PDA

View Full Version : Delaware Beat Writer on Furman



93henfan
February 22nd, 2009, 05:26 PM
The News Journal's Kevin Tresolini in the Sunday paper:

Selig, Kiffin & Furman: A firm specializing in shady deals

http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20090222/SPORTS07/902220346/1028


...And what about Furman, which jilted Delaware at the last minute, deciding to play at I-A Missouri on Sept. 19 of this coming football season instead of at Delaware Stadium, even though the Paladins already had one I-A game scheduled this season at Auburn?

That Auburn game, incidentally, is Nov. 7, sandwiched in between Southern Conference showdowns against Appalachian State and Georgia Southern, which should determine what is supposed to matter -- conference titles and I-AA playoff berths.

Scheduling one I-A game is fine for a I-AA school, because of the financial payoff and the experience the team gets of playing in such a crowded, raucous environment, and all that.

You know what playing two I-A games is?

Prostitution.

Furman, a private school with less than 3,000 undergraduates, is struggling in lean economic times. The Paladins are playing at Missouri strictly for the money, and athletic director Gary Clark and coach Bobby Lamb said so.

"Let's face it: It's an opportunity to make some money for the university during these tough economic times," Lamb told the Greenville News.

Don't know if that statement came from a street corner or how Furman flaunted its financial desires.

But they get the cash, selling themselves -- more specifically, Furman's 50-some player traveling squad -- to Missouri, where fans and players get the pleasure of a nearly guaranteed victory over an outmanned opponent.

Funny, I thought sports was about the competition, which there could be little of that day in Columbia, Mo.

Shame on Furman, a fine university with a gorgeous campus and many successful, well-paid graduates, for not coming up with a better way to raise money than to sell its football team.

Delaware, by the way, will be fine, despite losing a very appealing nonconference matchup against a solid I-AA program. The Blue Hens will fill that date, perhaps even with Delaware State, with which UD may be close to agreeing on a series of future games.

And that brings to mind three words comprising what seems to be an appropriate phrase for this matter:

Addition by subtraction.

R3TRO
February 22nd, 2009, 05:28 PM
LMAO @ Prostitution!!!

HAHAHA

Ivytalk
February 22nd, 2009, 06:33 PM
Tresolini is a good reporter who minces no words.xpeacex

blueballs
February 22nd, 2009, 06:47 PM
Ouch!!!!!!!!

Tresolini poops on the Purps...

Go Lehigh TU owl
February 22nd, 2009, 06:51 PM
I completely agree. I don't have much respect for programs that basically "whore" themselves out for $$. Furman hasn't been guilty of this in the past but certaintly are this year. They'll get what they deserve which is two blowout losses and Thanksgiving weekend off.

GoBlueHens83
February 22nd, 2009, 07:23 PM
You know, I was upset about this game being dropped. But I understand what Furman did, and I don't fault them. By all means, it was very very bad timing. Let's think for a second though, if Furman is in need of money quick, and the opportunity rises to make that money, what would you do? Would you rather see Furman have to drop a sport or two? Now I am not really sure how bad finances are at FU, but if they are in need of money so be it. It's over and done with, and no amount of complaining and whining on message boards is going to fix that. I will still wish Furman the best of luck in the game against Missouri, and all of their games this year. Maybe Farman will get to visit the Tub sometime in the future.

seahawkfan2007
February 22nd, 2009, 07:55 PM
I'm thinking Delaware State now has to bump Wagner to make room for Delaware (I don't blame them) If this is so, I hope Wagner can scramble to replace DSU with a CAA, Big South (Stony Brook maybe) or other opponent from an auto bid conference.

SideLine Shooter
February 22nd, 2009, 08:23 PM
Great article!xnodxxthumbsupx

mainejeff
February 22nd, 2009, 08:23 PM
I'm thinking Delaware State now has to bump Wagner to make room for Delaware (I don't blame them) If this is so, I hope Wagner can scramble to replace DSU with a CAA, Big South (Stony Brook maybe) or other opponent from an auto bid conference.

Maine has an open date for Sept.19.

DTSpider
February 22nd, 2009, 08:36 PM
How is Furman short on cash?!?!? They received $400 million back in 2001...

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E0DF1E3BF937A35752C0A9679C8B 63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/C/Colleges%20and%20Universities

Syntax Error
February 22nd, 2009, 08:39 PM
The News Journal's Kevin Tresolini in the Sunday paper: ...Funny, I thought sports was about the competition...Bwahhahahahahaaha xlolx Kevin knows better than that but he always goes off on his rants. Division I college football is about money. If your football program doesn't get it then other sports drop. Simple. Why do you think UD, UM, etc. want all the home games? Because of competition? MONEY!
...It's over and done with, and no amount of complaining and whining on message boards is going to fix that...Or on a media website and in the newspaper. xrulesx

Reign of Terrier
February 22nd, 2009, 08:40 PM
How is Furman short on cash?!?!? They received $400 million back in 2001...

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E0DF1E3BF937A35752C0A9679C8B 63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/C/Colleges%20and%20Universities

xlolxxlolxxlolxThey bet Wofford $400 million that they wouldn't get beat by them 2 years straight and recently lostxlolxxlolx

Hello Richardson building!!!!


Note: there was absolutely no truth in the above statement (to my knowledge)

seahawkfan2007
February 22nd, 2009, 09:31 PM
Maine would be a great replacement for DSU.

fuEMO
February 22nd, 2009, 10:02 PM
How is Furman short on cash?!?!? They received $400 million back in 2001...

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E0DF1E3BF937A35752C0A9679C8B 63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/C/Colleges%20and%20Universities

The Hollingsworth money is tied to the sale of land.

Concerning the article written by Kevin Tresolini: Are schools like Wofford (Wisc, USF) Charleston Southern (Fla, USF) also prostitutes? Or is Furman the only school that deserves the prostitution tag because it bought out of a contract with Delaware to add a second game. I just think it's silly and petty for a respected journalist to throw out the prostitution label on Furman. And I would like to know if Kevin would offer such high hopes for Delaware playing an FBS team as he foresees for Furman?

Ud1Hens
February 22nd, 2009, 11:31 PM
And I would like to know if Kevin would offer such high hopes for Delaware playing an FBS team as he foresees for Furman?

Let's be honest here...Navy (pretty much the only FBS UD schedules) and Missouri/Auburn are on two completely different levels. Those two teams come from arguably the toughest conferences in the nation in the SEC and Big 12. Delaware actually has a 6 and 6 record overall vs. Navy and has beaten them 2 out of the last 3 times they've played...with Navy going to a bowl in each of those years. Delaware scheduling a Navy or Maryland seems far more winnable than road games vs. Missouri and Auburn.

