Topic: It's the schedule, stupid...

[bbcard1]

One thing worth mentioning, we are a world removed from 1999, mostly thanks to ESPN.  The things that happened to that undefeated team in no way indicate what may happen to this undefeated team, if we are so fortunate to have that happen. if we go undefeated, we may not get an access bowl, but we will have a bowl game with a very, very good team.

[_sturt_]

Stuart, apologies in advance, your idea of purposeful dialogue -- from my perspective, only serves to give you a platform to pontificate. It doesn't add $$$$$  and personal involvement to the effort and in my mind, that's what Mother Marshall Athletics needs big time.

So, I choose to close the dialogue, enjoy the ride while we have it and continue to make every effort to recruit Big Green donors, individual sport contributors (Quarterback Club, Tipoff Club, Dugout Club, etc). Money talks, BS walks......... And so does dialogue.

Peace and hope your pocketbook is as enthusiastic as your "dialogue" as you describe it.

LTH2, when our President is asked a question like he was asked on Super Bowl Sunday about why the HHS secretary had not been held accountable for the herculean Obamacare website screw-up, he fooled no one... not his detractors nor his supporters nor anyone in-between... when he essentially said in so many words, "I know better than to go there, so I'm not."

So, as I read your response above, that scene came flooding back to mind for reasons you too vividly know yourself... and to your dismay for reasons that aren't very cloaked to anyone else who paid attention.

I'll give you another chance, though I know it will go nowhere... why not... after all, you're playing coy and hoping no one will notice that strategy, so why not throw another light on your disingenuous (...sorry 24, I had to... it fits...) response.

I gave you a clear example of how setting a FINANICALLY-NEUTRAL POLICY can determine OUTCOMES... actually, two, just in case...

One can contribute to a political party (or athletics scholarship foundation) all you want, and that can help elect your favorite candidate (or help your favorite team win a championship)... but that doesn't ELIMINATE the fact that PUBLIC POLICY... ie, a part of the framework of how the elections are actually implemented... in this case, voter ID policy or the electoral college policy... ALSO has a hand in determining who wins (nor the fact that SCHEDULING POLICY... ie, a part of the framework of how regular and post seasons are actually conducted... in this case, compensating for a significant drop in CUSA 3.0 strength-of-schedule ratings, regardless of which one you choose to look at... ALSO has a hand in determining who wins.)

I appreciate... genuinely... the job you do. You might be surprised to know that for about 12 years of my life, that kind of thing was part of my job description, and for about 2 years, it was even my primary responsibility. My direct supervisor was the college president. I recognize why you say what you say about how central that part is to success. But at the risk of seeming preachy, at that point that you abandon reason and say, "No... it's all about A, not A plus B"... people, even those who want to agree with you, draw back because they know even though A is a big piece, discounting B makes you seem to play a used-car salesman role... too interested in selling what you have to sell to be reasonable.

This is your chance to prove you're genuine... your chance to prove the disingenuous thing doesn't fit... your chance to choose diplomat over car salesman... your chance to choose balance over myopia.

Gonna take it? I hope for the best.

[MarshallGrad]

... (i.e., the one asking for an example).

Can we come up with an example where fans banded together in the way you are urging that resulted in significant change in the status quoe, where money was not an influencing factor. Finding examples at the scale of your suggestions would support the argument that being vocal advocates for these changes really could result in success. I think that in order for fans to buy in as proactive advocates, there has to be enough precedence to support the notion that advocating for the kind of changes will "create an environment where presidents and conference execs take notice".  

Who has done this elsewhere?

[_sturt_]

Can we come up with an example where fans banded together in the way you are urging that resulted in significant change in the status quoe, where money was not an influencing factor. Finding examples at the scale of your suggestions would support the argument that being vocal advocates for these changes really could result in success. I think that in order for fans to buy in as proactive advocates, there has to be enough precedence to support the notion that advocating for the kind of changes will "create an environment where presidents and conference execs take notice".  

Who has done this elsewhere?

So... help me out... you're proposing that there's no point in pursuing it... no one cares what fans say... there are no examples of fans having any influence on ADs, college presidents, or conference officials historically, and therefore, we are sheep, and might as well be happy in our sheep-ness... am I in the ballpark?

EDIT=================================================

Forgive my impatience in not waiting for a "yes." I'm going to assume I am.

