Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
I edited my post above regarding Rice.
The more I read and hear, the more I think Rice to the AAC would probably not happen. Rice would likely have a negative impact on the AAC every year if the G5 has a guaranteed spot in a 12-team playoff.
Also, an interesting twist regarding UAB. Apparently, the University of Alabama Board of Trustees allowed UAB football to come back under the condition they not pursue a P5 bid at any point in the future and not be a competitor to Alabama. AAC may be their limit.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwayne From Minden
We will be fighting basically over half a cookie...
Not even a whole piece of cake -
IRS needs to step in and make all donations to Athletic Club Foundations non-deductible - that may bring back a tad bit of sanity to college athletics (which is an oxymoron if you think about mentioning the IRS and sanity in the same sentence)
I agree.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DallasDog
Which is why a MBB team that can make the tournament on a regular basis will become even more valuable once the super conferences come online. It’s always been the best possible ROI, but now for a lot of schools it maybe the only significant way to make any money.
I'm not so sure. I give to LA Tech mostly because of our football program. I love the basketball team too, but I'm not "in it" for the basketball. If the school minimized football's importance at Tech, I probably wouldn't be near as devoted and as interested in giving. That's just me, but I suspect a lot of other donors are "football fans first" like me in that regard. I'm not interested in LA Tech becoming the next Wichita St. Just my opinion.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Historian
I edited my post above regarding Rice.
The more I read and hear, the more I think Rice to the AAC would probably not happen. Rice would likely have a negative impact on the AAC every year if the G5 has a guaranteed spot in a 12-team playoff.
Also, an interesting twist regarding UAB. Apparently, the University of Alabama Board of Trustees allowed UAB football to come back under the condition they not pursue a P5 bid at any point in the future and not be a competitor to Alabama. AAC may be their limit.
Well that's interesting. I hadn't heard about that UAB tidbit.
There's a lot of unrest in CUSA East. Marshall, ODU, Charlotte and maybe one or two more are big complainers, and have a big desire to disassociate themselves from the "Texas schools". They think the "Texas schools" have too much influence on CUSA. They complain about the basketball tournaments always being played in Frisco and about having to travel to UTEP. They also think too many of the bowl games are in western CUSA, and they don't like the fact the CUSA offices are in Texas. Mostly petty stuff.
But Marshall is a FOOTBALL school, and they really like the football being played in the Sunbelt BETTER than what's being playing in CUSA. Marshall fans are salivating over all the positive publicity that ULL, Coastal Carolina, Georgia Southern (who spanked us in a bowl game) and Georgia St are getting for football. On that note, I must confess LA Tech has played Marshall 3 times and laid down like scared kittens every time.
Don't be be surprised if Marshall (and possibly ODU, UAB or FAU) are invited to leave CUSA for the Sunbelt, or some restructured Sunbelt, that focuses on football. It probably won't include ULM.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
There is no scenario where we come out better than where we are in football. Even if we win every game 5 years in a row, it doesn’t matter. The only teams that will play for the championship will be the champions of each super conference.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
I don’t want to be the next Wichita St. at all. I want the reoccurring units from MBB tournament and increase in tickets, concessions etc, that actually comes close to paying for itself or turning a profit.
It’s the South, football will drive the boat, but the pond our boat is on stands a very real chance of shrinking to a puddle with the superconference concept coming, NIL, and the like.
I would never want to be a Wichita St, but I wouldn’t mind being a Gonzaga with a solid football program that is competitive and wins it’s conference regardless of the pond size.
Tech in our current configuration will never win a National title in football, or at least not for a very very long time. It’s very unlikely we would make the playoff barring a spot reserved for every conference champion not just the highest G5 at the table.
We could challenge for a National title in basketball because right now if we win our tournament we have that reserved spot. Then it’s settled on the court, in football it’s settled in the conferences boardrooms, before the ball every gets tossed onto the field.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Historian
And Tulane would have no problem being in a conference with Tech. They voted for us to join CUSA both in 2004 and 2012.
Who voted against us in 2004?
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dawgonit
Who voted against us in 2004?
Thankfully a group that isn't around anymore. Southern Miss' AD at the time, along with Memphis' president.
They convinced a big enough number that UTEP was a better choice.
That group began to regret it almost immediately.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HogDawg
Don't be be surprised if Marshall (and possibly ODU, UAB or FAU) are invited to leave CUSA for the Sunbelt, or some restructured Sunbelt, that focuses on football. It probably won't include ULM.
I get the impression that ULM is in no danger of being voted off the island. I think if the Sunbelt was going to "cull the herd", they would start with UTA and UALR (non-football schools) before they would look at ULM, but you may have additional info that I don't have.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ChuckK3
I get the impression that ULM is in no danger of being voted off the island. I think if the Sunbelt was going to "cull the herd", they would start with UTA and UALR (non-football schools) before they would look at ULM, but you may have additional info that I don't have.