I want Furman to win those games for they are the FCS team but you can't compare the UD scheduling of Navy as the same as Furman scheduling those two teams. Delaware has a 50-50 shot at winning their FBS games...the two for Furman this year are extremely tough.

OL FU
February 23rd, 2009, 08:07 AM
I didn't agree with the decision but that is a bull**** article. This isn't the first time that FU has played more than one I-A and it won't be the last. There are plenty of other schools that make the decision to play two I-As for a variety of reasons. Criticize us for the leaving UD high and dry (as I did) , but the reasons we did it monetary or otherwise are our business. Calling it prostitution shows that the writer is unfortunately one of the typical sport journalist mouth movers (or in this case, finger typers) without the thinking part of his brain activated.

PaladinFan
February 23rd, 2009, 08:14 AM
I also don't see how the decision is "last minute." Game got dropped in Feb. and Delaware has another FCS school in the same daggum state with an open week the same week.

All this pissing and moaning is getting annoying by the University of Delaware.

93henfan
February 23rd, 2009, 08:30 AM
All this pissing and moaning is getting annoying by the University of Delaware.

Kevin Tresolini is not a University of Delaware employee. In fact, he has been quite critical of the U of D in the past on various issues.

OL FU
February 23rd, 2009, 08:54 AM
Kevin Tresolini is not a University of Delaware employee. In fact, he has been quite critical of the U of D in the past on various issues.

Delaware is subject to criticismxconfusedxxconfusedxxconfusedxxsmiley_wix

Ud1Hens
February 23rd, 2009, 08:58 AM
I also don't see how the decision is "last minute." Game got dropped in Feb. and Delaware has another FCS school in the same daggum state with an open week the same week.

Actually February is pretty last minute in terms of scheduling. Very many FCS programs have finalized their schedules well before this point in February. And Delaware State actually has a game during that week against Wagnor...the same week you say is open.

bluehenbillk
February 23rd, 2009, 09:02 AM
Here's some ideas, the mods would even be cool with this. Why don't we start a fundraising drive to make FU the monthly sponsor on AGS? Bake sale? Maybe we could sell Girl Scout cookies outside the Tub before games this year & send the proceeds down to Greenville, or Travelers Rest as I've been told, you know like we used to donate money to UNICEF to help starving African kids.

OL FU
February 23rd, 2009, 09:07 AM
Here's some ideas, the mods would even be cool with this. Why don't we start a fundraising drive to make FU the monthly sponsor on AGS? Bake sale? Maybe we could sell Girl Scout cookies outside the Tub before games this year & send the proceeds down to Greenville, or Travelers Rest as I've been told, you know like we used to donate money to UNICEF to help starving African kids.

Just don't sell them next to the wall where you guys pissxsmiley_wix

93henfan
February 23rd, 2009, 09:24 AM
Just don't sell them next to the wall where you guys pissxsmiley_wix

The cascading pee wall in the new stadium will have splash guards:

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee234/93bluehen/peewall.jpg

bluehenbillk
February 23rd, 2009, 09:31 AM
Just don't sell them next to the wall where you guys pissxsmiley_wix

See, by backing out of our game you guys won't get to experience UD's version of "The West Wall".

OL FU
February 23rd, 2009, 09:33 AM
See, by backing out of our game you guys won't get to experience UD's version of "The West Wall".

:(

On the other hand I was kinda hoping there was another way in the stadiumxsmiley_wix

OL FU
February 23rd, 2009, 09:34 AM
The cascading pee wall in the new stadium will have splash guards:

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee234/93bluehen/peewall.jpg

xthumbsupx I thinkxeyebrowx

FURMANFAN
February 23rd, 2009, 09:43 AM
Actually February is pretty last minute in terms of scheduling. Very many FCS programs have finalized their schedules well before this point in February. And Delaware State actually has a game during that week against Wagnor...the same week you say is open.

However did UD and DSU handle that? You don't suppose a buyout was involved do you? And as far this writer is concerned, he should check the definition of pandering.

ChickenMan
February 23rd, 2009, 09:43 AM
Delaware is subject to criticismxconfusedxxconfusedxxconfusedxxsmiley_wix

No way.. we were all just thrilled with our 4-8 season... :p

89Hen
February 23rd, 2009, 09:57 AM
Division I college football is about money. If your football program doesn't get it then other sports drop. Simple. Why do you think UD, UM, etc. want all the home games? Because of competition? MONEY!
FWIW, in the last 10 years UD has visited YSU, GSU, The Citadel (2x) and Furman and has a game at SDSU coming up. Not the most away I-AA games of anyone, but not none either.

fuEMO
February 23rd, 2009, 12:55 PM
Let's be honest here...Navy (pretty much the only FBS UD schedules) and Missouri/Auburn are on two completely different levels. Those two teams come from arguably the toughest conferences in the nation in the SEC and Big 12. Delaware actually has a 6 and 6 record overall vs. Navy and has beaten them 2 out of the last 3 times they've played...with Navy going to a bowl in each of those years. Delaware scheduling a Navy or Maryland seems far more winnable than road games vs. Missouri and Auburn.

I want Furman to win those games for they are the FCS team but you can't compare the UD scheduling of Navy as the same as Furman scheduling those two teams. Delaware has a 50-50 shot at winning their FBS games...the two for Furman this year are extremely tough.

I get your point. Furman has been very fortunate to have played ACC, SEC, and Big East schools for many years. It is a tradition that the Players and Coaches look forward too. I'm sure it is sold to players during recruiting. Auburn is a big name but no bigger than Clemson or VaTech.

IMO these two teams make interesting matchups. Furman recruits very well in Bama, and with a new coach, new schemes, and playing Furman late in the year. Furman's players will love this match. Missouri, graduates a ton, but I'm sure has talent ready to step up. But Furman loves a matchup against an opponent not familiar with Furman's schemes. Plus this game puts Furman in the spotlight in another market for recruiting students. BL does a great job selling these games as an opportunity. Playing to that chip on the shoulder mentality that built the Furman program from the days of Dick Sheridan. This could be just what the doctor ordered to bring identity back to the program.

putter
February 23rd, 2009, 01:52 PM
I thought sports was about the competition

Has this guy been living under a rock? At the FCS level it is about staying viable and then wanting to win a NC. I would want to know how many FCS teams are playing two FBS games this year 'cause Furman isn't the only one.

