Texas has NOT talked to Big Ten

[Blake]

the Big 10 sends party invites to Notre Dame on an almost daily basis.

[Kermit]

Btw, great thread.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=188&f=1650&t=7769534&p=1

I haven't seen a lot of these.

[NFO]

the Big 10 sends party invites to Notre Dame on an almost daily basis.

I don't see anything anywhere from any real source that says the Big 10 sends Notre Dame party invites almost on a daily basis.

I have to call b.s. on that rumor.

[stretch]

I don't see anything anywhere from any real source that says the Big 10 sends Notre Dame party invites almost on a daily basis.

I have to call b.s. on that rumor.

[benefactor]

I don't see anything anywhere from any real source that says the Big 10 sends Notre Dame party invites almost on a daily basis.

I have to call b.s. on that rumor.

[Blake]

nor will you, but multiple sources have confirmed they have talked recently, which can mean nothing or a lot. Probably was nothing more than a meeting to gauge interest, etc...

if it's legit, then a credible source should have picked it up by now.

The rumor that they talked?

The part that said Notre Dame and UT held hands while going into the Big 10 meeting and laid out their demands.

Notre Dame keeps saying no and neither school really have a reason at this point to be proactive in trying to join another conference.

[Blake]

I don't see anything anywhere from any real source that says the Big 10 sends Notre Dame party invites almost on a daily basis.

I have to call b.s. on that rumor.

since it's only a messageboard fool saying it, that's probably a good call on your part.

[stretch]

if it's legit, then a credible source should have picked it up by now.

generally, where there's smoke, theres fire, even when "credible" people, or the people involved themselves deny deny deny. even though I like to with you (lol harrell lol tech), i know you are a pretty smart dude, and are most definitely smart enough to know that.

how big the fire is the better question. there isnt a doubt in my mind that some sort of talk has taken place between UT and the big 10. doesnt mean it went far, and it probably hasnt.

[NFO]

if it's legit, then a credible source should have picked it up by now.

I don't know what you consider to be a credible source, so I can't say if a credible source has picked it up yet by your standards.

The part that said Notre Dame and UT held hands while going into the Big 10 meeting and laid out their demands.

They were purposed terms first off. Second the rumor states that each party should do what is best for each party and that they preferred the status quo than to joining the Big 10. Third, like I said you can believe what you want. If you think this rumor is B.S. than more power to ya.

Notre Dame keeps saying no and neither school really have a reason at this point to be proactive in trying to join another conference.

Kind of like how the SEC said in August that they were happy with the current alignment and then 2 weeks later voted to accept Texas A&M, right??

ND will continue to say no until it has to say yes. Everyone knows that.

[Blake]

I don't know what you consider to be a credible source, so I can't say if a credible source has picked it up yet by your standards.

an actual media sponsored web site quoting university sources would do.

some slappy throwing out on a messageboard doesn't do.

They were purposed terms first off. Second the rumor states that each party should do what is best for each party and that they preferred the status quo than to joining the Big 10. Third, like I said you can believe what you want. If you think this rumor is B.S. than more power to ya.

I do think that Notre Dame and UT meeting up with Big 10 officials last night is BS until someone with rep confirms it.

It's rather silly to think that a meeting like that could happen with such secrecy.

More power to your silly beliefs.

Kind of like how the SEC said in August that they were happy with the current alignment and then 2 weeks later voted to accept Texas A&M, right??

wrong

The SEC talk about being happy was clearly for legal purposes because of the Baylors of the world.

ND will continue to say no until it has to say yes. Everyone knows that.

exactly, which makes a meeting of this type make little sense.

[Blake]

generally, where there's smoke, theres fire, even when "credible" people, or the people involved themselves deny deny deny. even though I like to with you (lol harrell lol tech), i know you are a pretty smart dude, and are most definitely smart enough to know that.

how big the fire is the better question. there isnt a doubt in my mind that some sort of talk has taken place between UT and the big 10. doesnt mean it went far, and it probably hasnt.

There have obviously been no formal talks.

No reason to think there havent been some informal phone calls here and there between school officials to test the waters.

[NFO]

an actual media sponsored web site quoting university sources would do.

some slappy throwing out on a messageboard doesn't do.

Other sources have confirmed the meeting. Not just the individual at on the message board. I take that post with a grain of salt, but that particular poster has been correct more often than not last year on things of expansion nature.