I agree that if the Belt intends to build a better conference, they will start with kicking out the non-football schools. ULM might be the 3rd one, though. They do not bring anything to the table in TV revenue. Honestly, we need to be thinking MUCH bigger than the belt, though. Their brand is not good due to the no-name schools involved. No matter what they do, it will still be the Sun Belt and that conference is not going anywhere. Schools would bail if the could, even for CUSA. You have to build a confernce on name recognition and the money will follow. I really see a brand new 16 team G5 conference that will be made up of some belt, some CUSA, and some AAC teams that make the cut. It will be based on name recognition and the POTENTIAL of market and winning. It would be very difficult to ignore a conference with just the biggest names in G5, excluding almost all directional schools and losing teams. High academics might play a part, as well. It is about potential, not about current market and that is where we come in... It was the mistake in the origninal CUSA before us. They thought that if you played in a big city, it meant more potential market. That wasn't and never has been true. It is about name recognition and the potential national market. UTSA is a good example of a school that will never bring in a ton of market, even though they are in a huge city. There is a reason that schools like Auburn and Okie State have more potential. It is because of name recognition and a more national base. The money will follow, when you have a name. If you get in a P5, the money starts coming in anyway. Look at TCU before and after their move to a P5. They had a name and were doing okay as a G5, but that changed dramatically for the better once they were actually IN a P5. It helps not to have a P5 team already in your name association, as well. UT in your name hurts any team. It is the same with UAB and other schools that are part of the system of a P5.
We have a small problem with being in the UL system and ULL trying to act like they are the main program by calling themselves UL. They are not P5, though, and we do not have any part of their name. ULM is screwed, because they took the bait. They went from being a directional name to a lower member of the UL name. We are not directional and do not have the perception nationally of being a directional or lower member of a big system - all due to keeping our Louisiana Tech name. We need to take advantage of that now. It should be no different than Virginia Tech, Texas Tech, etc... We just have to act, instead of waiting around.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
champion110
We have a small problem with being in the UL system and ULL trying to act like they are the main program by calling themselves UL. They are not P5, though, and we do not have any part of their name. ULM is screwed, because they took the bait. They went from being a directional name to a lower member of the UL name. We are not directional and do not have the perception nationally of being a directional or lower member of a big system - all due to keeping our Louisiana Tech name. We need to take advantage of that now. It should be no different than Virginia Tech, Texas Tech, etc... We just have to act, instead of waiting around.
I would like to see some leadership try to work with ULL. Make a deal to split the university of Louisiana system in two, keep a University of Louisiana system, and we get a Louisiana Tech System. In addition to that, we will support them becoming the University of Louisiana if they support a Louisiana Tech Medical school. They finally to get have their nondirectional name and get to be a flagship school of their system- we get a medical school and we are the flagship of our own system. We would have to work together against the LSU folks in BR of course.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dawgonit
I would like to see some leadership try to work with ULL. Make a deal to split the university of Louisiana system in two, keep a University of Louisiana system, and we get a Louisiana Tech System. In addition to that, we will support them becoming the University of Louisiana if they support a Louisiana Tech Medical school. They finally to get have their nondirectional name and get to be a flagship school of their system- we get a medical school and we are the flagship of our own system. We would have to work together against the LSU folks in BR of course.
In principle I like this, but you can't trust them.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Champ967
In principle I like this, but you can't trust them.
It's pretty much a pipe dream anyway. LSU politicians wouldn't allow it and even if they could accept it, I am sure ULM, Northwestern and McNeese would try to derail any attempt of being underneath Tech or ULL.
One can wonder though at the thought of a Medical school, our bioengineering program, ULM's Pharmacy school and Northwestern's Nursing program all under the Louisiana Tech name.
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Historian
Thankfully a group that isn't around anymore. Southern Miss' AD at the time, along with Memphis' president.
They convinced a big enough number that UTEP was a better choice.
That group began to regret it almost immediately.
UTEP made a bad choice to leave the WAC. They just fit better with these guys than CUSA during that time. UTEP would most likely be in the MW conference today if they would of stay put.
2005 WAC with UTEP
UTEP
Fresno State
Hawaii
Boise State
San Jose State
Nevada
Utah State
Idaho
NMSU
2005 CUSA with Louisiana Tech
USM
UAB
Memphis
Tulane
Houston
ECU
UCF
SMU
Tulsa
Marshall
Rice
Louisiana Tech
Re: Tech's best possible, REALISTIC conference movement
Quote:
Originally Posted by
qng001
UTEP made a bad choice to leave the WAC. They just fit better with these guys than CUSA during that time. UTEP would most likely be in the MW conference today if they would of stay put.
2005 WAC with UTEP
UTEP
Fresno State
Hawaii
Boise State
San Jose State
Nevada
Utah State
Idaho
NMSU
2005 CUSA with Louisiana Tech
USM
UAB
Memphis
Tulane
Houston
ECU
UCF
SMU
Tulsa
Marshall
Rice
Louisiana Tech
Now, THIS would have been a fun conference:
2005 CUSA with Louisiana Tech
USM
UAB
Memphis
Tulane
Houston
ECU
UCF
SMU
Tulsa
Marshall
Rice
Louisiana Tech
But, I must say, before the WAC started falling apart, this was a very fun conference lineup too:
SMU
Rice
Tulsa
LA Tech
Boise St
Fresno St
Nevada
SJSU
Hawaii
Utah State