89Hen
February 23rd, 2009, 02:19 PM
At the FCS level it is about staying viable and then wanting to win a NC. I would want to know how many FCS teams are playing two FBS games this year 'cause Furman isn't the only one.
I guess everyone has to "stay viable" otherwise there would be no team to compete for a championship, but the balance between the two is a little precarious. You are correct that FU is not the only double dipper. A more interesting list to me would be how many I-AA's have made the playoffs with two I-A's on the schedule. I'm sure it must have happened, but I wonder the percentages. xeyebrowx

OL FU
February 23rd, 2009, 02:42 PM
I guess everyone has to "stay viable" otherwise there would be no team to compete for a championship, but the balance between the two is a little precarious. You are correct that FU is not the only double dipper. A more interesting list to me would be how many I-AA's have made the playoffs with two I-A's on the schedule. I'm sure it must have happened, but I wonder the percentages. xeyebrowx

We ain't made the playoffs the last two years with just one:(

AshevilleApp2
February 23rd, 2009, 04:12 PM
I guess everyone has to "stay viable" otherwise there would be no team to compete for a championship, but the balance between the two is a little precarious. You are correct that FU is not the only double dipper. A more interesting list to me would be how many I-AA's have made the playoffs with two I-A's on the schedule. I'm sure it must have happened, but I wonder the percentages. xeyebrowx

App won the championship in 2005 with Kansas and LSU on our schedule.

furman94
February 23rd, 2009, 04:27 PM
Yes! And were the two astouding FBS losses looked at come decision time? Nope! This is getting really old people. This 'reporter' has no class.

T-Dog
February 23rd, 2009, 04:31 PM
App won the championship in 2005 with Kansas and LSU on our schedule.

And LSU was sandwiched in between Chattanooga and Western (both were decent that year) in November while in the middle of a conference title chase. In fact, many people credit the strong showing at LSU for App getting into championship form.

mcveyrl
February 23rd, 2009, 04:32 PM
I guess everyone has to "stay viable" otherwise there would be no team to compete for a championship, but the balance between the two is a little precarious. You are correct that FU is not the only double dipper. A more interesting list to me would be how many I-AA's have made the playoffs with two I-A's on the schedule. I'm sure it must have happened, but I wonder the percentages. xeyebrowx


App won the championship in 2005 with Kansas and LSU on our schedule.

I think a better question would be how many teams have had two I-As and received an at-large. (I think App was a conference champion that year, but don't know for sure). If you knew you were going to win your conference every year, you might as well schedule all I-As, take the money and go to the playoffs anyway.

89Hen
February 23rd, 2009, 04:33 PM
App won the championship in 2005 with Kansas and LSU on our schedule.
There's one, but I could probably name you a dozen off the top of my head in the last couple that didn't make it. xpeacex

mcveyrl
February 23rd, 2009, 04:34 PM
Yes! And were the two astouding FBS losses looked at come decision time? Nope! This is getting really old people. This 'reporter' has no class.

You are correct. App was the auto-bid.

T-Dog
February 23rd, 2009, 04:35 PM
Indeed we got the at-large that year, but we had to benefit from Furman losing @ GaSo in the 2nd-to-last week for us to get that spot. Furman and GaSo were more likely to win the conference that year than we were so it was no slam dunk for us at all that year.

mcveyrl
February 23rd, 2009, 04:36 PM
There are two problems I have with Furman's decision and that is 1) timing and 2) disclosure. I think they should've at least let Delaware known as soon as possible that they were looking to add another I-A game to the schedule and it might impact their game. Maybe they did, I don't know. The voices coming out of UD seem to indicate that this was a shock to them when it happened.

AshevilleApp2
February 23rd, 2009, 04:37 PM
You are correct. App was the auto-bid.

You're right that we were the autobid. But we also got the second seed with an 8-3 record. I was actually kind of shocked by that. I thought it was deserved, but still a surprise.

mcveyrl
February 23rd, 2009, 04:37 PM
Indeed we got the at-large that year, but we had to benefit from Furman losing @ GaSo in the 2nd-to-last week for us to get that spot. Furman and GaSo were more likely to win the conference that year than we were so it was no slam dunk for us at all that year.

You mean the auto, right? FWIW, after looking at the schedule, I think App probably would've received an at-large even if they didn't win the conference.

mcveyrl
February 23rd, 2009, 04:42 PM
You're right that we were the autobid. But we also got the second seed with an 8-3 record. I was actually kind of shocked by that. I thought it was deserved, but still a surprise.

App also had the benefit of going 7-1 in the Southern Conference. The problem with the two I-As is that if you go 6-2 in the Southern Conference (still a great effort that most year should be playoff-worthy), you're now probably a four loss team, possible going from the two-seed to out of the playoffs.

T-Dog
February 23rd, 2009, 04:43 PM
You mean the auto, right? FWIW, after looking at the schedule, I think App probably would've received an at-large even if they didn't win the conference.

Yeah, I meant to auto.

We had statistically the toughest schedule in all of FCS that year. Two FBS losses and a loss @ No. 1 Furman. We also won at Eastern Kentucky, destroyed Coastal the week after they beat defending champs JMU and won the rest of our conference games including a domination of GaSo in Boone.

We had four home games that year compared to seven road games in the regular season.

It says something when you go 8-3 and get the #2 seed in the playoffs.

OL FU
February 23rd, 2009, 04:47 PM
Yeah, I meant to auto.

We had statistically the toughest schedule in all of FCS that year. Two FBS losses and a loss @ No. 1 Furman. We also won at Eastern Kentucky, destroyed Coastal the week after they beat defending champs JMU and won the rest of our conference games including a domination of GaSo in Boone.

We had four home games that year compared to seven road games in the regular season.

It says something when you go 8-3 and get the #2 seed in the playoffs.

Not that it matters, but Furman was only rated number 1 one week in 05 and that was the GaSo game. Early in the season WCU embarrassed us.

As I said not that it matters. doesn't change a thingxsmiley_wix

BDKJMU
February 23rd, 2009, 04:59 PM
I thought sports was about the competition

Has this guy been living under a rock? At the FCS level it is about staying viable and then wanting to win a NC. I would want to know how many FCS teams are playing two FBS games this year 'cause Furman isn't the only one.

Last season playing 2 I-As:
-Northeastern (Ball State, Syracuse)
-Citadel (Clemson, Florida)
-Eastern Washington (Texas Tech, Colorodo)
-Cal Poly (San Diego State, Wisc)
-UC Davis (San Jose Stae, San Diego)

Only win among those was Cal Poly over San Diego. We all saw if they had a kicker they would have beat Wis too.

Probably were a few others playing 2 I-A games. Remember, only about 90 of the 120 I-AA are full scholly. Were 87 games last yr between I-A & I-AA. Some I-AA didn't play a I-A, while some played 2. Since the I-A went to 12 games every season, its becoming more common.