You are not going to see a media sponsored web site quoting a university source with this, because it is no in their interests to seek the media coverage.

A poster in a previous page has referenced another source other than that message board.

I do think that Notre Dame and UT meeting up with Big 10 officials last night is BS until someone with rep confirms it.

Good for you.

It's rather silly to think that a meeting like that could happen with such secrecy.

Are you re ed? based on your previous responses I seriously have to ask at this point.

More power to your silly beliefs.

My belief that something can happen without a media outlet confirming said event. I'm really reaching there. I'm pretty sure secret meetings happen all the time in this world whether it be in regards to sports, publicly traded companies and yet those meetings go largely unreported by media outlets.

wrong. The SEC talk about being happy was clearly for legal purposes because of the Baylors of the world.

You missed the point, not surprising, and then made some other random statement.

exactly, which makes a meeting of this type make little sense.

How does it not make sense. It was a contingency meeting in case the Big 12 were to completely dissolve and super conferences began to form. I don't get how you think that doesn't make sense. You honestly don't think schools are meeting behind closed doors discussing what happens if X happens, or Y happens.

[Blake]

Other sources have confirmed the meeting. Not just the individual at on the message board. I take that post with a grain of salt, but that particular poster has been correct more often than not last year on things of expansion nature.

great, link these sources.

You are not going to see a media sponsored web site quoting a university source with this, because it is no in their interests to seek the media coverage.

so who is the original source that knows of this meeting?

A poster in a previous page has referenced another source other than that message board.

what is the source?

Good for you.

Butthurt for you.

Good entertainment for me.

Are you re ed? based on your previous responses I seriously have to ask at this point.

you are the one defending a rumor from a random poster on a Northwestern fanboard.

I've got a better reason to call you re ed, tbh.

My belief that something can happen without a media outlet confirming said event. I'm really reaching there. I'm pretty sure secret meetings happen all the time in this world whether it be in regards to sports, publicly traded companies and yet those meetings go largely unreported by media outlets.

good for you and your silly beliefs.

You missed the point, not surprising, and then made some other random statement.

Your analogy was pretty re ed, tbh.

How does it not make sense. It was a contingency meeting in case the Big 12 were to completely dissolve and super conferences began to form. I don't get how you think that doesn't make sense.

As long as the Big 10 teams continue to schedule Notre Dame year in and year out and ND continues to love their independence, the Irish have absolutely no reason to be proactive in requesting a meeting to discuss joining.

Honestly, if the Big 10 wants Notre Dame, they need to just remove them from the schedules altogether and force their hand.

You honestly don't think schools are meeting behind closed doors discussing what happens if X happens, or Y happens.

who went to this meeting for UT?

who went to the meeting for Notre Dame?

where was the meeting held?

who is the source that is leaking this info to a Northwestern University messageboard poster?

5. The Longhorn Network would remain independent until approximately 2014, at which point the network would become a part of an expanded Big Ten Network (specifically referred to as "BTN2"), likely either in partnership with Fox, NBC, or less likely ABC

how would the Longhorn Network run by ESPN be more likely to partner with Fox or NBC and less likely to partner with themselves?

[NFO]

great, link these sources.

Um, nope. Google it yourself.

so who is the original source that knows of this meeting?

an individual.

what is the source?

an individual

Butthurt for you.

You use the word "butthurt" way to much. Probably a common word for you with your lifestyle.

you are the one defending a rumor from a random poster on a Northwestern fanboard.

Not defending the rumor. Where have I supported the rumor. I said it was interesting "if" true. You are the individual who thinks that if a source is not identified than a story is not true. If that was the case you probably were in denial of the Watergate scandal becuase "deepthroat" was an unidentified source (until his death bed) that brought down Nixon as president.

I've got a better reason to call you re ed, tbh.

OKay.

Your analogy was pretty re ed, tbh.

Yeah and your response to that analogy didn't even acknowledge the point being made, and just went on some other random tangent. Usually when a point is being made you don't just go off and spout off something random that has nothing to do with the original point being made.

Honestly, if the Big 10 wants Notre Dame, they need to just remove them from the schedules altogether and force their hand.

Sure. Piss someone off before inviting/forcing them to the conference. I'm sure that would go a long way into making ND think about joining the Big Ten.

who went to this meeting for UT?

who went to the meeting for Notre Dame?

where was the meeting held?

