Printable View
When did Texas State move up to Division I FBS? They were known as Southwest Texas State, I seem to recall and were an FCS school. Around 2008 or so they moved up. Most famous alums are LBJ and George Strait.
Okay, just did a quick search: their biggest football rivalry was Nicholls State...and now they have blown past us headed for the PAC-12. Yeah, it's not the same PAC-12 but is better in name and prestige than either CUSA or the Belt.
Mediocrity R US! :icon_roll:
TXST has 41,000 students. A $400 million endowment, and an $800 million annual budget; $175 million spent on research. A 500-acre main campus...oh, and the estimated population with 75 miles of campus: 5,000,000.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
This ^^^^^^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden
Now if we could get NLU to drop to the Southland, we would be perfect!
no tennis against ulm. They dropped that program today. I wonder what that saves them. The scholarships are being shifted to other sports.
The Lincoln Parish Journal reported today that Coach Lane Burroughs hired former ULM head coach Mike Federico as Coach for Player Development.
It would be but after all these decades, ULM has managed to survive. Barring interference from others ULM is here to stay, much to the dismay of many including current SBC fans.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgFaninHous
Totally agree..... When we first moved up to what was called 1a at the time and tied Maryland in the Indy Bowl, my hopes were VERY high for our future. The WAC (when it was a big step up) was in our sights, then (when CUSA formed), I thought we would head there. After that, I was hoping we would invest and, eventually, try for a P5. I had much loftier goals for Tech and the belt was in our rear view mirror. Going Independent was a great step to build upon and, then, join a good conference and keep moving up. The reality was that the good names left when we got to the WAC and the same happened when we moved to CUSA. With a few exceptions, all those teams kept moving in the right direction and we just stagnated and now find ourselves falling to the belt. Many see it as a good thing with regional rivalries, but the truth is the name of the conference and the name of the teams associated with it will always be a step down. We will go back to being thought of as a half step above FCS with in-state rivals that are viewed as little league on the national stage.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
My goal was obviously much loftier than the leaders at Tech. I saw us eventually being a Virginia Tech or Georgia Tech. We will now end up lumped with the Louisiana directional teams - even if they took the direction out of their name. Most people will lump us in with FCS teams like Nichols and McNeese - even if we are a small step ahead being FBS. TCU did it right and it looks like Texas State will be on the same path, even if the Pac 12 isn't what it used to be.
NIL has all but killed NCAA athletics, so investing heavily to get in a better conference is foolish. There’s no way we can come close to competing with the few resources that we have. If we manage to get in the Belt, it would be better than where we currently find ourselves, so that’s an easy decision to make. Maybe it would spark a little interest and excitement in the fan base, or what’s left of it.
Well, you can look at it this way: the "powers that be" are killing college athletics as we have known it, so! being left behind is no big deal.
Person A: Tech has missed the train.
Person B: True, but the train isn't heading anywhere anyway.
Some of these numbers we could have sniffed with proper management at any time in the last 50 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by CARTEK
Others we were never going to touch.
A wise strategy would have been to use what we had in an effective way to go as high as we possibly could.
We failed and now those doors are forever closed.
The student body size clearly has nothing to do with it. There are smaller schools that Tech (and some around the same size) that are in P4 conferences. It is about budget, endowment, and whatever population base you count for tv viewership. Of course, people in whatever population is counted have to watch Tech sports (mainly football). You could have a 5 million person population and none of them watch your team - instead they watch another. A good example of this was UTSA, but they are overcoming that.
I logged in after lunch to check in with the ole BBB on this topic - then it hit me, I don’t really care anymore - put us in a conference home somewhere from the SEC to the Southland…..and be done with it.
The conference realignment, NIL, transfer portal has all but crushed my GAS for college athletics.
It has boiled down to about 32 teams that will break away from the NCAA and jet from game to game on an unlimited budget to while the rest of us bus back and forth and cut Olympic sports.
If we are asked to be in the SBC, we better try to be the best value add they have ever seen and commit to that conference.
All I am concerned about at this point is a team that is good (wherever it is) and fun to watch.Quote:
Originally Posted by faninmonroe
For a decade we have been neither good nor fun to watch in any sport, so the GAS meter is below 0.
Baseball has been a 7 but could have been a 9.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
Football has been a sub 5 going back to Holtz' last 3 years.
MBB has been a 6 just because, but they ALWAYS choke due to poor coaching.
None of the other sports matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SicemDawgz
Just consolidate all the non-power conferences schools. At this point it doesn't matter. ESPN and the big boys have ruined college football. Retaining good players at the non-power level is going to be hard to impossible.