This season 9 I found:
Maine (Houston (rumored), Syracuse)
Wofford (USF, Wisconsin)
Furman (Missouri, Auburn)
JSU (GA tech, Fla State)
N. Colorodo (Kansas, San Diego)
Weber State (Wyo, Colorodo State)
Charleston Southern (Forida, USF)
CCU (Kent State, Clemson)
Gardner Webb (NC State, Buffalo)

Thats about 10% of your full scholly I-AA, and could be a few others. Conversely, you had several I-As playing 2 I-AAs last season. In the ACC alone there was:
FSU (Western Carolina, Chattanooga)
Ga Tech (JSU, Gardener Webb)

mcveyrl
February 23rd, 2009, 05:00 PM
Yeah, I meant to auto.

We had statistically the toughest schedule in all of FCS that year. Two FBS losses and a loss @ No. 1 Furman. We also won at Eastern Kentucky, destroyed Coastal the week after they beat defending champs JMU and won the rest of our conference games including a domination of GaSo in Boone.

We had four home games that year compared to seven road games in the regular season.

It says something when you go 8-3 and get the #2 seed in the playoffs.

It does, but what would've happened if you all would've lost to Ga. Southern (or somebody worse) that year, too. App would've been a very border line team with a 6-2 SoCon record.

89Hen
February 23rd, 2009, 05:47 PM
Last season playing 2 I-As:
-Northeastern (Ball State, Syracuse)
-Citadel (Clemson, Florida)
-Eastern Washington (Texas Tech, Colorodo)
-Cal Poly (San Diego State, Wisc)
-UC Davis (San Jose Stae, San Diego)

Only win among those was Cal Poly over San Diego. We all saw if they had a kicker they would have beat Wis too.

Probably were a few others playing 2 I-A games.
In addition to yours from last year and going back a few years, these teams had two I-A opponents:

2008
Chattanooga (Oklahoma and FSU)
Montana State (KState and Minny)
Idaho State (Boise and Idaho)
Charleston Southern (Miami (OH) and Miami (FL) (how did I not notice that before?)
Indiana State (NIU and EMU)
Murray State (Indiana and WKU)
EIU (CMU and Illinois)
Tennessee Tech (Louisville and WMU)
UT-Martin (USF and Auburn)
Nicholls (New Mexico St and Memphis)
SCState (UCF and Clemson) *made playoffs with auto
EKU (Cincy and WKU) *made playoffs with auto
Weber State (Hawaii and Utah) *made playoffs with at-large


2007
Gardner-Webb (Ohio and MissSt)
SacSt (Fresno and New Mexico)
Chattanooga (Arkansas and WKU)
Western Carolina (Bama and UGA)
Indiana State (Indiana and WKU)
SCState (AFA and South Carolina)
Northwestern State (Texas Tech and Ole Miss)
SFA (Rice and Nevada)
EKU (Kentucky and WKU) *made playoffs with auto

2006
Idaho State (UNLV and Idaho)
Eastern Washington (Oregon and West Virginia) * Portland State (NM and Cal)
NAU (AzState and Utah)
The Citadel (ATM and Pitt)
Indiana State (Purdue and NIU)
Northwestern State (Kansas and Baylor)
Sam Houston (SMU and Texas)
SFA (Tulsa and Arizona)
Nicholls (Nebraska and La Tech)
EIU (Illinois and Hawaii) *made playoffs with auto


2005
The Citadel (FSU and Ole Miss)
FAMU (USF and FIU)
Northwestern State (LA-M and LA-L)
Sam Houston (Houston and Texas Tech)
Nicholls (Utah State and Indiana) *made playoffs but never played Utah State because of hurricane

2004
The Citadel (Auburn and Duke)
Portland State (Oregon Stat and Boise)
Southeast Missouri (BGSU and CMU)

* EWU made playoffs in 2004, 05 and 07 while playing one I-A. They missed in 2003, 2006 and 2008 while playing two. So in the last six years, they are three and three in making/missing while playing one/two I-A opponents. xeyebrowx

More notable than the fact that it's tough to get an at-large playing two I-A's is the fact that the number of teams playing two I-A's is growing. xcoolx

BDKJMU
February 24th, 2009, 06:00 PM
Damn, just skimmed over schedules & I caught only 5 of the teams last season that played 2 I-As. I see there were 18- that makes about 1/5 of the full scholly teams.

BlueHenBill
February 27th, 2009, 04:44 PM
How about Furman finalizing a date in a future season to come to UD to fullfill the home and home contract? IF UD ever enters into a home and home contract with Furman again (and I doubt UD would given what happened), UD would only do it after Furman comes to UD to make-up for this game not being played and UD would also require the Home game first under any new contract. This is a blow to the desire of most FCS fans to see more of these out of region FCS OOC games and scheduling agreements.

FURMANFAN
February 27th, 2009, 09:47 PM
When UD took the money the contract was fulfilled. It is really the height of hypocrisy that after UD if not aided certainly encouraged another school to drop a date to accommodate their needs that some UD fans would still rabbit on about breaking contracts. The mock outrage clung to so tenaciously to mask what amounted to a giant temper tantrum is now debunked.

Syntax Error
February 27th, 2009, 09:57 PM
When UD took the money the contract was fulfilled. It is really the height of hypocrisy that after UD if not aided certainly encouraged another school to drop a date to accommodate their needs that some UD fans would still rabbit on about breaking contracts. The mock outrage clung to so tenaciously to mask what amounted to a giant temper tantrum is now debunked.That's kinda my take too.

pitpen
February 27th, 2009, 11:27 PM
That's kinda my take too.

That's your typical anti-Delaware take.

GannonFan
February 27th, 2009, 11:56 PM
That's your typical anti-Delaware take.

Yup, 3 UD guys are prominent GPI-debunkers and hence the anit-UD stance in most things. Oh well. xlolx

FCS Go!
February 27th, 2009, 11:56 PM
So Delaware has replaced Furman with another school (Del St?) that had to "Furman" someone to play Delaware? Nice!

GannonFan
February 27th, 2009, 11:57 PM
When UD took the money the contract was fulfilled. It is really the height of hypocrisy that after UD if not aided certainly encouraged another school to drop a date to accommodate their needs that some UD fans would still rabbit on about breaking contracts. The mock outrage clung to so tenaciously to mask what amounted to a giant temper tantrum is now debunked.

Nah, no getting around it - UD got Furmaned, then Wagner got Furmaned. Nice try.

