Printable View
With the AAC's emphasis on basketball, it seems like we could be an attractive candidate. I realize we are way behind in terms of overall athletic budget. That said, if we could make the tournament and maybe win a game or 2 the AAC would take notice. Do you guys think Dr. Guice will pursue this?
No money
We need to do whatever it takes to gain admission imo. Borrow! Beg! Barter! Bribe! Whatever it takes....
We wouldn't be their first choice, but eventually they would look at us. It might take certain schools leaving and certain schools being called up, but we would make it eventually. I just hope we make it there before we end up in a conference with ULL.
http://www.smu.edu/~/media/Images/Ne...04&w=425&la=en
I think we get into AAC depending on who they lose.
If they lose a Memphis/Tulane (Big XII could want N.O. market - even though that is LSU's), they could possibly turn to us (luckily we are playing good Football/Basketball right now).
If they lose Houston, I could see them selecting UTSA/Rice
If they lose Cincy/East Carolina (not likely), They could add Marshall
Nope. And I'm I'm totally okay with that. Let's jjust build a strong CUSA.
This. We aren't totally out of that conversation, just way down on the list. We still have a long way to go.Quote:
Originally Posted by HogDawg
I think we would have to add about $10 million a year to our budget to even be considered.
I agree. We just need to keep winning. The AAC is not that much better than C-USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by HogDawg
Same could be argued for C-USA vs SunbeltQuote:
Originally Posted by DONW
We need that just for CUSA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
Disagree. I think CUSA is much closer to AAC than Sunbelt is to CUSA. Just look at Sunbelts TV, Bowls, and Revenue.Quote:
Originally Posted by boxerdog
If I'm not mistaken, I think the average budget of AAC members is in the neighborhood of $42,000,000. I think given that number, the amount you stated is probably close.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
I don't deny that. However, weren't some of those things negotiated before the defections of SMU, Tulsa, East Carolina, and Tulane?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigdog13
Part of the TV deal, but the bowls have been a moving target since they announced and the dominoes started falling. The new C-USA contract with sinclair and ASN has great potential vs. zero potential for the Sunbelt's TV package.Quote:
Originally Posted by boxerdog
Yes but wasn't the AAC's negotiated with Louisville for example, as a part of the conference? But even still when our new deal is negotiated. Have no doubt it will remain light years better than the Sunbelts.Quote:
Originally Posted by boxerdog
We'd be better than the Sunbelt's if we didn't have a contract...which they don'tQuote:
Originally Posted by Bigdog13
One of the main parts of an athletic budget is the cost of education I would think and the difference from cost at La. Tech and SMU, Rice, Tulane and Tulsa would be a lot of money.
If you strip out the difference the budgets may not look nearly as great as just looking at the
raw total numbers.
I think we do. But we need a promised bigger budget as stated above by Tech77. Also as stated our being pretty good in MBB and Football really helps right now. Likewise, our Tier 1 status/academics is a huge positive for AAC's private school votes.
And we've obviously been conference mates in the WAC with some of these guys.
So jack up the cost of tuition for athletes. Then the scholarship are bigger.Quote:
Originally Posted by ETXBULLDOG
Bada-bing, bada-boom.
No, it was with the current roster. Can be renegotiated if two of Houston, Cincinnati, Temple, or Connecticut leave, if ESPN wishes to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigdog13
Just losing Louisville dropped the AAC average about $5 million. I think the current average is no more than the mid-30M range. It would take a mid-20M budget plus other factors to get serious consideration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof!
I would be ok with that as well if everybody else in CUSA was ok with that, but everybody is itching to jump ahead into the AAC.Quote:
Originally Posted by HogDawg
Correct. The schools the AAC spoke to back in 2011 when the realignment game was put on hold were Rice and Southern Miss. How attractive is CUSA without Rice, Southern Miss, and UAB? What if realignment continues and four schools leave CUSA for the AAC and UAB is long gone? Tech must plan for what its facing in the next 18 months. If we're not invited to the AAC, someone else in CUSA will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by KSDAWG
And regarding USM, if budget is a factor USM is only in the low-20M range.
