rams80

LOL WUT.

No, because the ACC doesn't need to expand.If he was talking about the SEC that would surely be welcomed and acceptable correct?The thought that the SEC would willingly take Cincinnati and UConn merits Archimedes losing his

No, because the ACC doesn't need to expand.

Don't forget, they still have Tampa for the footprint.

My own observation is that the only way the new mods have been "inconsistent" is that the more visible and active moderation presence is inconsistent with the past anarchy that was permitted on much of the boards. In this case, inconsistency is very, very welcome.

The best solution to the main site comment problems remain "disable comments"

It would be pretty dumb if they tossed Maryland... Say this is 5 years down the road and Maryland is producing wins, attendance, etc I, for one, welcome our new Alien Space Bat overlords. Aside from very brief periods of success, Maryland athletics are typified by sustained mediocrity and uniforms that make small children go blind. I dance a small jig. Purdue. The Big Ten's quest for markets and financial assistance had nothing to do with Maryland's decision making process I am sure. Regardless of them being a perpetual weak sister in the conference. Maryland has the better part of a century playing major college sports. Boise State or Louisville (retch) would be your rising rookie. Maryland's another aging veteran who used to double as the sick man of the ACC.

If the Big Ten was paring down teams they'd eject Maryland before tossing Purdue.

Nope. The league sent Chris a cease and desist order years ago. i find this obsurd, wikipedia still uses them under the terms of its fair use policy, so why cant chris, Wikipedia can afford far better lawyers than Chris.

Don't kid yourself, Russia invested a lot of capital in demonstrating that, as far as international affairs were concerned, they were a kinder, gentler nation and a responsible state actor back when the votes were held for both the Olympics and the World Cup were held. In 2007/2010 they weren't the ones knocking over countries, we were. Well, that and Russia was sitting on Europe's energy supply at the time, so they had a far heftier Sword of Damocles to hang over the rest of Europe, and Putin might care just enough to ratchet up oil and gas prices if he was upset. Conversely, our government isn't going to do crap if you vote against us because of the NSA spying fiasco (which is good and appropriate), so it gives the other nations of the world the perfect opportunity to register their protest against our policies. Realpolitik at its finest. EDIT- WE'VE BEEN SPYING ON THE CITIZENS OF OUR ALLIES! We may have been aided and abetted by their own intelligence agencies, but by golly the NSA's been looking at their metadata too, and thanks in part to Snowden their citizens know it.

It is a little bit of "inflation" from the money the USA spent to get the 1996 and 2002 Olympics. We were paying college tuition, getting tickets to the Super Bowl and The Oscars in addition to cash.As for the USA just outspending the other bidders, Eddie Snowden gave the rest of the world issues to worry about regarding how we monitor everyone in terms of surveillance. That's kind of an issue for those whose world revolves around seediness. No, Snowden's relevant in the bidding for international events. We're not exactly popular in a decent chunk of the world. If human rights were considered when choosing a home nation, Qatar would've never won the initial bid in the first place. All that matters is the money in this situation. There's no rational reason behind choosing Qatar in terms of safety. Why should we assume Snowdens leak would have any form of impact on a World Cup bid selection if a country like Qatar had been picked?It's all about the ability to move money and use power, and the United States can do that. I can't imagine Snowdens leaks will have any sort of impact on the ineffective bid committee that comes with World Cup politics. Guess what, a large chunk of FIFA's representatives don't give a crap about human rights violations. However, they do see a semi-rare opportunity with Snowden to get a free poke of the eye in at the United States. Something that, again, they won't pass up as they are from smaller countries that the United States typically bosses around.

It is a little bit of "inflation" from the money the USA spent to get the 1996 and 2002 Olympics. We were paying college tuition, getting tickets to the Super Bowl and The Oscars in addition to cash.As for the USA just outspending the other bidders, Eddie Snowden gave the rest of the world issues to worry about regarding how we monitor everyone in terms of surveillance. That's kind of an issue for those whose world revolves around seediness. Snowden's relevant in the bidding for international events. We're not exactly popular in a decent chunk of the world.

ACC teams to possibly play non-conference games against other ACC teams. EDIT: Hot off the wires: UMass football to the Sun Belt?! *gets another gallon of LSD for Mr. Popo*

Didn't the board once have a policy of banning posters who were younger than 13? Whatever happened to that policy?

A lot of these posts are saying Conference-specific TV deals as well.

Can we just ban reddit as a source?

Hybrid post limit and tenure requirements-Kind of like how the fantasy forums work. 3 months and 100 posts. Alternatively, modify the board software so that the concepts section can only be viewed by members. The latter alternative would also help curb logo theft by outsiders.

Provided Connecticut is still in the American by then. Given the recent basketball successes, it's not necessarily a given. Still holding on to that slim prayer of the B1G and ACC I take it.

Republican state senators in Illinois currently hold a super-minority. They are bored. How bored? Bored enough to commission a study about whether or not another Illinois state school should join the Big Ten. Napoleon Harris (who in the interests of full disclosure, is a Democrat) apparently thinks Chicago State, which has no football team and an accreditation status of "dubious," would be a fine candidate.

Bump. UMass turned down full membership in the MAC last month, and will therefore be booted out of the Conference as a football member after 2015. And now for a song.

FIFA wants 40,000 minimum per stadium. And its making noises about having a 40 (or more) team field in future World Cups. So at least 10 stadia with 40,000 seats. So if you want to go through with this, you might want to tell Canadian municipal governments to prepare their collective anuses.

Actually, for some strange reason, the woman's world cup is not going to have games in Toronto. It will be Montreal, Edmonton, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Ottawa and, Moncton. I also feel Canada could easily host a world cup. Yes, there would be some serious work needed but between 2 venues in Montreal and Toronto and all the new CFL stadiums being built I think we'd be covered. Remember, all the stadiums used in the 1994 world cup in the USA were all "pointy ball" football stadiums. Is there the political will to build enough stadiums with 40,000+ seating capacity for an expanded World Cup?

FIFA won't accept dual bids anymore.

Orleans Arena (Wranglers' arena) has a listed 7,773 person capacity for hockey. If you want a better statistical outlook on things.

There's a Lake Glendale? OH WHAT THE HELL?