Syntax Error
February 28th, 2009, 12:22 AM
That's your typical anti-Delaware take.
...hence the anit-UD stance in most things. Oh well.Every school has obnoxious "fans" that claim that others are against their program if they do not share their exact viewpoint on everything. xrolleyesx xboringx The normal fans are great at every FCS sponsoring school as are the football programs. Just ignore the minority, obnoxious fringe. xthumbsupx

ChickenMan
February 28th, 2009, 08:03 AM
When UD took the money the contract was fulfilled.

Schools sign 'contracts' in order to play football games.. the 'money' was compensation for Furman's FAILURE to abide by the terms of the original contract. Rationalize and deny all you want.. but a rose is a rose...

mcveyrl
February 28th, 2009, 08:19 AM
When UD took the money the contract was fulfilled. It is really the height of hypocrisy that after UD if not aided certainly encouraged another school to drop a date to accommodate their needs that some UD fans would still rabbit on about breaking contracts. The mock outrage clung to so tenaciously to mask what amounted to a giant temper tantrum is now debunked.


Schools sign 'contracts' in order to play football games.. the 'money' was compensation for Furman's FAILURE to abide by the terms of the original contract. Rationalize and deny all you want.. but a rose is a rose...

He's right. A buyout is not "fulfillment" of a contract, it's their out that keeps UD for suing them for damages for a breach of the contract.

PaladinFan
February 28th, 2009, 08:28 AM
A buyout is most certainly a fufillment of a contract. It's not the optimal result both sides were looking for, but both teams got the benefit of their bargain.

Syntax Error
February 28th, 2009, 09:52 AM
A buyout is most certainly a fufillment of a contract. It's not the optimal result both sides were looking for, but both teams got the benefit of their bargain.Of course it is fulfillment of the contract... you play the game or pay the money. That is the deal. UD got the money, deal over. That doesn't mean the whining is over but the contract is fulfilled. It took UD a week or two to replace the game, big deal? They accepted getting paid without the chance of another L, good for the Hens! xcoffeex

Sir William
February 28th, 2009, 10:41 AM
This whole issue has become, in a word...BORING. What's done is done, like it or not. Furman will play Mizzou. UD accepted the buyout money and will find (or has found) a replacement. Case closed. Both FU and UD will continue to represent the best of FCS. If the two never play again during the regular season, so be it. Other FCS schools have bought out contracts and others will do it in the future (UD not excluded or righteously immune from doing such). One can argue about such subjective matters as "circumstantial integrity" and "situational ethics" to no end. The point is that there may be two sides to this story to which none (or few) on this board are actually privy.

Get over it. Move on. And best of luck to the Blue Hens in the CAA next year.

WildCat In The Hat
February 28th, 2009, 10:53 AM
regardless of all legalities, i'm bummed because it probably would have been a real good (playoff atmosphere type of) game.

UncleSam
February 28th, 2009, 11:18 AM
Compensation in the terms of money never excuses improper behvior, it just compensates for that bad behavior. We see that type of payoff in other areas of life, Michael Jackson compensating ($$$) victims to drop criminal cases, insurance companies compensating ($$$) plainiffs to settle out of court and so on.

Furman's breaking the contract was unethical and the cash payment doesn't make it any less unethical.

bleedblue
February 28th, 2009, 11:27 AM
Every school has obnoxious "fans" that claim that others are against their program if they do not share their exact viewpoint on everything. xrolleyesx xboringx The normal fans are great at every FCS sponsoring school as are the football programs. Just ignore the minority, obnoxious fringe. xthumbsupx

Indeed. Opps I am supposed to be ignoring you.

GannonFan
February 28th, 2009, 11:32 AM
Every school has obnoxious "fans" that claim that others are against their program if they do not share their exact viewpoint on everything. xrolleyesx xboringx The normal fans are great at every FCS sponsoring school as are the football programs. Just ignore the minority, obnoxious fringe. xthumbsupx

So I'm now "obnoxious" and part of the "minority...fringe"? How to win friends and influence people, huh? xrolleyesx

LarryBoy
February 28th, 2009, 12:18 PM
Compensation in the terms of money never excuses improper behvior, it just compensates for that bad behavior. We see that type of payoff in other areas of life, Michael Jackson compensating ($$$) victims to drop criminal cases, insurance companies compensating ($$$) plainiffs to settle out of court and so on.

Furman's breaking the contract was unethical and the cash payment doesn't make it any less unethical.

How can one break a contract through methods clearly established by the contract? Provisions are built into these contracts to protect both schools' interests, financially and otherwise. This is just one such provision, one that is protecting Delaware financially, and Furman is abiding by that provision. Buy-out clauses are one of the most commonly used and exercised options in sports finances. It happens with players, coaches, and yes, college football teams, every single year.

Syntax Error
February 28th, 2009, 12:56 PM
So I'm now "obnoxious" and part of the "minority...fringe"? How to win friends and influence people, huh? xrolleyesx

Excuse me? Did I say anything about you? No, I did not. I said "Every school has obnoxious "fans" that claim that others are against their program if they do not share their exact viewpoint on everything." I advised "The normal fans are great at every FCS sponsoring school as are the football programs. Just ignore the minority, obnoxious fringe." I did not say anything about YOU. Sorry that you felt included or left out. xcoffeex

UncleSam
February 28th, 2009, 02:05 PM
How can one break a contract through methods clearly established by the contract?


Delaware contracted a home/home series with Furman to play a football game at AT Delaware, as well as a game at Furman. They did not contract the series to be paid for NOT playing a scheduled game at Delaware. UD held up it's end of the bargin and played their contracted game at Furman. Furman FAILED to hold up their end of the contract and as a result, they HAD to pay UD $$$ as compensation for their unethical behavior. Anyone who thinks Furman abided by the terms of the original contract by paying compensatory $$$ is delusional.

FURMANFAN
February 28th, 2009, 03:55 PM
Delaware contracted a home/home series with Furman to play a football game at AT Delaware, as well as a game at Furman. They did not contract the series to be paid for NOT playing a scheduled game at Delaware. UD held up it's end of the bargin and played their contracted game at Furman. Furman FAILED to hold up their end of the contract and as a result, they HAD to pay UD $$$ as compensation for their unethical behavior. Anyone who thinks Furman abided by the terms of the original contract by paying compensatory $$$ is delusional.

No just someone who deals in contracts daily. Contracts are designed to handle contingencies; the date can't be kept, the shipment will be late or short, or not arrive at all. Most of the time this is because vendors assign their resources to more profitable work. This is how business is done and anyone who thinks college athletics isn't business is naive.

I know some of you are going to continue to cling to this nonsense. So be it. What I want to know is how can the highminded Hens be a party to dumping Wagner. Are Wagnerians such a lowly lot that their treatment is immune to censure? This can't be about money, of course not. It's all about competition and building relationships. That is unless UD needs a home game. The DSU-UD ageement dumping Wagner gives the lie to all this moral bluster.