You read the rumor. None of those things were identified. Why don't you contact the poster on that messageboard and Joe Lullon and ask them your questions. But you asking me to answer those questions when you already know the answer proves your inep ude.

who is the source that is leaking this info to a Northwestern University messageboard poster?

an individual that works at the big ten office if you go by Joe Lullons information, who is not the same person as the poster on the Northwestern board.

how would the Longhorn Network run by ESPN be more likely to partner with Fox or NBC and less likely to partner with themselves?

Those questions were not answered in the rumor. Quit pretending like I made up the rumor and have any and all answers to it. I merely posted the link for discussion purposes and you turn everything into absolutes. It is just a discussion bro, get over your loser ego and just participate in the discussion.

[Blake]

Um, nope. Google it yourself.

an individual.

an individual

I did google it.

I found it to be a bull rumor.

Your continued butthurt over me calling it bull is fantastic though.

You use the word "butthurt" way to much. Probably a common word for you with your lifestyle.

You are way too "butthurt" about this, tbh.

Not defending the rumor. Where have I supported the rumor. I said it was interesting "if" true. You are the individual who thinks that if a source is not identified than a story is not true. If that was the case you probably were in denial of the Watergate scandal becuase "deepthroat" was an unidentified source (until his death bed) that brought down Nixon as president.

you:

Other sources have confirmed the meeting...........but that particular poster has been correct more often than not last year on things of expansion nature.

you clearly think that there might be something to this rumor.

I think there is nothing to this rumor at all and I think you are stupid for falling for it.

I'm simply making fun of you running with a silly rumor and making even more fun of you getting butthurt about it in the process.

Yeah and your response to that analogy didn't even acknowledge the point being made, and just went on some other random tangent. Usually when a point is being made you don't just go off and spout off something random that has nothing to do with the original point being made.

I pointed out why your analogy was a failure.

It was rather simple to do.

Sure. Piss someone off before inviting/forcing them to the conference. I'm sure that would go a long way into making ND think about joining the Big Ten.

If that's the case it further solidifies the point that the Big 10 needs ND more than ND needs the Big 10.

.....which again would make little sense for ND to be proactive in reaching out to the Big 10.

You read the rumor. None of those things were identified. Why don't you contact the poster on that messageboard and Joe Lullon and ask them your questions. But you asking me to answer those questions when you already know the answer proves your inep ude.

Again, I'm simply calling BS on the rumor you posted and it's clearly chapping your hide.

The easiest ways to ease your pain would be to either (1) back up what you post or (2) stop posting.

an individual that works at the big ten office if you go by Joe Lullons information, who is not the same person as the poster on the Northwestern board.

lmfao.

who the is "Joe Lullons"?

Those questions were not answered in the rumor. Quit pretending like I made up the rumor and have any and all answers to it. I merely posted the link for discussion purposes and you turn everything into absolutes. It is just a discussion bro, get over your loser ego and just participate in the discussion.

Right, those questions weren't answered in the rumor. That's why I asked those questions. Rather re ed of you to not get that, tbh.

Since you nor anyone else can answer those questions and more, I'll continue to call bull and if the current trend continues, you will continue to stay "butthurt".

[NFO]

you clearly think that there might be something to this rumor.

No I just posted the link yesterday, because I knew you would go ape on it like did last year in the same thread over the same topic, that is the entertaining part.

Never said I believed the recent rumor, you make to many assumptions.

I think there is nothing to this rumor at all and I think you are stupid for falling for it.

My opinion on the rumor is I'm pretty sure ND and/or Texas has conversations with the Big Ten recently about a contingency plan if certain things happen. The conversations were not meant to be proactive in actually join the conference, but as a last resort scenario. Nothing more nothing less. Was it as detailed as the message board poster laid out, probably not. Don't know, don't really care.

I'm simply making fun of you running with a silly rumor and making even more fun of you getting butthurt about it in the process.

You are the one asking re ed questions, making piss-poor assumptions, going off on random tangents. I just get a kick out of what crazy you say next.

I pointed out why your analogy was a failure.

It was rather simple to do.

No you didn't. You ignored the point in the analogy and spouted off some other random thing that had nothing to do with my point. I don't think you understand the word analogy. Must be that Tech education kicking in.

If that's the case it further solidifies the point that the Big 10 needs ND more than ND needs the Big 10.