I'm compelled to answer the question in a couple of ways.

First, straight-up. As I google the phrase, "We listened to the fans," which I believe is limited to about 2-3 years worth of possible sites, I get 167 unique hits, and fair to say many and probably most appear to be sports-related... a decision-maker acknowledging that the consumers/stakeholders/fans matter, and that some decision made was based on what their consumers/stakeholders/fans thought.

Second, have you ever been one of those people in one of those rooms where your decision is of-interest or even consequential to many others, but it remains your decision or a small group consisting of yourself and some colleagues? If so, you probably know that characteristically, assuming it comes from people who you trust care about the same things you do, you appreciate having that input. You reserve, of course, the right to decide for yourself how beneficial it actually would be to pursue the will of the people, since you have access to more information and just as importantly, because if it goes wrong, it's your job on the line, not the peoples'/fans'. But to say it doesn't matter in that situation is just not accurate. You want to do things that you know will be popular, all other things being equal.

Third, I have to bring this up as moralistic as it might be... it's the reverse of your parents' mantra... "If you saw your friends jumping over a cliff, would that make you decide you should do it?" Maybe it's even crossed your own lips a few times like it did mine as my kid was growing up. What do we mean by that? We mean that some things are just the right thing to do, and it doesn't actually matter whether anyone successfully did it or not.

So, while I agree... it's helpful to remind people that Hamrick has indicated that he's made kelly green a bigger issue because that's something he understood to be important to fans... helpful to remind people that grassroots things like a Tea Party movement sometimes do have an effect on outcomes... and helpful to cite anything else along those lines... REGARDLESS... even if no one else has done it... it's the right thing to do. This doesn't even cost money. It doesn't cost anything but a mental investment in generating ideas and then deliberating together and getting behind an idea.

[banker]

Just a guess, less than $500 a year to the BG and tries to bum tickets to games instead of buying season tickets. His contributions are limited to the arena of ideas. Pointless, fanciful ideas.

[_sturt_]

Just a guess, less than $500 a year to the BG and tries to bum tickets to games instead of buying season tickets. His contributions are limited to the arena of ideas. Pointless, fanciful ideas.

See, 24? Deflection. It's the only best strategy to excuse oneself for not doing something that cynics find soooooo hard to do.

Banker, the right thing to do is the right thing to do. None of the educated people fail to see your ad hominem crap for what it is... the best rhetorical option when you've got no other options.

Other than call you a cynic... and I think you probably even embrace that wholeheartedly... you don't see me reducing my arguments to that kind of thing.

Why? Because I have some principles. And one of those is that I try to stick with substance, not poking you as a person as-if there's anything I actually know about you, or attempting to beat down your credibility. If you have the better argument/position, so be it. I can live with that. (On the other hand, pardon the opinion, but I'm not sure shoe-on-the-other-foot that you can... the serotonin levels seem like they must go through the roof as you take your shots sometimes.) In fact, one thing I appreciate about you is that more often than not, you've not taken this direction, and there has been some substance debated between us.

[banker]

Found your cover letter on line sturt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/10/cover-letter-to-jp-morgan-laughing-stock-of-wall-street-goes-_n_1268695.html

Hey, I'm open to public scrutiny. You say everyone sees though me, and I know you think your opinion is a tremendous substitute for fact, but let's ask them.  Am I being a closed minded jerk or is sturt a self important narcissist that loves to read his own posts?

We'll let others decide.

[_sturt_]

Found your cover letter on line sturt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/10/cover-letter-to-jp-morgan-laughing-stock-of-wall-street-goes-_n_1268695.html

Hey, I'm open to public scrutiny. You say everyone sees though me, and I know you think your opinion is a tremendous substitute for fact, but let's ask them.  Am I being a closed minded jerk or is sturt a self important narcissist that loves to read his own posts?

We'll let others decide.

Well, they do see through you. How hard could it be?... hehe... and now, you just reinforce the whole "I've got nothing" assertion I made by making yet another ad hominem attack... make that two (huffington plus narcissist).

I didn't call you a closed-minded jerk. You evidently figure that some people must think that of you. But I just call you a cynic, and again, I'd be surprised to learn that you don't welcome that label (?).