Furman has been on both sides of buyouts. I'm certain they consider them neither unethical or even questionable. UD on the other hand if this writer and certain of their fans are to be believed does. Yet Wagner be damned. Which school is really ethically ambiguous? If something is wrong, it's always wrong regardless of circumstance.

UncleSam
February 28th, 2009, 04:22 PM
What I want to know is how can the highminded Hens be a party to dumping Wagner. Are Wagnerians such a lowly lot that their treatment is immune to censure? This can't be about money, of course not. It's all about competition and building relationships. That is unless UD needs a home game. The DSU-UD ageement dumping Wagner gives the lie to all this moral bluster.



It amazes me that some Furman fans refuse to admit that FU acted not illeagllly, but unethically.

Also UD didn't dump Wagner and if Delaware had a contracted game with Wagner, they never would. DSU, not Delaware, is the school that broke the agreement with Wagner. If you want comparisons, it's Furman rather than UD, that now can be compared to DSU...... ;)

PaladinFan
February 28th, 2009, 05:48 PM
I'm about to take my nice copy of Summers and Hillman and start beating some people in the head.

FURMANFAN
February 28th, 2009, 09:56 PM
It amazes me that some Furman fans refuse to admit that FU acted not illeagllly, but unethically.

Also UD didn't dump Wagner and if Delaware had a contracted game with Wagner, they never would. DSU, not Delaware, is the school that broke the agreement with Wagner. If you want comparisons, it's Furman rather than UD, that now can be compared to DSU...... ;)

Concerning contractual agreements there is no higher ethic than legality. And encouraging bad (by your definition) behaviour is the same ethically as doing it yourself. And trying to hide behind the distinction is especially low rent.

93henfan
March 1st, 2009, 08:45 AM
Concerning contractual agreements there is no higher ethic than legality. And encouraging bad (by your definition) behaviour is the same ethically as doing it yourself. And trying to hide behind the distinction is especially low rent.

For somewhat that says they can't believe this issue is still being discussed, you sure are adding a lot of bandwidth to the conversation.

Bottom line is Furman caused the issue, so they have to deal with the criticism. All fallout, including the Wagner loss of a game, was due to the scenario set in motion by Furman.

We can let this thread die, and it will, but people will always invoke Furman's name in the future when people back out of contracts at the FCS level, especially at such a late juncture and having enjoyed a home game prior to welshing. Sure, schools have Furmaned other schools in the past, but now it has a name!xlolx

AppMan
March 1st, 2009, 09:24 AM
I get your point. Furman has been very fortunate to have played ACC, SEC, and Big East schools for many years. It is a tradition that the Players and Coaches look forward too. I'm sure it is sold to players during recruiting. Auburn is a big name but no bigger than Clemson or VaTech.

IMO these two teams make interesting matchups. Furman recruits very well in Bama, and with a new coach, new schemes, and playing Furman late in the year. Furman's players will love this match. Missouri, graduates a ton, but I'm sure has talent ready to step up. But Furman loves a matchup against an opponent not familiar with Furman's schemes. Plus this game puts Furman in the spotlight in another market for recruiting students. BL does a great job selling these games as an opportunity. Playing to that chip on the shoulder mentality that built the Furman program from the days of Dick Sheridan. This could be just what the doctor ordered to bring identity back to the program.

Just another example of some whiny ass Yankee attempting to tell us dumb Southerners what to do and how to live our lives. You have to keep in mind these Northeast liberals just don't understand how important playing top level football is to those of us in the South. Remember all the people on here telling the ASU faithful how stupid it was for our AD to schedule a game with Michigan where we had no chance of winning? Yea, I know it was a fluke. During the 80's ASU regularly scheduled two 1-A games per year and in 1990 & 1991 played THREE 1-A games. I'd much rather see ASU play tough competition than pick up easy wins over a D-II or weak FCS program and NO I'm not calling Delaware a weak FCS program! This clown needs to mind his own business and let Furman do what they think is in the best interest of their school. He probably doesn’t even realize Furman has beaten the Tar Holes several times. Good for you Furman for showing some stones.

AppMan
March 1st, 2009, 09:30 AM
Compensation in the terms of money never excuses improper behvior, it just compensates for that bad behavior. We see that type of payoff in other areas of life, Michael Jackson compensating ($$$) victims to drop criminal cases, insurance companies compensating ($$$) plainiffs to settle out of court and so on.

Furman's breaking the contract was unethical and the cash payment doesn't make it any less unethical.

No contract was broken. The buyout clause was a part of the contract. Furman exercised their rights as stated in the contract and Delaware agreed to it. Game, set, and match. Get over it.

apppackdad
March 1st, 2009, 12:20 PM
This Delawre whining is amazing. I suspect that come November, Furman will likely regret this decision. The Paladins will probably be sitting on the playoff
bubble, having given up a very winnable game against an FCS opponent from the "highly regarded" CAA for a probable loss against an FBS power conference team.

Furman has scheduled themselves into an incredibly tough mid-season stretch and reaching eight wins will be very hard. Football wise it makes very little sense. Economically it is pure genius. I suspect Ol' Bobby has visited the AD to ask him if he is out of his $$$$$$$ mind. The AD has to pay for the entire athletics program and not just consider football. In these economic times, one does not look a gift cash cow in the mouth!

Wouldn't it be ironic , if the FCS Selection Committee chose UD over FU for the last playoff spot. Looking at the schedules of the two it could happen.

Methinks UD fans may be more upset over being cornered into another game with DSU, than upset over losing Furman as an opponent!

henfan
March 1st, 2009, 12:55 PM
Methinks UD fans may be more upset over being cornered into another game with DSU, than upset over losing Furman as an opponent!

Some UD fans may be upset, but I wouldn't say that's the majority opinion.