Where did I ever say that ND needs the Big 10 more than the Big 10 needs ND. This just proves you make up random that you think people say or have said.

.....which again would make little sense for ND to be proactive in reaching out to the Big 10.

Who said ND was proactively looking for a conference. You are the only individual that has even mentioned that.

Again, I'm simply calling BS on the rumor you posted and it's clearly chapping your hide.

Like I said I mainly posted it to get you riled up like it has in the past.

The easiest ways to ease your pain would be to either (1) back up what you post or (2) stop posting.

What pain The only pain I have is the pain for anybody that has to put up with you on a daily basis. I feel pain for those individuals.

who the is "Joe Lullons"?

I meant Joe Lull, my apologies.

Right, those questions weren't answered in the rumor.

So you can read.

That's why I asked those questions.

I can understand the questions, but if no one was going to provide you the answers, what is the point in asking them. Who ever said there was not any stupid questions, has never taken a question from you.

Since you nor anyone else can answer those questions and more, I'll continue to call bull and if the current trend continues, you will continue to stay "butthurt".

Blake's Butthurt

[Blake]

No I just posted the link yesterday, because I knew you would go ape on it like did last year in the same thread over the same topic, that is the entertaining part.

Never said I believed the recent rumor, you make to many assumptions.

Lol at the backpedaling.

You clearly made a post implying the rumor might have legs. I just quoted it.

Let me know if you need to see what you said again.

My opinion on the rumor is I'm pretty sure ND and/or Texas has conversations with the Big Ten recently about a contingency plan if certain things happen. The conversations were not meant to be proactive in actually join the conference, but as a last resort scenario. Nothing more nothing less. Was it as detailed as the message board poster laid out, probably not. Don't know, don't really care.

I pretty much called this rumor bull .

You got butthurt.

You still appear butthurt, even in the midst of the backpedaling.

You are the one asking re ed questions, making piss-poor assumptions, going off on random tangents. I just get a kick out of what crazy you say next.

Asking for a source is not re ed. Falling for a ty rumor is.

I'm not assuming much other than the rumor is full of and you thought it had enough legs to want to re-post it here.

good stuff.

No you didn't. You ignored the point in the analogy and spouted off some other random thing that had nothing to do with my point. I don't think you understand the word analogy. Must be that Tech education kicking in.

I absolutely did.

I don't think you know that you actually used an analogy.

Where did I ever say that ND needs the Big 10 more than the Big 10 needs ND. This just proves you make up random that you think people say or have said.

You missed my point about the probability of ND meeting with the Big 10 the other night.

I'm not sure you understand what the word point means.

Who said ND was proactively looking for a conference. You are the only individual that has even mentioned that.

I'm not sure you fully read the rumor and that the things that Joe Lull has said.

"He [Lull] acknowledged TV contract issues, and said both schools already made presentations to Big Ten officials."

http://www.mlive.com/sports/index.ss...to_big_te.html

I'm not sure you know what "proactive" means.

Like I said I mainly posted it to get you riled up like it has in the past.

I simply called it , and you got yourself riled up about it.

well played.

What pain The only pain I have is the pain for anybody that has to put up with you on a daily basis. I feel pain for those individuals.

the pain displayed in the last few pages of this thread.

Extremely visible to those of us that can see your backside burning.

I meant Joe Lull, my apologies.

oh, the local Cleveland weekend sports radio hack Joe Lull that has been getting shat on and accused of making this up.

no apology necessary.

So you can read.

I'm not sure you can.

I can understand the questions, but if no one was going to provide you the answers, what is the point in asking them. Who ever said there was not any stupid questions, has never taken a question from you.

here's a simple one:

is it a bull rumor?

yes or no.

Blake's Butthurt

holy ! Look at all of those law breakers!

lmao Clarett

lmfao Tressel

[NFO]

Lol at the backpedaling.

You clearly made a post implying the rumor might have legs. I just quoted it.

That quote you posted in no way implies I thought "that" specific rumor had legs. You are the one doing the implying. Not me.

I pretty much called this rumor bull .

Yeah we got that the first 1,395 times you said it. If you have nothing else to add to the thread maybe you shouldn't be posting in it. We know you think the rumor is BS. move on.

You got butthurt.

lol at an adult using the word "butthurt" like it is the coolest word in the 6th grade.

