kshoe Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 Marquette, Charlotte and Dayton would be considered quality. (I'm not predicting the first two but for us to be an NCAA caliber team we will have to have them) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schasz Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 The Lawman is up against it trying to convince us this is not an additional MU home game that does give them an unfair advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwyjibo Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 You are missing the point in your overzealous defense of Marquette's honor. The fact that Marquette did not create the scheme is irrelevant to determining whether it is fair to the competitive balance of a league. It is also irrelevant if it has been done before or if a 3rd party was the promoter. I'm sorry if someone brought up Marquette's role in its creation, but what is relevant (and what angers fans from other teams in C-USA) is simple competitive fairness. And playing only 7 away games in conference is not fair. This is true of any sport at any level, there are basic principles of scheduling fairness that are rarely broken. I know I would be on here saying it isn't fair no matter what team had the advantage(including SLU). That said, the real villain in all this is the C-USA Commissioner/Rodeo Clown Banowsky for letting the teams do it. Also, any claim that Marquette will not have a competitive advantage in Green Bay is disingenuous. There will be lots of Marquette supporters there. I know Marquette fans who will be there and undoubtedly you know very well that getting from Milwaukee to Green Bay is very easy (make sure you gas up in Francis Creek, WI where the gas plaza is on Favre Court). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tseugnekillib Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 bonwich said, "the guys at Marquette had it brought to them .... they didn't initiate it .... so they must be real stand-up folks". Sort of reminds me of Bill Clinton (Marquette) and Monica Lewinsky (the promoter) story. SoMiss coach Green stated...."one of the reasons we moved it (the game) was because Marquette doesn't mean that much to our people". I surprised that the sporting Mississippi folks don't know that Marquette is a "national" team! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Law Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 no, what I'm trying to convince you all of is that this was not some grandiose plan hatched entirely by MU (as stated by Rammer last night) to avoid having to go to Hattiesburg. In fact, Rammer's comments, to the unitiated, would make one believe the game will be held at the Bradley Center. I think the conference did the right thing in stopping this from happening in the future. It is USM that people should be pissed at. They sold off their game to make a much larger profit because they have no fan support and they weren't smart enough to realize that they could draw extra people if they publicized the football coach being in the house or something like that. This is a school that drew 350 paid for a game against New Orleans U earlier this season and most of the fans there the other day were Memphis fans. If it isn't football, USM fans don't care who the opponent is. It's a shame too because James Green is a very good coach and they don't deserve to have him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 KWYJIBO SAID, "That said, the real villain in all this is the C-USA Commissioner/Rodeo Clown Banowsky" man you hit that right. i never thought i would miss our old commish, but this guy hasnt done much of anything right since taking over. i am betting he forces the conference tourney to texas next year so he wont have to be inconvienenced. i say good luck to those staying behind in this nascar b.s. league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Law Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 It will probably be in Memphis. From now on the league will be controlled by Memphis, just as L-ville ran the old Metro and Dayton the old MCC. If not they'll keep threathening to leave. OVC, here comes the Tigers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 marquette and dayton have about 60 rpi's and charlotte's is barely below 40. if the goal is to get a below 40 rpi (what always seems to be the dividing line of in or pray), i would think we need better quality wins than those 3 bubble teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyClyde Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 I actually agree with Huggins. Stunning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 nm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 .. but if I read what you're saying, its okay to play the little sisters of the poor providing you kick their collective *sses by crazy numbers, eh? C'mon .... Akron ... Oakland (MI) ... Coppin State .... Valpo .... Mid Tenn State .... Elon ..... okay, I believe you. At least its not like Ohio State football ... where you'll play everybody and anybody ... providing they come to the Horseshoe. I may have to eat my words but I'll talk to you tomorrow, okay? Wanna bet? You have the conn ...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyClyde Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 Take a look at the teams Cincinnati and UAB have played. Not all that impressive. I think both are winnable games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basketbill Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 you keep saying it was all USM's doing perhaps if you chant it you might even get yourself to believe it. However it takes two to tango. Marquette is just the innocent guy that a beautiful woman wisper sweet nothings in his ear. "come one honey let do it in Green Bay".......Well shucks it was her Idea thus I have no responsibility!!! Wrong. It is wrong. Marquette and USM should be reprimanded. It is dishonest. It makes me wonder about crean and his recruiting tactics. Crean and the AD crossed the line by accepting this plan even if they had no part ingenerating the plan, which I still doubt as we have no background on the virginia guy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Law Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 Why do you think the tourney was at their place every year? When they started to lose some influence to Xavier then they jumped to the GMC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Law Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 It makes me wonder about crean and his recruiting tactics. Crean and the AD crossed the line by accepting this plan even if they had no part ingenerating the plan, which I still doubt as we have no >background on the virginia guy... You wanted info on the promoter. Here you go: http://www.russpotts2003.com/biography.html Current VA