I know this is super simple, but it takes 1,000 alums/supporters giving $1,000 a year to equal $1 million. We would probably need to increase our budget by about $5 million to $7 million. We must do a better job involving those alums who currently give nothing, or almost nothing.
While I'm not excited about all things our AD is doing, I think he gets what you describe above. He has pounded this message in EVERY pregame interview this year and every other interview I've heard him do. He is also sending out letters leading up to the bowl game. One thing different he is doing that I've never heard done before is asking for ANY SIZE donation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
Like season tickets, LTAC commitments aid them in setting the budget. I'm glad to see and hear him seeking help from the common folk.
Or just one guy with a long beard or bald head. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
The AAC would be doing good to get name teams. I would consider Louisiana Tech, Southern Miss, and UTEP to have the most name recognition in CUSA - UTEP being too far out of the footprint.
Yes, before they weren't that interested in the small donations. What they didn't realize is people start small and as their incomes go up they can do more. I like the "any size" message.Quote:
Originally Posted by maddawg
Gonna let that slide.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal&Ken
Since you're a lady and all ...
:laugh::laugh:Thank you Champ,:laugh::laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
Budget size comprises so many things: Tickets sold being one of them.
:laugh:...good one!
not as good as the one where Cajuns ask about the Big 12Quote:
Originally Posted by no1cajunfan
I don't believe we should leave C-USA unless (1) we get and invite to the Big12 (little chance) or (2) it becomes the Belch.
It already is Sunbelt Lite. If we miraculously get an invite to the AAC there is no doubt that we should take it. There is a hierarchy in conferences and the AAC is the next step up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Houston Techsan
If we go to the AAC I would almost guarantee the teams we want to play (Houston, ECU, Tulsa, SMU) will have already gone and then it becomes the next Sunbelt Lite.
I agree. Those schools want nothing to do with us and I'm finished worrying about it. If a Sunbelt Lite is what you want to call our current conference, so be it. We are who we are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Houston Techsan
Actually, Houston and several others like Cincy and UConn may be gone, but ECU, Tulsa and SMU are likely in the AAC for the long haul. Their geography will really hamper their ability to move up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Houston Techsan
Actually, we never had problems with SMU, Tulsa, or ECU. Memphis on the other hand.... And that may be Tech's biggest advantage in the next round of realignment. Our biggest detractors may have moved up in the process.Quote:
Originally Posted by brtransplant
Tulane hates our guts. Feeling is mutual fo sho!Quote:
Originally Posted by The Historian
tuck fulane
To add to this... SMU's president was arguably our biggest ally in getting our WAC invite, and ECU's AD was one of our biggest allies in getting into C-USA. ECU's AD is gone, but SMU's president is still there.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Historian
Say what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg06
Smoo U could not care less about Tech.
I was at our final game against SMU in Dallas and had my radio on. As Tech pummeled the Mustangs on the field their radio announcers were proclaiming their glee that they would soon not be in the same conference with such a Podunk school as Tech.
I hate Tulane. Could care less about ECU and Tulsa. I love were we are but also concede that if you aren't moving up you are dying.
Shouldn't expect anything less from SMU people. They rival Ivy League grads in their delusional snobbiness, imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
No love for SMU and it's 5 season ticket holders. That being said I want to stay in a conference with as many SWC teams as possible. Rice, SMU and Houston are alway preferred Conference mates to me.
Good thing SMU's radio announcers don't sit on the AAC Board of Directors or chair the membership committee. Boise State got the WAC invite so the WAC could get a tie-in to the Humanitarian Bowl. The last spot in the WAC came down to Tech and NMSU after they quietly rejected Utah State, Idaho, North Texas, Arkansas State, and ULL. SMU's Prez lobbied for Tech and NMSU over the others because he said we would help best build the WAC's national reputation. Tech got the invite over NMSU due to geography (Las Cruces too close to UTEP). And he's still SMU's prez today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
I would be thrilled if we got an invite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg06
We are gonna need three more years similar to this year. By that I mean division titles, championship game appearances, big bowl games and solid MBB seasons. Not losing to to ULL in basketball, and NSU in football
Okay, compared to UState, Idaho, NTexas, AState,NMexSt and uslull, yes, Tech had/has a better national reputation. Didja hear the C-USA's talking heads on their weekly show when Marshall beat Tech for the championship? They were all over themselves justifying Marshall's win being a great one cuz of Tech's reputation . . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg06
So, long story short, of course Smoo's prez was for Tech. But in the long run . . . . . .don't think so.
