I'm sure our AD is courting the AAC.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by techdawg28
Printable View
I'm sure our AD is courting the AAC.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by techdawg28
fifyQuote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Courting the AAC for a job, not for opponents.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
Why? I disagree. It's really true. We're in a conference where HALF the teams (FIU, FAU, UNT, Charlotte, Rice, UTEP and UAB) consistently rank among the worst in America almost every year. Furthermore, Marshall has cratered from what was once a proud program, and it was only a couple of years ago that USM ended the longest losing streak in the nation, and their basketball team has been on probation since the biginning of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
How much more proof do you need? :laugh:
And despite all that, we've consistently been the bridesmaid.Quote:
Originally Posted by HogDawg
I'm not saying you're wrong in any of the above. But we have to win it. The fact that most of the other teams suck only gives us less excuse.
Stay focused HD
that would be funny......Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
.....if it did not appear to be so dang true.
There is no doubt we should be doing everything that needs to happen behind the scenes to become the next member of the AAC. When we were in the WAC most fans wanted to get into the CUSA. At the time, the WAC and CUSA were on somewhat equal footing in football, with the WAC perhaps being a little better. The reason most Tech fans wanted into CUSA was to have more regional matchups.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
When the conference landscape of college football changed, we were finally invited into CUSA. The only problem with that was CUSA had become a lessor conference with the creation of AAC to take in the Big East schools left out of the Power 5. Some of the best programs in the CUSA went into AAC. That left us in CUSA with the bottom programs, a bunch of SunBelt and FCS schools.
Our acclaimed history, along with the very solid programs of today deserve to be in a better conference. Forget about the number of conference championships. Our football program has a national reputation, despite having four different head coaches in the last 11 seasons. Two of those coaches were hired to lead Power 5 programs. The team draws well in bowl games and plays a very exciting style of football, regardless of the lack of a solid defense. The men’s basketball program also has been hurt by the fact of having four different head coaches during the last 11 seasons. We lost one coach to a Power 5 program; but have still averaged over 20 wins during those 11 seasons. Additionally, the basketball program has the burden of playing in a one bid league.
I think it would be prudent to compare our success in the revenue sports over the last decade to current AAC schools to determine how competitive we may be. The following list is the number of wins and bowl appearances for each AAC school and Tech, in football:
Houston 87 wins and 8 bowl games
Cincinnati 86 wins and 9 bowl games Big East school
Navy 85 wins and 9 bowl games
Tulsa 76 wins and 7 bowl games
Central Florida 75 wins and 7 bowl games
East Carolina 71 wins and 7 bowl games
LOUISIANA TECH 70 wins and 5 bowl games
Temple 67 wins and 4 bowl games Big East school
South Florida 66 wins and 6 bowl games Big East school
UCONN 57 wins and 5 bowl games Big East school
Memphis 52 wins and 5 bowl games
SMU 45 wins and 5 bowl games
Tulane 34 wins and 1 bowl game
A look at basketball revels much of the same expected success for Tech:
Memphis 256 wins, 7 post season tournaments (5 NCAA’s)
UCONN 236 wins, 8 post season tournaments (6 NCAA’s) Big East school
Cincinnati 226 wins, 9 post season tournaments (7 NCAA’s) Big East school
Temple 218 wins, 8 post season tournaments (7 NCAA’s) Big East school
LOUISIANA TECH 213 wins, 5 post season tournaments (0 NCAA’s)
Tulsa 205 wins, 7 post season tournaments (2 NCAA’s)
SMU 190 wins, 4 post season tournaments (2 NCAA’s)
Houston 184 wins, 5 post season tournaments (1 NCAA)
UCF 172 wins, 3 post season tournaments (0 NCAA’s)
East Carolina 148 wins, 3 post season tournaments (0 NCAA’s)
Tulane 137 wins, 2 post season tournaments (0 NCAA’s)
South Florida 120 wins, 2 post season tournaments (1 NCAA) Big East school
The data suggests we would be competitive in both large revenue sports. During these years we were 5-5 in basketball and 2-5 in football against AAC schools. During the last decade, we have had four different athletic directors, which would be considered a large amount of turnover. Let’s consider these four gentlemen, we had one political appointee (Oakes), one part-timer (Dooley), the worst AD in major college sports history (Van De Velde) and the youngest in Division 1 (McClelland). Despite the turnover and incompetence, we were still very competitive over the last decade. Not to mention four of the AAC schools were in the Big East during the last decade. With that they received much more tv money, BSC Bowl access and were in a league with multiple NCAA tournament bids. Despite this Tech produced similar results.
We were also burdened during much of this time with a President who did not put a lot of effort or consideration towards athletics. We now have a President who seems to care much more about the success of the athletic program. Perhaps our AD will grow into the job. Our facilities are improving every year, our attendance is acceptable and would only grow in the AAC and we have a solid national reputation. We also provide solid attendance at our bowl games. Furthermore, I am confident we would draw a lot of fans at some of the AAC opponent’s fields and coliseums. We could be very strong at Houston, SMU, Tulane and perhaps even the Florida schools.