While I'm disappointed that FU has chosen not to make the trip to Newark, I'm thankful that their decision made it possible for UD to schedule DSU a few seasons earlier than they otherwise would have. UD-DSU is sure to attract more interest from the locals and, with the FU buyout thrown in, this deal is certainly to work out to UD's financial and, perhaps, competitive advantage. xthumbsupx

Syntax Error
March 1st, 2009, 12:58 PM
Believe it or not, UD went out of its way to schedule DSU is what Tresolini is spouting now
http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57079

93henfan
March 1st, 2009, 01:04 PM
Believe it or not, UD went out of its way to schedule DSU is what Tresolini is spouting now
http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57079

I'll admit I haven't read the article yet, but from what I've heard, UD sweetened the payout on the games in consideration for none being played in Dover. Works good for everyone. More money for DelState and more home games for Delaware. In that respect, thanks Furman, from two schools in Delaware. xthumbsupx

apaladin
March 1st, 2009, 01:12 PM
It is my understanding the reason Furman dropped UD in favor of Missouri is that FU knew how bad UD wanted to play DSU and was anticipating being dropped by UD so they could play DSU. :D

apppackdad
March 1st, 2009, 01:21 PM
xeyebrowxAnyone notice a notable change in UD opinion about DSU from say............the fall of 2007on these boards. If this is truly legitimate, then it is heartwarming . Of course, I believe in Santa, the tooth fairy, and the imminent destruction of the earth due to global warming!xsmiley_wix

93henfan
March 1st, 2009, 01:25 PM
xeyebrowxAnyone notice a notable change in UD opinion about DSU from say............the fall of 2007on these boards. If this is truly legitimate, then it is heartwarming . Of course, I believe in Santa, the tooth fairy, and the imminent destruction of the earth due to global warming!xsmiley_wix

I can vouch for one Delaware fan and say I hope we continue to beat them 44-7 every time we play them.

I've always wanted to play DelState. Their campus is 15 minutes away from my house, about four times closer than my alma mater. The game does mean something to Delawareans. Two thirds of the UD student body are not from Delaware, so perhaps it means nothing to them. I can't speak for those people.

I will say that your last two posts show your lack of understanding of the situation, but that's cool. I don't profess to be able to understand how ASU feels about playing other schools in North Carolina, so I won't take wild guesses.

apppackdad
March 1st, 2009, 02:58 PM
Not trying to be insensitive or take this to smack level. I just seem to remember a level of disdain for the DSU program in the not so distant past from a significant faction of the UD fan base. When you combine this with the somewhat sanctimonious comments from this writer plus many of the posters on this topic, I think you can see where an outsider might consider it an interesting change of tone.

I believe that the AD at Furman did what he believed to be in the best interest of his school and the same for Delaware's AD given the situation. I truly believe that UD will come out the overall winner in all of this, if they have a better season than 2008.

App fans don't, as a rule, come rushing to the support of Furman athletics. I just felt that the UD fans/beat writer's reactions were a bit over the top.

mcveyrl
March 1st, 2009, 03:21 PM
I'm about to take my nice copy of Summers and Hillman and start beating some people in the head.

Feel free to, but the fact is the "benefit of the bargain" was you agree to play us at our place and we'll agree to play you at your place. The buyout is not an obligation either side has until they fail to fulfill the primary obligation, which is to play the game. A "buyout" clause is a glorified liquidated damages clause which basically says if you fail to fulfill obligation A, you can pay us X instead of us suing you for damages related to your failure to fulfill obligation A.

The buyout clause is an up front settlement of a breach of contract suit. No other way to slice it.

I have no problems with it, by the way. Buyout clauses/liquidated damages clauses allow people to make business decisions and allow things to operate more economically. If there were no buyout clause, Furman wouldn't know what it would cost to skip out on the game and wouldn't know their possible profits for playing Mizzou. It would make things a lot less certain. This way, Furman can say, "Okay, it's going to cost us X to skip out on UD and we will make Y playing Mizzou. Is the prospect of Y-X enough?" In this case it was.

PaladinFan
March 1st, 2009, 08:08 PM
Feel free to, but the fact is the "benefit of the bargain" was you agree to play us at our place and we'll agree to play you at your place. The buyout is not an obligation either side has until they fail to fulfill the primary obligation, which is to play the game. A "buyout" clause is a glorified liquidated damages clause which basically says if you fail to fulfill obligation A, you can pay us X instead of us suing you for damages related to your failure to fulfill obligation A.

The buyout clause is an up front settlement of a breach of contract suit. No other way to slice it.

I have no problems with it, by the way. Buyout clauses/liquidated damages clauses allow people to make business decisions and allow things to operate more economically. If there were no buyout clause, Furman wouldn't know what it would cost to skip out on the game and wouldn't know their possible profits for playing Mizzou. It would make things a lot less certain. This way, Furman can say, "Okay, it's going to cost us X to skip out on UD and we will make Y playing Mizzou. Is the prospect of Y-X enough?" In this case it was.

Completely true. I suppose that most Furman fan's contention is Delaware is made whole. They get their money.

I think the annoyance is that no one, really, but the Furman higher ups wanted to move this game. It's one of the sad facts of college athletics that these type of things happen. However, they do happen pretty regularly, and everyone just moves on about their business.

mcveyrl
March 1st, 2009, 08:41 PM
Completely true. I suppose that most Furman fan's contention is Delaware is made whole. They get their money.

I think the annoyance is that no one, really, but the Furman higher ups wanted to move this game. It's one of the sad facts of college athletics that these type of things happen. However, they do happen pretty regularly, and everyone just moves on about their business.

Yea, in that sense, Delaware did get what they bargained for in that they knew the alternative to getting a game was a buyout.

It is annoying (and I'm not a fan of either team, just FCS football), but a reality at our level.

YoUDeeMan
March 1st, 2009, 09:20 PM
Feel free to, but the fact is the "benefit of the bargain" was you agree to play us at our place and we'll agree to play you at your place. The buyout is not an obligation either side has until they fail to fulfill the primary obligation, which is to play the game. A "buyout" clause is a glorified liquidated damages clause which basically says if you fail to fulfill obligation A, you can pay us X instead of us suing you for damages related to your failure to fulfill obligation A.

The buyout clause is an up front settlement of a breach of contract suit. No other way to slice it.

I have no problems with it, by the way. Buyout clauses/liquidated damages clauses allow people to make business decisions and allow things to operate more economically. If there were no buyout clause, Furman wouldn't know what it would cost to skip out on the game and wouldn't know their possible profits for playing Mizzou. It would make things a lot less certain. This way, Furman can say, "Okay, it's going to cost us X to skip out on UD and we will make Y playing Mizzou. Is the prospect of Y-X enough?" In this case it was.

Well said. xnodxxthumbsupx

henfan
March 1st, 2009, 10:14 PM
I can vouch for one Delaware fan and say I hope we continue to beat them 44-7 every time we play them.

I've always wanted to play DelState.

Anyone who's followed my postings on the various message boards for the last 11 years knows that this has been my feeling as well.

There absolutely was an ardent group of message board posters against ever playing DSU and some appear to have warmed (or surrendered) to the idea.

Keep in mind that the majority of UD fans do not post- let alone, read- message boards. I'd suggest that the 15-20 UD fans who regularly post on AGS are not representative of our entire fanbase. It would be difficult to know what fans think without coming down to the ballpark and surveying all 20K of them. xpeacex

ASU
March 2nd, 2009, 05:35 AM
The buyout is not the issue.....

