Pac12 expansion - looking to add 4 teams

wazzu31 said:
Because CSU and USU have literally nothing to do with my post. What part do you not understand? I can’t explain that any clearer.

I changed it to natural rivals because that is what they are? Is there a different phrasing in your part of the country that I don’t know to explain what a rival would be?

You keep saying downgraded as if that is suppose to offend me or something. You already embarrassed yourself with that line of thinking so I’m not sure why you keep doubling down on idiocy
Click to expand...
I brought up USU moron to illustrate they aren't rivals ether yet were added. It's really not that hard to understand. You look like a jaded bitch that can't handle the truth.
 
wazzu31 said:
Wyoming and New Mexico aren’t rivals to my school nor are they in the conference. So now you are just making up arguments in your head and puking it out on this thread.
Click to expand...
When did I say they were? I asked about them and you said "not rivals". Thats all.

Yet another post where you show off your dumbassery.
 
Wild Turkey said:
Big 12 is a pretty big stretch as they left out teams like Memphis and SMU. They will be targeting teams like FSU, Clemson, Gonzaga and some ACC teams when it blows up in 2036.

Never say never but UNLV is going to have to make series strides in FB and BB for the B12 to get interested. Remember they turned down Cal and Stanford.
Click to expand...
Fuck you
 
ralphiewvu said:
I asked about Wyoming and New Mexico and got the response of they aren't rivals. I then referenced usu not being a rival and this dude went off. No one is arguing Idaho isn't a natural rival to wazzou or even Boise.
Click to expand...

Are you just arguing to argue? He never mentioned New Mexico, USU or Wyoming in his Tuesday post.
 
ericd7633 said:
Are you just arguing to argue? He never mentioned New Mexico, USU or Wyoming in his Tuesday post.
Click to expand...
Huh??? Is this a joke?

I have stated about 4 times now that I asked about Wyoming and UNM. And got the response of "not rivals". So then I brought up how USU wasn't a rival yet we're still added and here we are. Did you actually even see my first post where this started???
 
ralphiewvu said:
Huh??? Is this a joke?

I have stated about 4 times now that I asked about Wyoming and UNM. And got the response of "not rivals". So then I brought up how USU wasn't a rival yet we're still added and here we are. Did you actually even see my first post where this started???
Click to expand...

He wants Idaho added because they can be a natural rival. Just like Boise State and Gonzaga. New Mexico and Wyoming are not and have no potential to be. He never said all added teams were rivals. Not sure where you got that from?
 
ericd7633 said:
He wants Idaho added because they can be a natural rival. Just like Boise State and Gonzaga. New Mexico and Wyoming are not and have no potential to be. He never said all added teams were rivals. Not sure where you got that from?
Click to expand...
I understand he wanted Idaho, but him stating New Mexico and Wyoming were a no because "not rivals" of "my school" was where I brought up how neither was USU yet they were added. And the term natural rival only appeared about three posts into this dispute and no one has argued Boise and Zaga aren't natural rivals to wazzou.
 
ralphiewvu said:
I understand he wanted Idaho, but him stating New Mexico and Wyoming were a no because "not rivals" of "my school" was where I brought up how neither was USU yet they were added. And the term natural rival only appeared about three posts into this dispute and no one has argued Boise and Zaga aren't natural rivals to wazzou.
Click to expand...

Yes, because he would prefer the next team to be added a rival school. USU has nothing to do with his argument about previous additions or future additions.

To sum up. He wants to add Idaho because they can be a rival, on top of Gonzaga and Boise State. He doesn't want New Mexico or Wyoming because they won't be/aren't rivals. You then bring up USU for some reason. Implying something he never meant or alluded too.
 
ericd7633 said:
Yes, because he would prefer the next team to be added a rival school. USU has nothing to do with his argument about previous additions or future additions.

To sum up. He wants to add Idaho because they can be a rival, on top of Gonzaga and Boise State. He doesn't want New Mexico or Wyoming because they won't be/aren't rivals. You then bring up USU for some reason. Implying something he never meant or alluded too.
Click to expand...
For the 5th time, I brought USU up illustrating how they aren’t a rival yet were still added. And to say he didn’t allude to is absolutely not true. Coming up with “not a rival” when asked about New Mexico and Wyoming is absolutely alluding that only rivals were added, hence why USU (and CSU) were brought up. Stop dumbing down to his level of stupid.
 
ralphiewvu said:
For the 5th time, I brought USU up illustrating how they aren’t a rival yet were still added. And to say he didn’t allude to is absolutely not true. Coming up with “not a rival” when asked about New Mexico and Wyoming is absolutely alluding that only rivals were added, hence why USU (and CSU) were brought up. Stop dumbing down to his level of stupid.
Click to expand...