One school would have SMU's support for AAC membership before Tech and that would be Rice. We would have their support for any opening past that. Reneau is long-time friend of their president, and even after his retirement he will have a say in what happens on their campus. Also, SMU was our biggest ally in our attempt to get into CUSA in 2004.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgpix
I know some of you don't want to believe this, but Tech has been selling itself for so long on so many levels when it come to realignment that we've actually convinced leaders at other schools of our worth as a possible addition to other leagues.
Correct. All you have to do is look at Tech and NMSU's academics compared to the rest and you will see why SMU lobbied for these two.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg06
Every conference, and every school, is looking out for its own best interest. When a conference needs to go looking for new members, they will take the best available, even if they classify it as "taking the lessor of the "evils"", and if that is how Tech gets invited over some other schools....so be it. Can't make certain prezzes at certain schools like us, if they don't.
Focus on what you have control of. Build Tech and its programs and its facilities and keep pushing forward.
I totally agree with you, but I wish our own fans and alumni would stop thinking of us as "lesser". We have a bigger name than most realize and our facilities (while needing improvement) are getting better and better. We are no longer that "lesser" program. Academics and athletics are far and above most G5 programs and better than many P5 ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
My point is that we need to get over that "poor pitiful us" and start thinking of ourselves as a rising power. Perception is everything and we need to give off that vibe!
That definitely wasn't pointed at your post, Dawg80. I understand your point about other Presidents. I just wanted to remark about our own self image and how we project. Our name is known and becoming more known every day. We are a catch for a conference like the AAC. We should be shooting higher that that, though. Take what we can get now, but as you stated, keep pushing forward. Use TCU as an example.
Good post, Champion110. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by champion110
Champ:
You guys in Texas, like HD and others, are always posting that Tech has a better reputation there, and in other states. But, for those of us in the ole home state, we get an earful of bashing about how we are no better than Nicholls, and others....
I know Tech has surged ahead in so MANY areas, and there is separation. But, I also know it isn't a huge gap and the state legislature (ala UAB) could pull some political shenanigans.
Anyway, we just have to keep on, keeping on!
Ask any sports fan in Canada how many NCAA schools they can name in Louisiana and most will say two. Tech and the school in BR.
We have done a poor job in Louisiana and need to keep the separation growing in the minds of the people there. I know they find it hard to grasp. I travel a LOT (mostly in Texas, but all over). I rarely find that someone has never heard of Louisiana Tech. Our name is known. If I say Tech in Texas, they no longer assume Texas Tech like they did in the 90's. They now ask Texas or Louisiana? There are a few "Texas, Louisiana, or Virginia?" And (to further Wade_Antley's post), I can go anywhere and ask what two universities are there in Louisiana and get Tech and the school in BR, with a Tulane thrown in sometimes. Funny thing about Tulane, most forget it is in Louisiana. They have name recognition, but no state identity.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
We down ourselves in-state more than any school I know. Time to step up and get past the perception that we are on the level with any other Louisiana school. As for as name recognition goes, it is lsu and us. I will admit that fewer people have heard of Ruston. They know Tech is in Louisiana, but aren't sure where. Probably similar to Southern Miss problem. Oh, and Southern Miss has a name, as well.
So, our Dallas dogs show have no problem putting 30,000 in the Cotton Bowl on Friday.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
With a little help from folks from other places....like Memphis, perhaps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool Hand Clyde
Recognizable name doesn't necessarily equate to casual fans in the seats. We will get a great tv rating, though. Also, I expect to see 25,000 plus there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool Hand Clyde
Thank you Kerry Rupp??Quote:
Originally Posted by Wade_Antley
twdws:laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool Hand Clyde
In all honesty that's the same here in Texas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wade_Antley
:laugh:...yeah keep telling yourself that....we got Richard Simmons and y'all got terry Bradshaw. We'll never mind that part...