I think all our programs would benefit from playing in the AAC. Perhaps, one of the greatest benefits would be playing basketball in the AAC. We are currently in a league where there will only be 1 NCAA bid and perhaps no NIT bids. That would not be the case in the AAC, as they draw multiple bids every year.
There is no argument against Louisiana Tech not doing everything possible to gain entrance into the AAC, in my opinion. It may prove to be a tough and expensive move, but for the growth of the athletic program this is a must. The future isn’t in CUSA, but is in the AAC. We have all heard of national talk show folks state that the AAC closer to the bottom of the Power 5 than they top of the Group of 5 in football. Success in this conference would allow us greater access to national rankings, NCAA and NIT bids, New Year’s Day bowl bids and grow our athletic budget. Our conference shares and tv money would grow, additionally ticket revenue and alumni/booster donation would grow as well. Not to mention if the Big 12 or any other Power 5 conference expands we must be prepared to move up in conference when the dominos start to fall. THIS IS A MOVE WE MUST PUT FORTH EVERY EFFORT TO ACHIEVE AND THE TIME TO START IS NOW!
I would say that our wanting to leave the WAC (for valid reasons including Mr. Peanut Head) was a contributing factor causing it to implode. I was never for going to C-USA after the initial offer wasn't forthcoming because everything played out the way I thought it would. Looking at history of our last two moves we find that when we joined the WAC the schools we wanted to play left - TCU, Tulsa, SMU, Tulane. By the time we were invited to join C-USA the same thing happened - Houston, Tulane (ok stayed one year), SMU, Tulsa. To me it shows there is no way for us to improve in the G5 setting by changing conferences. The AAC would be ok if the best schools don't move on leaving the bottom dwellers. All we ever get is just a bare notch above the Sunbelt (how many ex Sunbelt teams do we have?) and about equal to the MAC. We need to stay where we are and kick ass until we prove we are the highest quality G5 school. In addition we need to beat Miss. State, S.Car., LSU (next year) and Texas the year after. Only then will we get the recognition for us to really move up.
Where is it, exactly, that you think there is to move up to? You said yourself that the SMU's, Tulsa's, and Tulane's of the world want nothing to do with us. Do you think Houston, Memphis, or UCF are any different? The correct answer to that question is a resounding NO. We're where we're going to be for quite a while. CUSA is today no better than the Sun Belt. The addition of the two Florida schools was a terrible mistake, and while we were busy adding those two terrible programs, the SBC added App St and Georgia Southern as replacements. They got the best of us in that deal, that's for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Houston Techsan
That's no reason not to try.Quote:
Originally Posted by brtransplant
Forget about the "Pretend 6th". Our next move needs to be to the Big12 after winning a few Access Bowl games. We're on the right path.
For some reason the BIG12 has made more sense to me over the last couple of years more so than the AAC, the fit seems better. Yea, I Know....that is just a pipe dream, but is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by DogsWin
Geographically it makes a lot of sense, we seem to be a better fit with those teams and are not that athletically inferior to them at all. Somehow I think we are not the only ones thinking this way, this may be in the back of the minds of some of the BIG12 folks also.
Budget, Budget, Budget....that will be our biggest sticking point and if Tmac would start cultivating our small donors, we might have a chance of growing our budget within a few short years.
Then again maybe my meds are affecting my judgement a little!
Houston, Memphis, UCF, USF, BYU, Boise, and SDSU are just the first seven schools that I can think of that would get into the Big 12 in front of us. There are others. There is absolutely no chance whatsoever that Tech will ever be in the Big 12, but that's alright. There's no hope for any other member of CUSA to ever get into a P5 conference either. My hope is for Tech to become a stable G5 athletic program with competitive FB, MBB, WBB, and BB programs that all qualify for bowl games and NCAA tournaments more years than not. If we do this, we'll garner enough support that we'll be able to keep our programs and facilities in top shape. We've got to be able to pay our coaches enough to keep them from leaving for other G5 opportunities (pretty much done), and we've got to complete the renovation of JAS (the aluminum wings must go and be replaced with some kind of permanent seating in the north end zone that brings symmetry back JAS).Quote:
Originally Posted by DogsWin
We can all enjoy one heck of a nice athletic program right where we are if we manage things properly. Our experience with the WAC and CUSA has proven to me that everyone has an elevated opinion of THEIR program and that everyone aspires to gain P5 status. Sooner or later we all get around to accepting reality, and life as a G5 conference member is our reality for the foreseeable future.
Well we got WKU and MTSU from them (big whoop!)Quote:
Originally Posted by brtransplant
When I say move up, it is in perception of the program (respectability) and scheduling. If we can win C-USA and become the best G5 then we will get some big bowl bids and maybe some of the big money, and then we can think on a higher plane. How can we possibly be respected when our home games on national TV show too many empty seats? Let's see if we can fill our stadium by scheduling quality opponents at the Joe. Mississippi State will be the first test. We didn't fill it the last time we played. If we beat NSU (not a given knowing our past history) the Joe should be full. If not then meh. If we don't care why should anyone else?