He never alluded to that. Reread the thread.

Again. He wanted Idaho because they can be a rival. You brought up New Mexico and Wyoming as potential targets. They are not rivals of Washington State, thus he would prefer them not be added. It's pretty simple to follow that. After he said they aren't rivals, you said this:

"Yes, I forgot the intense rivalry Colorado State and Utah State bring with every member of this new Pac. My bad"

I'm failing to see where he ever alluded to all the additions being rivals or natural rivals, or whatever you want to call it, between his desire to add Idaho and what you said in italics.

Again to sum up:

@wazzu31 wants to add Idaho because they are a rival.
@ralphiewvu says, what about New Mexico and Wyoming, they would be good adds(which I actually think New Mexico would be, but that's besides the point)
@wazzu31 says they aren't rivals.

You then say the italicized above. I mean it's a complete stretch to say he alluded to what you're suggesting between his initial post and your italicized one. It just doesn't make sense IMO.
 
wazzu31 said:
When did they turn down Cal and Stanford? I find it very hard to believe they turned down the Big 12
Click to expand...
Cal and Stanford inquired about the Big 12 and were told no.
 
ericd7633 said:
He never alluded to that. Reread the thread.

Again. He wanted Idaho because they can be a rival. You brought up New Mexico and Wyoming as potential targets. They are not rivals of Washington State, thus he would prefer them not be added. It's pretty simple to follow that. After he said they aren't rivals, you said this:

"Yes, I forgot the intense rivalry Colorado State and Utah State bring with every member of this new Pac. My bad"

I'm failing to see where he ever alluded to all the additions being rivals or natural rivals, or whatever you want to call it, between his desire to add Idaho and what you said in italics.

Again to sum up:

@wazzu31 wants to add Idaho because they are a rival.
@ralphiewvu says, what about New Mexico and Wyoming, they would be good adds(which I actually think New Mexico would be, but that's besides the point)
@wazzu31 says they aren't rivals.

You then say the italicized above. I mean it's a complete stretch to say he alluded to what you're suggesting between his initial post and your italicized one. It just doesn't make sense IMO.
Click to expand...
Seriously??? You are failing to see how calling my suggestion/question “not rivals” is him alluding only rivals were added? Seriously?

It’s not a complete stretch at all Eric, it’s exactly why I brought up USU and CSU. Bringing about a team like Wyoming which is miles better then Idaho and being told not a rival so no is exactly alluding to only rivals were added.

You just don’t want to admit it.
 
ralphiewvu said:
Seriously??? You are failing to see how calling my suggestion/question “not rivals” is him alluding only rivals were added? Seriously?

It’s not a complete stretch at all Eric, it’s exactly why I brought up USU and CSU. Bringing about a team like Wyoming which is miles better then Idaho and being told not a rival so no is exactly alluding to only rivals were added.

You just don’t want to admit it.
Click to expand...

Dude come on. He wants to add a rival school. He didn't say all schools that were added up to that point were rivals. New Mexico and Wyoming are better additions than Idaho, in every sense of the definition, but he would prefer a rival school.

It would be like a Michigan fan saying, "I'd like to add ND next." Then you saying, "what about Alabama and Texas, those would be good additions." The Michigan fan then says, "not rivals." And then you come back at that response by saying, "Yes, I forgot the intense rivalry Oregon, Washington and UCLA bring with every member of this new B1G. My bad." That makes no sense.
 
ericd7633 said:
Dude come on. He wants to add a rival school. He didn't say all schools that were added up to that point were rivals. New Mexico and Wyoming are better additions than Idaho, in every sense of the definition, but he would prefer a rival school.

It would be like a Michigan fan saying, "I'd like to add ND next." Then you saying, "what about Alabama and Texas, those would be good additions." The Michigan fan then says, "not rivals." And then you come back at that response by saying, "Yes, I forgot the intense rivalry Oregon, Washington and UCLA bring with every member of this new B1G. My bad." That makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Be a reasonable here. First my question was asked for the PAC, not just for Wazzou. Next he does not say he “prefers” a rival school to me. He says “not a rival.” Alluding to the fact that only rival schools were added. This is exactly where the disconnect is and it’s absurd to say my thinking here makes no sense.

You just don’t want to admit this.
 
ralphiewvu said:
I thought they told the B12 no, academia and probably some religious reasons too. However I’m not exactly sure to be honest.
Click to expand...
I don't see anyone joining the ACC at a discounted rate instead of the Big 12.
 
Wild Turkey said:
I don't see anyone joining the ACC at a discounted rate instead of the Big 12.
Click to expand...
Normally I agree but these two seem like different thinkers. The elitist academia types that would rather stick it out with other like minded (academia wise) universities than worry about sports. But again, I’m not exactly sure what happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top