Y'all forget to send Coach Mack Brown the memo.Quote:
Originally Posted by no1cajunfan
You guys crack me up...you have about as much of a chance going to AAC as your local high school does. Your facilities are poor at best. Your in Ruston(need I say more). You have very little athletic success and you still have tarps over your seats in that hole you call a stadium...and you LOST to an FCS school. Your a little school in the UL system and we are the biggest school so shut your mouth and speak only when spoken to...lol I love poking at you ladies...http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/...l/6168935.jpeg.
Nicol, do you really still use AOL???Quote:
Originally Posted by no1cajunfan
Says the guy who's team loses to ULM and McNeese St practically every time they play them.
An engineer buddy of mine asked where the ULL located that was playing in the N.O. Bowl this year. He then goes on to ask, "There are 3 ULX's in Louisiana right?". I was confused so I asked him where he thought the three were located. He started that he wasn't sure but that
one of them was in Lake Charles! :laugh::laugh: I almost spit my coffee out. I guess I shouldn't have corrected him. :icon_razz: Or did I?
But everyone over here in Texas knows about Louisiana Tech and the school in Red Stick as well as Tulane about 50% of the time.
And back in 2010 you were saying this about Tech and CUSA. Yet, if there had been one opening in CUSA in 2012, it was going to Tech. Two openings and it was Tech and FIU. And how many reputable national publications even mentioned the Cajuns as a possible CUSA candidate at that time. The answer is zero.Quote:
Originally Posted by no1cajunfan
I can't wait to see the meltdown that'll take place over on raginpagin when CUSA replaces UAB with someone other than UL-L.
This little troll does not deserve to be answered. He probably really does prefer Richard Simmons.
You're not to be taken seriously. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by no1cajunfan
I am fairly sure that Big 12 is going to expand and take Cinn & UCF. That will leave 2 open slots in the AAC. They will probably look at Marshall and Tech or Western KY to replace openings in the East. Do not think Memphis, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa or Houston will support
Tech unless in different Division. We shall see over next few months.
Nah. I think Navy backs out and they stand pat at 9.Quote:
Originally Posted by ETXBULLDOG
If it's Cincinnati and UCF, the AAC can keep its TV contact if it stays at 12. UCF oddly isn't on the list that would trigger contract renegotiation.
I would be surprised is WKU or Marshall got any real consideration. Most likely it would be one east team and one west. Rice, NIU, and UMass would probably be high considerations.
Yes, Rice for the "prestige" thing. Logically they make more sense than either Tulane or Tulsa made, but I understand the Texas issue. All the crappy privates back together with good markets...makes sense in the college football world.
Rice has prestige and is a sentimental choice for the other privates. It'll be a test of SMU's influence, as they don't add a market unless they're replacing UH and they have limited potential as a program. But two of the three last additions were western privates, so you have to like their odds.
On the other hand, if UH has any influence, Rice is dead to us right now, from what I understand.
Interesting. Something new or old hate?Quote:
Originally Posted by parialex
Yes, I knew y'all already had the market, but "the market" is always thrown in when discussing the privates.
New. We were slated to pay a game at Rice Stadium last year against Cincy, and allegedly they would not let us use the home locker room. We ended up moving it to the soccer stadium.
Then they pulled out of the rivalry game this season at the last minute, leaving us without a game and without a team to play in our first game in the new stadium. Fortunately we worked something out with UTSA (moving the game to start the season) and UNLV (who could play a 13th game bacause Hawaii).
On the other hand, given how our game went with UTSA, maybe it would have been better to open against Tennessee Tech (which was the plan after Rice and prior to UTSA and UNLV).
I'm not actually sure if the first one is true (though apparently we did move heaven and earth to avoid playing at Rice Stadium). But from what I understand there is a lot of bad will right now (for all I know, maybe we already opposed their joining the AAC and so we "started it.")