A school that signs a contract to play a home and home, should honor that contract....
It should honor that contract, regardless of how much more monies they could make by breaking it.

ChickenMan
March 2nd, 2009, 08:14 AM
My final word...

Furman and Delaware signed a contract to play two football games.. the first at Furman and the second at Delaware. One school honored that contract and one school didn't... no amount of 'spin' will ever change that fact.

OL FU
March 2nd, 2009, 11:19 AM
My final word...



xhurrayxxhurrayxxhurrayxxhurrayxxhurrayx
:Dxlolx:Dxlolx:Dxlolx:Dxlolx

Sir William
March 2nd, 2009, 02:15 PM
My final whine...

Fixed it for ya! xthumbsupxxsmiley_wix

jstclmet
March 2nd, 2009, 02:21 PM
IMO, the only thing that makes this pullout disappointing is that you had a "Conf A" (CAA) vs a "Conf B" (SoCon) matchup. Had this been a NEC/PL/PFL/Big So team pulling out for a pay day, I don't think many would have blinked twice.

I don't think FU was in the top 3rd of the SoCon, and nor was UD in the top 3rd of the CAA, but it would have still been an entertaining Conf vs Conf matchup.

At the end of the day, but teams benefitted. FU got their pay day. UD got their buyout plus an easier "W" on their schedule. At the end of the season, the importance of the game played on 9/19 will have little bearing on either team's post season (unless FU is one "W" short of getting into the playoffs).

89Hen
March 2nd, 2009, 02:25 PM
Why is this thread still alive? Furman took the money, will never get another chance to play UD (if they care) but did nothing illegal and Delaware filled the date. What else is there to say? xcoolx

PaladinFan
March 2nd, 2009, 02:26 PM
IMO, the only thing that makes this pullout disappointing is that you had a "Conf A" (CAA) vs a "Conf B" (SoCon) matchup. Had this been a NEC/PL/PFL/Big So team pulling out for a pay day, I don't think many would have blinked twice.

I don't think FU was in the top 3rd of the SoCon, and nor was UD in the top 3rd of the CAA, but it would have still been an entertaining Conf vs Conf matchup.

At the end of the day, but teams benefitted. FU got their pay day. UD got their buyout plus an easier "W" on their schedule. At the end of the season, the importance of the game played on 9/19 will have little bearing on either team's post season (unless FU is one "W" short of getting into the playoffs).

I'm just upset Furman can't win and hear Coach Keller go on about how the better team lost. :)

OL FU
March 2nd, 2009, 02:31 PM
Why is this thread still alive?

Cuz I had to rag chickenman who apparently isn't paying attention:(

blukeys
March 2nd, 2009, 09:08 PM
Why is this thread still alive? Furman took the money, will never get another chance to play UD (if they care) but did nothing illegal and Delaware filled the date. What else is there to say? xcoolx

Like Ol FU, I am keeping this thread alive for Chickenman!!!!

I love that guy!!!!xlolxxlolxxlolxxlolxxlolx

GannonFan
March 2nd, 2009, 09:25 PM
And hey, if not for this thread, how could we not spread the meaning of the word "Furmaned" to the masses???? xlolxxlolxxlolxxlolx

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=furmaned

blukeys
March 2nd, 2009, 09:44 PM
And hey, if not for this thread, how could we not spread the meaning of the word "Furmaned" to the masses???? xlolxxlolxxlolxxlolx

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=furmaned

Oh MY GAWWWD!!! This is hilarious!!!!

And so fitting.

I really feel sorry for the so many decent Furman fans out there.

This was so unneccesary.

YoUDeeMan
March 2nd, 2009, 10:00 PM
Anyone who's followed my postings on the various message boards for the last 11 years knows that this has been my feeling as well.

There absolutely was an ardent group of message board posters against ever playing DSU and some appear to have warmed (or surrendered) to the idea.

Keep in mind that the majority of UD fans do not post- let alone, read- message boards. I'd suggest that the 15-20 UD fans who regularly post on AGS are not representative of our entire fanbase. It would be difficult to know what fans think without coming down to the ballpark and surveying all 20K of them. xpeacex


Good to know UD only has 20,000 fans. xeyebrowx

Syntax Error
March 2nd, 2009, 10:07 PM
Why is this thread still alive? Furman ... did nothing illegal and Delaware filled the date. What else is there to say?No kidding but we all know why it is still alive. UD took the money, gets to make even more by playing the date still, against another team, and won't stand the chance to lose to Furman twice in a row. xsmiley_wix

Seriously, we all wanted the game to happen but both sides are making more money the way it turned out. xthumbsupx

seantaylor
March 2nd, 2009, 11:19 PM
Delaware is going to win big. Furman has really fallen off from what they use to be. No team speed, and coaching is very suspect.

Syntax Error
March 2nd, 2009, 11:25 PM
Furman has really fallen off from what they use to be. No team speed, and coaching is very suspect.Are you taunting Delaware? xeekx Last year... Furman 23 - Delaware 21.

henfan
March 3rd, 2009, 10:59 AM
Good to know UD only has 20,000 fans. xeyebrowx

Come on, Cluck. It was a figurative statement.

PaladinFan
March 3rd, 2009, 12:00 PM
Delaware is going to win big. Furman has really fallen off from what they use to be. No team speed, and coaching is very suspect.

This coming from the team who has lost three out of the last five to Furman? In 2007 Bobby Lamb outcoached Chris Hatcher under the table at Paulson Stadium. Last season both teams looked terrible, only GSU looked less terrible.

mcveyrl
March 3rd, 2009, 01:08 PM
Delaware is going to win big. Furman has really fallen off from what they use to be. No team speed, and coaching is very suspect.

My 2009 "Post That Makes it Obvious the Poster Hasn't Read the Thread and Only Follows Their Team"

PaladinFan
March 3rd, 2009, 03:00 PM
My 2009 "Post That Makes it Obvious the Poster Hasn't Read the Thread and Only Follows Their Team"

Well, I'll give him credit. At least we didn't have to read about the 30 four star athletes GSU signed this year. again.

blukeys
March 3rd, 2009, 09:33 PM
Well, I'll give him credit. At least we didn't have to read about the 30 four star athletes GSU signed this year. again.

I could be wrong but I thought the number was closer to 90 four star athletes. And for the record all of their Defensive linemen run 4.4 forties. Of course all of the skill people run 4.1 forties.

VT Wildcat Fan53
March 3rd, 2009, 09:46 PM
UNH can drop St. Francis and pick up Furman -- don't know if the dates match up, though.