We ain't having nuttin to do with any Canuck football mess. Our offense has enuff trouble moving the ball with 4 downs, sure as heck don't need to try it with only 3!
Of course, we can have 12 men on the field...there are no motion penalties...
|
|
|
|
|
We ain't having nuttin to do with any Canuck football mess. Our offense has enuff trouble moving the ball with 4 downs, sure as heck don't need to try it with only 3!
Of course, we can have 12 men on the field...there are no motion penalties...
When are 13 used on defense?? What country is that??Originally Posted by dawg80
We ain't having nuttin to do with any Canuck football mess. Our offense has enuff trouble moving the ball with 4 downs, sure as heck don't need to try it with only 3!
Of course, we can have 12 men on the field...there are no motion penalties...
Dooleyville
good one!
Utah got that invitation by default. BYU was never going to get a bid from the Pac-10 for the same reason that Baylor was not going to get an invitation. (Here is a hint: It had nothing to do with athletics.)
Considering the hole BYU dug during the first half of a rebuilding year, I think finishing 6-6 was a good job.
By going independent, BYU will make more money than they would have in the MWC, and in 2-3 years, the football program will be in better shape than it was in the MWC.
I am not a die-hard BYU fan, but members of my family are, and I have been to several BYU games over the past two years (Washington, OU, and Tulane.) I am going to make a prediction that if the Tech/BYU game is played in Ruston, they will bring the largest visiting crowd to Aillet stadium since nlu did in 1997. That is not too bad for a school that is a 20-plus hour drive from Ruston.
BTW: As a die-hard Tech fan, I would take a 6-6 record and an invitation to third-rate bowl right now.
Who cares about saving the WAC? I'm ready to line up and beat down Southern Miss, Tulane, Rice, Tulsa, Houston, SMU, ECU, Memphis, Marshall, UCF, and UAB!!! It'll be nice to whip up on them, play a decent OOC schedule, and bowl it up! Just getting the Green Wave in Ruston is interesting even on its own, to me!
UBC could actually be a get, considering where the WAC is presently. The football would be iffy, but there'd be no questioning that it's a legit school. That's one of the things the WAC has going for it, at least. State flagships and land-grants. This would fall into line with that. And there's a novelty factor (a good one, not like the novelty factor a University of Phoenix team would bring in).
Simon Fraser opted for a lower level of play, though, and UBC might opt for the same to keep athletic budgets under control.
University of Houston '01. Any references to "we" or "us" likely refer to UH. Cheers!
You and I have mentioned this before, that adding UBC would be a good move for the WAC, but most people here have already wrote the WAC off. I agree it's not the optimal conference to be in once the top half leaves but had we been consistent winners since joining the conference we wouldn't be sitting here in this predicament. It's always been my feeling that 5 or 6 years ago the conference should have made a play to add Gonzaga and Saint Mary's to strengthen our already strong basketball conference.
UBC would be good for the WAC. it would be horrible for Tech (why increase travel costs even more?). hopefully Tech can get out of the WAC and they can look to the great white north to save themselves..
UBC wouldn't be a bad fit for the WAC if it was for football and basketball only. I like the idea but it will NEVER happen. A rebuilt WAC is crucial for Tech because the only other option is the sunbelt.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