Asking for a source is not re ed.

Um, yes it is. If sources had to be named there would be no sources in instances like this if the rumor is true. Do you really think Joe Schad, other ESPN people, Yahoo sports break all their stories without sources. Most go unnamed.

I'm not assuming much other than the rumor is full of and

You have assumed my posts have other meanings. So you have assume the rumor is bull , pretty much called the rumor bull . Way to cover your ass on that one, so IF the rumor happened to be true you can say I assumed it was BS and I pretty much thought it was BS. Way to go out on a limb there buddy.

you thought it had enough legs to want to re-post it here.

No that was not my reason for posting the link. Once again you have made the wrong assumption yet again. Notice a pattern of wrong assumptions being made on your part.

You missed my point about the probability of ND meeting with the Big 10 the other night.

No I didn't. You mentioned that:

As long as the Big 10 teams continue to schedule Notre Dame year in and year out and ND continues to love their independence, the Irish have absolutely no reason to be proactive in requesting a meeting to discuss joining.

That is false. If the super conferences form that ND AD said a seismic shift could change their thought process on being in a conference. So the purpose of the "alleged meeting" was to present terms if that seismic shift were to occur so they were being "proactive" in case that seismic shift were to occur and not being "proactive" in joining the conference right now.

If nothing changed then your point would have merit, but once again you missed the boat that if a seismic shift were to occur then ND was being "proactive" if such a change were to occur.

I'm not sure you fully read the rumor and that the things that Joe Lull has said.

"He [Lull] acknowledged TV contract issues, and said both schools already made presentations to Big Ten officials."

I have not read every single thing he has posted on the subject. But TV issues with Texas and ND would be issues for either team IF they were to join a new conference.

I'm not sure you know what "proactive" means.

I am aware of what the word means, I'm pretty sure you are assuming the wrong idea again like you consistently do with my posts as well as other posters here.

I simply called it , and you got yourself riled up about it.

Could of swore you assumed it was wrong or "pretty much" thought it was bogus.

Extremely visible to those of us that can see your backside burning.

You have a sad case of denial bro. Ask anyone here they all think you are a tool.

oh, the local Cleveland weekend sports radio hack Joe Lull that has been getting shat on and accused of making this up.

Good for Mr. Lull. What sources are calling him a hack. I demand sources

here's a simple one:

is it a bull rumor?

yes or no.

Can I assume it is false like you or "pretty much" call it BS like you previously have. That sounds 100% definitive to me.

holy ! Look at all of those law breakers!

haters gonna hate no matter what. Tech was just happy to get to play in Ohio Stadium, take their pay day and ass raping and go home smiling.

[Blake]

That quote you posted in no way implies I thought "that" specific rumor had legs. You are the one doing the implying. Not me.

So we finally agree the rumor is bull ?

Yeah we got that the first 1,395 times you said it. If you have nothing else to add to the thread maybe you shouldn't be posting in it. We know you think the rumor is BS. move on.

Na, I'll go ahead and keep posting to see how much more butthurt and backpedalling will come of it.

lol at an adult using the word "butthurt" like it is the coolest word in the 6th grade.

yeah, it's fun to call someone butthurt that's butthurt and watch as they get even more butthurt.

Um, yes it is. If sources had to be named there would be no sources in instances like this if the rumor is true. Do you really think Joe Schad, other ESPN people, Yahoo sports break all their stories without sources. Most go unnamed.

Ummmm.......no it's absolutely not.

Difference is that those guys have reputations to uphold and get paid to prove their stories have merit.

A weekend sports radio hack just made a bit of a name for himself thanks to this rumor.

...and sinc hee couldn't back up his tweets with any real sources, he has now been shown to be a silly fool.

You have assumed my posts have other meanings. So you have assume the rumor is bull , pretty much called the rumor bull . Way to cover your ass on that one, so IF the rumor happened to be true you can say I assumed it was BS and I pretty much thought it was BS. Way to go out on a limb there buddy.

So leave nothing for anyone to assume.

Is the rumor full of or not?

No that was not my reason for posting the link. Once again you have made the wrong assumption yet again. Notice a pattern of wrong assumptions being made on your part.

Your reason for posting doesn't matter in regards to you believing if it's true or not.

You said this:

"Other sources have confirmed the meeting...........but that particular poster has been correct more often than not last year on things of expansion nature."

