Conference USA

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:40 am

Marco!

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:41 am

Polo!

kdog27 · Post by **kdog27** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:42 am

gee whiz guys you just ruined my day.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:43 am

And with that the thread should close.

Please turn to page 33 in your hymmnals and join the AZZ choir in the singing of "Kumbayah"

"Someone's crying Lord, Kumbayah...."

Germainfitch1 · Post by **Germainfitch1** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:12 am

Flipper wrote:And with that the thread should close.

Please turn to page 33 in your hymmnals and join the AZZ choir in the singing of "Kumbayah"

"Someone's crying Lord, Kumbayah...."

This is exactly what I mean. How is this in any way funny at all. Am I missing something?

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:16 am

"....Ohhhhhh, Lord, Kumbayah!"

Thank you, Brother Flipper. Let us all go in peace.

Germainfitch1 · Post by **Germainfitch1** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:13 am

Can we compare the MAC television contract to the CUSA TV contract?

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 6:33 am

Germainfitch1 wrote:Can we compare the MAC television contract to the CUSA TV contract?

Only if we also compare travel costs.

Rightupinthere · Post by **Rightupinthere** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 7:30 am

Germainfitch1 wrote:Can we compare the MAC television contract to the CUSA TV contract?

I wasn't asking you the compare the CUSA contract with the MAC contract. I was asking you to compare the NEW contract with CUSA to the previous contract with CUSA.
Fewer games, less pay, and less exposure. Correct me if I"m wrong. I'm simply asking you the asnwer the question you are obviously avoiding.

Germainfitch1 · Post by **Germainfitch1** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:27 am

Since you asked I will correct you. I am not avoiding any question. I have never seen an article on the Conference USA TV contract. It very well could be lessoning in scope in terms of money and games. I will give you that. But this entire post was "where would be better for our team to be, the MAC or CUSA." So atlthough it is of interest that the CUSA TV contract has shrunk it is not exactly a base for jumping this conversation off of. One could just compare the growth of the MAC TV contract and measure it against the CUSA Growth. Its not exactly like the MACs coverage is a hot commodity. Many of us know that first hand after having to watch snowboarding instead of BG vs CUSA. The argument was that it would be better to be in CUSA than the MAC. ANd right now, no matter if it is shrinking, I would assume the CUSA TV contract is better than the MACs. It is easier to build back up with that sort of thing than to build from scratch.

FliccGirl · Post by **FliccGirl** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:45 am

Germainfitch1 wrote: ANd right now, no matter if it is shrinking, I would assume the CUSA TV contract is better than the MACs.

Some courses you might want to look into:
PHIL 103- Introduction to Logic
HNRS 201- Introduction to Critical Thinking
MATH 313- Elementary Mathematical Logic

You can't base an argument off an assumption.
You can't offer opinions as the basis of your argument and expect people not to question them.
You can't respond to facts with, "Too bad, I'm still right."

You want people to take you seriously and stop accusing you of avoiding questions? Go look up some facts and statistics and present us with a complete list of pros and cons about C-USA. Cite sources. And be prepared to have your points contested-- you can just back them up with secondary sources. Go to it.

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:46 am

FliccGirl wrote:
Germainfitch1 wrote: ANd right now, no matter if it is shrinking, I would assume the CUSA TV contract is better than the MACs.
Some courses you might want to look into:
PHIL 103- Introduction to Logic
HNRS 201- Introduction to Critical Thinking
MATH 313- Elementary Mathematical Logic

You can't base an argument off an assumption.
You can't offer opinions as the basis of your argument and expect people not to question them.
You can't respond to facts with, "Too bad, I'm still right."

You want people to take you seriously and stop accusing you of avoiding questions? Go look up some facts and statistics and present us with a complete list of pros and cons about C-USA. Cite sources. And be prepared to have your points contested-- you can just back them up with secondary sources. Go to it.

Germainfitch1 · Post by **Germainfitch1** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:01 am

Once again a post with a smiley face, piling on with no real substance.

Back to the point made prior. The reality is that I can base an argument off of an assumption. Why can I not? I am assuming it is not a better contract. It is a "if X is true than I beleive Y to be true." I can easily make that theory. Your right that because it is built off of an assumption ti is flimsy, but I don't have to prove that is right. THe burdon of proof lies on my detractors. In this instance I would gamble that the CUSA detractors would give me the contention that CUSA currently has a better TV contract. The reality is that because I based my argument off of an assumption(which I can without a doubt do) as soon as someone proves me wrong, my argument is out the window. Now, because I based my argument off of an assumption, it is for those who disagree with that assumption to state that they do and prove that I am wrong. The burdon of proof is off of me. I completely agree with the legitimacy of my argument being lessoned by me not having facts, but is there anyone out there who really thinks CUSA does not have a better contract? You can argue that there contract is weakening and we may surpass them but from the pulse I am getting from the board it would seem that it is universally accepted thta CUSA has a better current contract. I love your class definitions though. Your attempt at humor was very unique and I applaud it. Better than most. Your logic was thin and it is clear that you are still working on that degree. When I made that post I was out the door to work. I will google later and see what I can find, but it was my beleive that everyone here would give me the contention that CUSAs current contract is better than the MACs.

"You can't offer opinions as the basis of your argument and expect people not to question them.
You can't respond to facts with, "Too bad, I'm still right."

You want people to take you seriously and stop accusing you of avoiding questions?"

This part cracks me up. Where do I say too bad I am still right? And where do I ever ask people not to question me. I am all for discourse and have said so many times. I plead for questions to attempt to keep the dialogue going and learn more about the situation. And where am I asking people to stop accusing me of avoiding questions? As far as i know I was only accused once of avoiding a question, and in response I explained why I was avoiding the question.

transfer2BGSU · Post by **transfer2BGSU** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:07 am

FliccGirl wrote:Some courses you might want to look into:
PHIL 103- Introduction to Logic
HNRS 201- Introduction to Critical Thinking
MATH 313- Elementary Mathematical Logic

You can't base an argument off an assumption.
You can't offer opinions as the basis of your argument and expect people not to question them.
You can't respond to facts with, "Too bad, I'm still right."

You want people to take you seriously and stop accusing you of avoiding questions? Go look up some facts and statistics and present us with a complete list of pros and cons about C-USA. Cite sources. And be prepared to have your points contested-- you can just back them up with secondary sources. Go to it.

Damn. And that came from a chick too!

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:09 am

GermaineFitch1, I will agree with you that C-USA's current TV contract is much better than the MAC's current TV contract.