing it off. It's comical. So i'm gonna call him out on it. If you don't wanna read it...uhh, don't read it?
You still haven't said why you think Boise is a better option LMAO when will we all be graced with that response????jordo212000;899950 wrote:Krambman, see what I am dealing with here?
Lol keep clingin to thatjordo212000;899916 wrote:Also, there is no guarantee that they even get in. They asked for entrance. Meaning the ACC didn't ask them...
[INDENT]@McMurphyCBSBrett McMurphy [/INDENT]
SportsAndLady;899981 wrote:Lol keep clingin to that
Source tells @GaryParrishCBSACC presidents could vote to accept Syracuse, Pitt early as Sunday. It's formality. 'It's done," source said