« on: May 05, 2013, 09:49:27 am »
TQ - You asked for explanation. I gave you several examples and #1 was Easy. Am I missing something? Pretty low-key conversation? Between you and I. Yes it was. A part from that I had everyone of My Opinions attacked and scrutinized by The Great One. That I didn't feel was low-key. Questioning " how much I know about D3 ", not low key. And, his yucks about what comes first, with some kind of inside joke about a chicken. I'm glad the SLIAC was able to be part of the punch line.
The question I asked regarding the regional aspect of a Div. of the NCAA. No response?
Basically TQ, you may have mistaken the explanation points behind my easy first choice, as being meant for you. They weren't.
I'm having somewhat of a hard time following what you are upset about, Denny. So just a few thoughts...
1) I went back and read this entire conversation and I honestly don't think you are being attacked by anybody.
2) You did make some pretty controversial statements that naturally elicited some responses. For example...
- "Take Principia out, there is No Way a FU or any other SLIAC school can compete with any CCIW schools on packaging. Not for a student athlete or any other student."
- "Basically my view of Division III members are either State Schools or High Profile Private schools. I truly do not believe that the SLIAC schools are part of the Div. III profile."
- "Kids do not want to go to a commuter school."
- "It just really gets under my skin the way the SLIAC has always been treated. If they want the league in DIII, then quit bad mouthing it."
What makes this forum great is the number of different opinions represented, like yours above. But realize when you make debatable points (and many of your points in this conversation have been "debatable"), you're going to get a little healthy debate coming back. You seem a little surprised/offended that you've gotten pushback -- remember, the stronger the opinions you make, the stronger the counter points will be from those who feel otherwise. Neither party is in the wrong - it's all good.
3) Greg's reference to a chicken was a jab at two IWU fans/posters (Mr. Ypsi and IWU70...long story) -- it had nothing to do with the SLIAC. I re-read his comment and don't really see how you took that as a jab at the SLIAC.
Bottom line, I don't think you have been "attacked" at all in this conversation. "Scrutinized"? Sure. But you certainly posted some things that welcomed healthy scrutiny.