Bottom line is that you seem to feel this thread has come to a place where you can't argue any substance, so you divert to what you think might win you some friends, especially among the less educated who go for that kind of thing. Best of luck on that if that's so important to you. But don't think it matters to me either way, not out of any disdain for anyone in particular, but that I've been Mr. Popularity in my life, and it gets rather empty after awhile. Better to be someone who can shoot straight, imho.

[banker]

Sturt, your whole idea has no substance because it has exactly zero chance of ever becoming reality. Since your idea has no substance it's not possible to have a meaningful conversation about it. You're just to impressed with yourself to recognize this.

Beyond the fact that it is logistically impossible, it also is just the entirely the wrong approach to the goal.  It was wrong last year when you similarly droned on and on about it and, a year later, it's still wrong.  You should just start a blog so you can endlessly write things to impress yourself. You even went so far as to throw this stuff out on the CUSAbbs and were simply dismissed by even a wider audience. Your inability to admit your whole concept is flawed is what leads me to labeling you a narcissist. You have no ability to recognize your failures because you are just to doggone smart to be wrong, or so you project.  All you try to do is belittle the countless posts that have no interest in your flawed plan. In your mind it's just because others are not advanced enough to appreciate your superior intellect (see, right back to the narcissistic thing). You can't understand that people on a message board don't want to read novels, it must be because they can't process more than one line of thought at a time.

Just give it up, go back to the drawing board and try to come up with an idea that actually makes sense (even though one is not needed since the blueprint has already been proven).

[IM4DHERD]

1999 - We finished #10 in the AP poll with one of the bottom 10 strength of schedules in the country.  Had the BCS had the rules they had when NIU made it, and let's face it they changed the rules almost every year due to annual controversy, we would have been in.  NIU's Orange Bowl berth was less about that one year than their group of good years prior, the same as ours was in 1999.  They were 11-3 for 3 straight years.

NIU, with a Sagarin SOS of 121 beating a ranked KSU who lost a 2-10 Kentucky had nothing to do with it. That 2012 Kent State might have proved that "Just win Baby" is the only way to go having been one within win from an Orange Bowl bid after going 11-1 with that one loss vs.  a poor Ky, a Sagarin SOS of 107 and 10-0 vs. MAC competition, before losing to a at the time LOWER ranked NIU and then to Arkansas State in a bowl game. BTW - KSU was 5-7 the three years before almost making it to a BCS bowl.

The NIU team who did go did beat a 2-10 Army and a 1-11 Kansas, and squeaked by KSU to get into the Orange bowl by a td.  

Bottom line - Just win baby does make all the difference, if not this year than go 30-6 over 3 years and they cannot ignore you.  History is the proof.

There is not a freakin' thing that a group of fans or message board folk can to to make a change in scheduling. We, as do teams in the SEC, ACC, Big 10, etc. have a commitment to play our conference mates first then work that schedule around it.  Those that give REAL money DO have a voice in how things are done, including scheduling.  Posting manifestos on a message board doesn't make any difference.

We win, and win big as we did in the glory days, and they cannot ignore us.  We were the tide who rose all boats in the MAC, which before us was considered the lowest of the low and the only place who might take a rising 1-AA team. I, for one  believe we will raise the tide in the new CUSA and will be a force in the Group of 5.

Access to the big bowls is easier than ever,  the highest ranked of the Group of 5 gets in.  Just win and let everyone else fall by the wayside.

[The E-Man]

1999 - We finished #10 in the AP poll with one of the bottom 10 strength of schedules in the country.  Had the BCS had the rules they had when NIU made it, and let's face it they changed the rules almost every year due to annual controversy, we would have been in.  NIU's Orange Bowl berth was less about that one year than their group of good years prior, the same as ours was in 1999.  They were 11-3 for 3 straight years.

NIU, with a Sagarin SOS of 121 beating a ranked KSU who lost a 2-10 Kentucky had nothing to do with it. That 2012 Kent State might have proved that "Just win Baby" is the only way to go having been one within win from an Orange Bowl bid after going 11-1 with that one loss vs.  a poor Ky, a Sagarin SOS of 107 and 10-0 vs. MAC competition, before losing to a at the time LOWER ranked NIU and then to Arkansas State in a bowl game. BTW - KSU was 5-7 the three years before almost making it to a BCS bowl.