Someone's been visiting Bernice ....Quote:
Originally Posted by maddawg
So true MD because the privates don't have many fans that attend their games or even watch on TV for that matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by maddawg
ESPN and others will figure it out eventually.
I hope they figure it out soon. Empty stadiums and poor tv rankings. If they want name programs - they should take Southern Miss and Tech.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
Southern Miss choose a really bad time to play some really bad football.
Yeah, but they are still a name. They will recover. I don't think the private schools will ever bring much more than they do now.Quote:
Originally Posted by parialex
They offer over saturated markets and (for Champ) HUGE endowments.Quote:
Originally Posted by champion110
Serious question: How does a huge endowment help a conference? I understand the advantage of it for your school.Quote:
Originally Posted by maddawg
I agree. If I had my druthers, they'd have the spot currently occupied by Tulane. But realistically, Southern Miss has two institutional problems:Quote:
Originally Posted by champion110
1. They lack a large market or home base. Unlike UTSA, for example, they don't have a big city that they can claim. Unlike LaTech, they'll also never likely be better than #3 in a state without a large market in it.
2. They lack money. I get the sense that athletics budgets - either existing or a willingness to commit - matter a great deal, and Southern Miss doesn't have the money for a robust budget.
To overcome these two - which it's possible to - they really need to be able to point to a level of success that cannot be ignored. Either that, or have some other angle like Rice does with academics and sentimentalism. I would love them to be the next school up, but they've made it a tough sell.
Being in a Bowl game every year fo the next 5 or so years, facility upgrades every year and incremental increases in the Athletic Budget will put us in position to be in the AAC next go round. You cannot ingnore success, we must play in the Championship game and go bowling on a regular basis or face the prospect of staying were we are forever.
Our budget will never get to the ACC level. We need another $5 to $10M just to be considered for the AAC. Yes winning is important, but look to the SW for evidence that consistent winning is not the end all.Quote:
Originally Posted by KSDAWG
Well, thank you for the nod on Number 1, Parialex, but to be honest...USM's liabilities are honestly ours too. At least they can hang their hat on consistent success for 18 years or whatever it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by parialex
And here in Louisiana, we have too many crabs in the bucket. The second one crab tries to rise to the top, the others claw at him and pull him back down.
We have a LOT OF WORK to do to be considered for anything other than where we are at this time, in my opinion.
Don't look at the AAC for what it is now but what it will become after realignment. The bigger budget programs will be gone.Quote:
Originally Posted by maddawg
ECU, UCF, Tulane, Tulsa, SMU, and UH do not want to be associated with us. I've accepted that fact. Twice we've crossed over to the promised land, only to have our new conference mates desert us at the first possible opportunity to do so. I'm done with kissing their collective asses hoping they'll start liking us. They won't. UNT, UTSA, UTEP, Rice, USM, WKU, and MT are all good conference mates for us. I will focus on our making CUSA as good as it can be instead of chasing what may or may not be greener pastures.
Rice left us high and dry in the WAC as well, I can't blame them for moving up a rung when the opportunity presents itself, we'd be dumb not to do the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by brtransplant
I agree.... And we should and will jump, if given the opportunity.Quote:
Originally Posted by GermDawg
I don't blame those that left, but they really got fooled in that whole transition to what they THOUGHT was the Big East. They are a G5 conference now and CUSA is a better football conference in my opinion. In BBall, they have a big advantage with a few schools, but not top to bottom. Those top bball schools in the AAC might be in for a downfall, as well, since being left out of the real Big East.
The fact is that we would have an unbelievably strong WAC and now CUSA, if they had stayed put. There would be no AAC, in fact. I am fine with CUSA, unless we get an invite to a better conference. Our aim needs to be for a P5 conference, even if it is a long term goal. Every thing we do should be with that goal in mind. That may be moving to the AAC first, but the most important thing is continue building and marketing - no matter what conference we are in. CUSA might be the best G5 conference right now - just like the WAC was before everyone bolted.