State Senator, founder and President of Russ Potts Productions, Inc. which has promoted more sports events than any other entity in North America, born and raised in Virginia, graduate of U of Maryland. Honestly, if SLU were offered a similar opportunity you really believe they would have turned it down. If so, I have some oceanfront property in Fenton to sell you. And don't once wonder about Crean's "recruiting tactics." I know for a fact that recruits who have even suggested something unethical have been told to look elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 BL - here is something you can use when you are an attorney representing a client who has been harmed by some questionable company - If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck then it is a DUCK. You can try to tell us that it is not a duck but a goose or sand piper or whatever but that still does not make not a duck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 I don't get what your point is about the promoter. Every major event has a promoter. Whether the promoter is a state senator from Virginia or a chinese mango farmer is meaningless. The bottom line is that Marquette voluntarily elected to play by a different set of rules than everyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted January 14, 2004 Share Posted January 14, 2004 "Honestly, if SLU were offered a similar opportunity you really believe they would have turned it down. If so, I have some oceanfront property in Fenton to sell you." Honestly, I believe Brad would have thrown a sh!tf!t. He has a strong sense of integrity (hey, he's a Wisconsin native). Although financial decisions have infiltrated every program, not everyone automatically goes for the best financial deal. I do draw the line at the point that this somehow reflects poorly on Crean's recruiting ethics. It is, nonetheless, incredibly sleazy from a sportsmanship standpoint, and the fact that the U. presidents spoke so clearly, so quickly indicates that Marquette snuck this one under the radar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 BL - USM can not sell their game without MU agreeing. If MU says no and reports it to the CUSA then the whole stupid idea dies. We all agree that USM was wrong but that does not make MU not accountable for their actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 I don't see what was fiction in the original article. Even attempting to defend Marquette's honor in this really hurts your credability. When these things happen it makes you wonder where else they look to gain an unfair advantage ... hmmm... maybe a 5 sec call. Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naticat Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 Never said it was ok, and in a way, I agree with you. However there is a big difference between smashing the little guys, and winning by 3-5 points on your home floor. Cincinnati still has OOC games vs Xavier and Wake to make up for the weak start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 i actually believe that biondi/woolard would have sought the conference's blessing BEFORE even considering the option. did marquette do that? or did they just run it by the rodeo commish while he was downing another old crow and water? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 >>In regard to us chasing Marquette, Brad, on the radio, >>indicated his displeasure w/ C-USA allowing Marquette to buy >>out a road game @ Southern Miss. This game will be played >>at Green Bay rather than Haitsburg, so Marquette ends up 9-7 >>in league competions @ home,and Sourthern Miss will be 7-9. >>Brad's beef w/ the league is they are suppose to create a >>"level" playing field and this sort of thing should never >>happen. The arrangement was consumated in secret, >>apparantly to avoid a clamour of opposing views. While >>Marquette appears good, as Roy states, it also appears they >>are being helped by the league(officiating at Milwaukee) and >>the above scheduling, to enhance their ranking and league >>prestige. > >Marquette did not "buy out" the USM home game. An >independent, Virgina-based promoter contacted USM and >pitched the idea to them to move the game to Green Bay, WI, >home of their most famous alum, Brett Favre, and they said >"let's do it" as USM would make more money off this game >than a regular home game (they drew 350 paid for a home game >earlier this season - 350!). Marquette was told of the >agreement and said "sure." They had no role in arranging >it. If MU had the game would not be in Green Bay. > >The truth (whether you all choose to believe it) is that USM >sold their home game to an independent promoter, not to >Marquette. MU will not gain any money from this game and >isn't even involved in promoting the game or in ticket >sales. The game is in Green Bay in an arena MU has never >played in, so I'm not sure how it's a "home game" for >Marquette. Also, MU has NEVER lost at USM, whereas even >since MU and USM have been in the same conference MU has >never won a home game against USM. The idea that this >automatically changes a "sure win" for USM to a "sure loss" >is shortsighted, to say the least. I don't agree with the >league's decision to let USM sell this game but Marquette >would have been foolish to turn it down. If SLU was >presented with a similar arrangement (maybe a game in Cape >to honor Rush Limbaugh - if he had gone to college) would >they have turned it down?? > >And how have they been "helped by the league" in terms of >officiating? They won the game, there is no conspiracy. >Mulder and Scully wouldn't even bother looking into that >game. In fact, wouldn't it have helped the league to have >SLU win up at MU to increase their national profile and >given them a RPI boosting win to maybe get one more team in >the tourney at the end of the year?? BLaw, we and the rest of CUSA teams got screwed by this arrangement and Marquette got favoritism. No one can argue that. Now, the fact that Marquette did not initiate the screw doesn't lessen the fact that it is wrong ... it only means Marquette is less culpable in the crime (which I assume is your main concern). I for one am glad we are getting out of CUSA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 marquette has proven a few times now by actions of late that everything is about them and not their brethern, why would we expect otherwise? i would look to the snake a.d. they apparently have up there now. i do not put crean in the middle of it a bit. same with green in so miss. this is all a.d.'s b.s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Majerus Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 I think it was Lady Astor - they had a running feud. Another one was: She said, "If you were my husband, I'd give you poison." He replied: "If you were my wife, I'd cheerfully take it." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.