The NIU team who did go did beat a 2-10 Army and a 1-11 Kansas, and squeaked by KSU to get into the Orange bowl by a td.  

Bottom line - Just win baby does make all the difference, if not this year than go 30-6 over 3 years and they cannot ignore you.  History is the proof.

There is not a freakin' thing that a group of fans or message board folk can to to make a change in scheduling. We, as do teams in the SEC, ACC, Big 10, etc. have a commitment to play our conference mates first then work that schedule around it.  Those that give REAL money DO have a voice in how things are done, including scheduling.  Posting manifestos on a message board doesn't make any difference.

We win, and win big as we did in the glory days, and they cannot ignore us.  We were the tide who rose all boats in the MAC, which before us was considered the lowest of the low and the only place who might take a rising 1-AA team. I, for one  believe we will raise the tide in the new CUSA and will be a force in the Group of 5.

Access to the big bowls is easier than ever,  the highest ranked of the Group of 5 gets in.  Just win and let everyone else fall by the wayside.

Well said Doug. The Herd had a big time say changing the BCS
NQ status. The media took notice of our 99 undefeated team, that was ranked as high as 7th in one poll. I truly feel like we will set the standard for the new system.

[_sturt_]

banker, tell me... why does it bother YOU so?

Or is it out of bounds to ask?

What does it say about YOU that you so consistently show up in these threads? And always without exception to play your cynic, "It'll never happen, give up and go home" role, though to be fair, sometimes actually engaging in discussion instead of this all-out exhibition of pretentiousness you've decided to wield on this occasion?

Dozens and probably hundreds of posters have read my posts, yet no one quite seems to be even barely as motivated as you are. Even barely.

One can only conclude that this is somehow personal with you.

Why? I don't stalk you. You stalk me. If I ran over your dog, I apologize, but I don't see why you can't just come clean and get out what's bothering you about me. I doubt we know each other. Everyone I know loves and adores me. (*grin*) Maybe that's it. Maybe you're one of those who was scavenging for attention in hs or college, and you've got this social vendetta thing going on. I dunno. You're just so strange in this way.

As to your post... yadayadayada... nothing new here... just another mountain of ad hominem which for the umpteenth time now demonstrates you've got nothing... but this time, supplemented with another dose of cynicism and a smattering of dismissiveness wrapped in incoherence.  

Do I care about your opinion of my word count? Really?!?... hehe... you gotta be kidding.

Am I oblivious to the antagonistic nature of most message boards?... hehe... no, actually, that's sometimes even the point... one of the most helpful CSNBBS posters was also one of the most negative--that Bruce guy on the MAC board. He would hate knowing that he was helpful, but whatever... I appreciated his insight, and it pointed me to some things I hadn't considered.

Do I care about your charges of narcissism?... *chuckling*... well, my friend, given that I'm not the one of the two of us who writes prophecies like he's just come down from Sinai, I'm content that even those who cheer you on recognize the laughable hypocrisy... ie, "that'll never!... zero chance!... not possible!... and by the way, Boise was never that good, the WAC was just that bad!!!"

(Well, no. The numbers say what Oklahoma and a handful of PAC teams learned... Boise was that good, and the WAC was CUSA-like, nothing to write home about but nothing to sneeze at either.)

And no... you don't know me... I honestly don't say that defensively or with an edge in my voice, but rather quite relaxed and as a matter of fact... again, you're pissed off with me for some reason and it drives you, but the handful of people on this board who know me know what you call narcissism is more accurately passion--seeing a problem, defining it, and trying to facilitate people to work together toward resolving it... which, of course, sometimes demands stepping forward and attempting to get some ideas circulating.

Like many others, no doubt, I problem-solve for a living, and this problem we're dealing with is genuinely upsetting given how far we'd come from when we first began to take some renewed pride in ourselves when Little Stu... no relation, of course... ;)... made us recognize "we are Marshall" without actually uttering those words. I want to solve it or, at least, help solve it, if only by shining a light on it and calling spades spades.

On the other hand, maybe it's not personal. If not, there's only one other thing it could be. Brace yourself. Narcissism alert. Perhaps it's that the points I make are too reasonable, and while you dare not say so, it just greatly concerns/perturbs you that for every person who bothers to post their displeasure, there's probably ten other lurkers to a thread who see just how rational my points are, and don't bother to respond because it's quite apparent that I don't need much help... not so much because I'm so smart, but because what we get mostly is hyper-critical, head-in-the-sand tripe without substance like you just pumped out yet again.