If you are saying Im assuming too much here, you are either backpedalling hard or you are just re ed and can't understand the words you used.

either way, lol.

That is false. If the super conferences form that ND AD said a seismic shift could change their thought process on being in a conference. So the purpose of the "alleged meeting" was to present terms if that seismic shift were to occur so they were being "proactive" in case that seismic shift were to occur and not being "proactive" in joining the conference right now.

Notre Dame will never get left out of a superconference.

You're re ed if you think they think they will get left out.

You're even more re ed if you think they could ever get left out.

I have not read every single thing he has posted on the subject.

No .

Could of swore you assumed it was wrong or "pretty much" thought it was bogus.

Face value it looked pretty much bogus or wrong.

After that, it took some simple googling to show it's a pile of .

You have a sad case of denial bro. Ask anyone here they all think you are a tool.

it's so awesome to watch people like you get hurt when someone else exposes their posts as .

Good for Mr. Lull. What sources are calling him a hack. I demand sources

I called him a hack. It's right there with my name on the post.

Your ability to read sucks, tbh.

Can I assume it is false like you or "pretty much" call it BS like you previously have. That sounds 100% definitive to me.

That's not a yes or no and I'm just asking for your opinion.

Again, your ability to read sucks.

haters gonna hate no matter what. Tech was just happy to get to play in Ohio Stadium, take their pay day and ass raping and go home smiling.

if you say so.

lol Pryor

[NFO]

So we finally agree the rumor is bull ?

Never said it was true. Now what is the opposite of true. Come I think you can get this one right, well maybe.

Na, I'll go ahead and keep posting to see how much more butthurt and backpedalling will come of it.

Dude, everyone here knows your a tool. If you want to see butthurt so bad, just go to the thread where you ask for marital advice on this board, that is butthurt.

Na, I'll go ahead and keep posting.

Great, more BS from a BS poster.

yeah, it's fun to call someone butthurt that's butthurt and watch as they get even more butthurt.

From someone who has probably experienced the most butthurt on this board, I'm sure you do like to watch butthurt or experience first hand.

Ummmm.......no it's absolutely not.

Difference is that those guys have reputations to uphold and get paid to prove their stories have merit.

Ok. Start naming Joe Schaad's sources, Chris Mortensen's sources, Chad Ford's. You can't name a ing one. There is a reason sources go unnamed.

A weekend sports radio hack just made a bit of a name for himself thanks to this rumor.

Perhaps he did. Maybe be smart or dumb move for him, we'll see.

So leave nothing for anyone to assume.

Well when you are consistently wrong in assuming ones views then yes, you specifically stop assuming what other posters think. You have been wrong almost 100% of the time when assuming other posters thoughts regarding their posts. I know, you probably get your jollies off doing that, which is fine since that probably fills a void in your pathetic life.

Your reason for posting doesn't matter in regards to you believing if it's true or not.

You said this:

"Other sources have confirmed the meeting...........but that particular poster has been correct more often than not last year on things of expansion nature."

If you are saying Im assuming too much here, you are either backpedalling hard or you are just re ed and can't understand the words you used.

All I said was that particular poster had been correct in the past on somethings, not all, on the expansion topic. That in no way implies whether or not I thought the rumor was true. I know words are hard for you.

Notre Dame will never get left out of a superconference.

You're re ed if you think they think they will get left out.

You're even more re ed if you think they could ever get left out.

All I said was, "If the super conferences form that ND AD said a seismic shift could change their thought process on being in a conference. So the purpose of the "alleged meeting" was to present terms if that seismic shift were to occur so they were being "proactive" in case that seismic shift were to occur and not being "proactive" in joining the conference right now."

Where did I say ND would get left out of a superconference. No where.
you reaching for stuff. Keep reaching bro.

it's so awesome to watch people like you get hurt when someone else exposes their posts as .

Well I just exposed your last comment as . So how does it feel to watch your self get butthurt. Although I'm sure you probably do that at home all the time in front of a mirror so I'm going to have to assume you enjoy it a lot.

I called him a hack. It's right there with my name on the post.

Well if you are calling yourself a credible source, then I have to call BS. I guy that posts on message boards in regards to the dollar menu can't be very credible.

Your ability to read sucks, tbh.

lol Pryor

Good one. At least tOSU didn't fire their coach because ESPN told them to do so.