I suppose it probably bugs you that I don't follow your lead and start going tit-for-tat, pretending the debate should automatically just end because I said so...

No. It is, in fact, worth discussing your model--the one that says we couldn't be in a better position than to be in this top-dog situation with a bunch of developing pups to fight for the food bowl.

Evidently unlike you, though, I feel no need to pull the conversation into personal attacks, and am quite content to stay on that topic, fleshing out why the model you embrace is wishful thinking on your part, often... again, unlike you... bringing some objective numbers into the conversation as support... you?... hehe... well, you know it's been your way to ask me to go look up numbers FOR you, and then to get criticized when the numbers weren't what you thought they ought to be.

There. Feel better? A whole post, largely if not almost exclusively about you.

That's enough of that. You should've had your fill. No more deflection. Back to the actual topic.

[_sturt_]

1999 - We finished #10 in the AP poll with one of the bottom 10 strength of schedules in the country.  Had the BCS had the rules they had when NIU made it, and let's face it they changed the rules almost every year due to annual controversy, we would have been in.  NIU's Orange Bowl berth was less about that one year than their group of good years prior, the same as ours was in 1999.  They were 11-3 for 3 straight years.

NIU, with a Sagarin SOS of 121 beating a ranked KSU who lost a 2-10 Kentucky had nothing to do with it. That 2012 Kent State might have proved that "Just win Baby" is the only way to go having been one within win from an Orange Bowl bid after going 11-1 with that one loss vs.  a poor Ky, a Sagarin SOS of 107 and 10-0 vs. MAC competition, before losing to a at the time LOWER ranked NIU and then to Arkansas State in a bowl game. BTW - KSU was 5-7 the three years before almost making it to a BCS bowl.

The NIU team who did go did beat a 2-10 Army and a 1-11 Kansas, and squeaked by KSU to get into the Orange bowl by a td.  

Bottom line - Just win baby does make all the difference, if not this year than go 30-6 over 3 years and they cannot ignore you.  History is the proof.

There is not a freakin' thing that a group of fans or message board folk can to to make a change in scheduling. We, as do teams in the SEC, ACC, Big 10, etc. have a commitment to play our conference mates first then work that schedule around it.  Those that give REAL money DO have a voice in how things are done, including scheduling.  Posting manifestos on a message board doesn't make any difference.

We win, and win big as we did in the glory days, and they cannot ignore us.  We were the tide who rose all boats in the MAC, which before us was considered the lowest of the low and the only place who might take a rising 1-AA team. I, for one  believe we will raise the tide in the new CUSA and will be a force in the Group of 5.

Access to the big bowls is easier than ever,  the highest ranked of the Group of 5 gets in.  Just win and let everyone else fall by the wayside.

Now c'mon.

We've done this dance before we knew how everything was going to shake out. I could go point by point beginning with a demonstration of how, even in 1999, as proud as you may be of the #10 mark, those boys were shafted by the system, prevented from playing on the stage they, if in this new environment, would have played on, and even so, receiving a ranking that, the case could be made, should have been #6. Though I don't doubt we had a low strength of schedule being as we were in the MAC, we both know that's a moving target depending on whose SOS ranking you decide to cite.

And now that we're on the other side of learning how the CFP thing is structured, how can you even barely sit there with that cheshire cat grin and pretend all is hunky-dory.

The environment is new. If you were honest, you'd admit as I have to that we really can't know how these 15 guys are going to judge things, including what biases they will have about schedule strength. But it's rarely been good to be considered part of the 4th best of 5 conferences (which one would be hard-pressed to find anyone who says otherwise at this juncture).

Here's the difference between us, or at least, our positions... and I want you to indulge me and think about this please.

If I'm wrong and you're right... who's damaged? In that case, we would really be that good, and it doesn't matter what schedule we play, at least at the Go5 level. We can all enjoy the parties over the next several years,  yes, partially celebrating the crow that sturt has to eat.

But if you're wrong and I'm right?

*sigh*

All I know is, of the two of us, I will be the one able to look at our players walking off that Birmingham bowl field, when they know in their hearts, they were forced by Go5 and CUSA political conditions to never get to realize their rightful stage, and say "I tried... at least, I was one of the ones who tried to help you guys get where you wanted to be."

"By posting manifestos on a message board?"

That's what you call it, ostensibly for the purpose of denigrating my arguments for being proactive about the scheduling problem... which is pretty much like suggesting that Doc thinks its enough to write a list of the recruits he's targeting for next February today.

But that's silly. Any basically intelligent person knows that it's just the first step.

Exactly.

A first step.

[The E-Man]

Back to the actual topic.

_sturt_, I respect your intelligence, but do you have to write a
Manifesto on every post? You said something that was one of the smartest things I've read from you, ("back to the actual topic"  ;)

[_sturt_]

_sturt_, I respect your intelligence, but do you have to write a
Manifesto on every post? You said something that was one of the smartest things I've read from you, ("back to the actual topic"  ;)

Not something I think about e-man... I respond as I feel it's merited. In fairness, you will see occasions in this thread where I've answered pretty concisely. But just generally, I've always been pretty up front that it's great if people read, and to me anyhow, it can be just as great if they don't. I don't desire to be every person's cup-o-tea round here. And aside from giving banker some love and attention a couple of posts ago, to be fair, I think not only have I stayed on topic, I've been pretty committed to keeping it on topic in spite of the occasional attempts by some (who otherwise you'd think were adults) to divert the conversation into an insult contest.

[MUonium]

i read sports message boards to learn new words every day.   can you pick out the one below which doesn't belong? ;D

pompous
grandiloquent
presumptuous
go herd
ostentatious
supercilious
narcissistic
vainglorious

[Buffalo Bop]

Just win baby!!

[_sturt_]

i read sports message boards to learn new words every day.   can you pick out the one below which doesn't belong? ;D

pompous
grandiloquent
presumptuous
go herd
ostentatious
supercilious
narcissistic
vainglorious

You forgot one.

Obnoxious.

Thanks, Murray Arnold.  :P

[The E-Man]

You forgot one.

Obnoxious.

Thanks, Murray Arnold.  :P

LMAO,  ;D

[banker]

Sturt, you neglected to tell me I was wrong about your level of support for the program.  Was that intentional or an oversight on your part?  I figure with you your impressive IQ and the fact that you are employed to solve problems you have to be pulling at least $250k, so go ahead and tell me how you blow that $500 donation level away.

[_sturt_]

Sturt, you neglected to tell me I was wrong about your level of support for the program.  Was that intentional or an oversight on your part?  I figure with you your impressive IQ and the fact that you are employed to solve problems you have to be pulling at least $250k, so go ahead and tell me how you blow that $500 donation level away.

banker, I say this without even a hint of apology... it was completely intentional.

First, who said I have an "impressive IQ?" I wouldn't even know, but I'm fairly certain I'm about 100 or so, which probably falls short of yours or anyone else who descends for Mt. Sinai on occasion as you do. Who said I make six digits? I bet you make more than me. I'm comfortable. No more no less. I love my 2004 manual transmission Nissan Frontier, I'll tell you that much, and I don't plan on trading any year soon.

But whether I give $250K, $250 a year or $25 a year, who do you think you're kidding (still)...?

Your purpose in asking is merely to distract from the meat of the discussion. You can't get any traction any other way but to try to bust my chops and beat the messenger... evidently, you feel a little helpless to debate the content of the message... you can only say "zero chance" so many times without boring your own self to tears, I suppose.

That's not to say I'll necessarily refuse to be more forthcoming to you via PM, but I think I'm like most people... I prefer to keep my financials private. Nothing wrong with that. But moreover, what I do charitably--Marshall-related, church-related, or otherwise--is especially so. It's just one of those things with me that giving to causes shouldn't be done to show off, and I just feel better about my contributions if my name isn't attached.

[banker]

Well, are you at least a season ticket holder?  I really don't want to think that you believe you know what is best for our team and don't even invest in seeing them play.

[ThunderValley]

Banker, you are in waaayyyyy over your head ;D

You would be better served if you gave it up

[lovetheherd2]

everyone, let it die a quiet passing. Anything else is giving a platform for performance. >:(

[banker]

it's the offseason, what else should I do for late night entertainment on a weeknight?