G5 or FCS? Discuss

[techman05]

Apathy has hit an all time low when I see several people talking about playing ULM and thinking that’s a good thing. Gag!

I agree, but I would support H/H series with Troy, App State, or even ULL.

[johnnylightnin]

Not sure this year’s number, but in 2018, only 22 FBS teams DID NOT play an FCS home game.

[DallasDog]

A deal with ULL yes, ULM I won’t attend. There are a lot of teams out there we can get deals with, it’s on Tiny Tim that we haven’t. Just because he doesn’t want to do his job, doesn’t mean I will settle for the SH@T that is ULM.

[sportdawg]

My question is regarding the positive of playing FCS teams. I can't find any other than it being an easy win for our HC.

I agree that FCS games should be filler when we can't get a 6th home game.

I wouldn't mind playing 1 of NSU, Grambling, Southern, etc. every 4 years.

I think the only positive is it gives us a 6th home game (5th next year).

[techman05]

It would be nice if SWAC games were a last resort. We all know they are first pick for an FCS game.

[sportdawg]

FUTURE LOUISIANA TECH NON-CONFERENCE OPPONENTS

2020 09/05 - at UNLV 09/12 - TBD C-USA 09/19 - vs. Prairie View A&M 09/26 - at Baylor 11/21 - at Vanderbilt	2021 09/04 - at Mississippi State 09/11 - Southeastern Louisiana 09/18 - SMU 10/02 - at NC State	2022 09/03 - at Baylor 09/10 - vs. SFA 09/17 - at Clemson
2023 09/02 - at SMU 09/16 - Baylor 09/23 - at Nebraska 09/30 - Bowling Green	2024 09/07 - at NC State 09/21 - Tulsa	2025 09/06 - NC State 09/25 - at Tulsa
2026	2027 09/17 at Kansas	2028 09/16 - Kansas

AAC openings 2022-2028
Houston: 24-28
Memphis - 24-28
Navy - 24-28
SMU - 22-28 (We play in 21 & 23 - hopefully will have good turnout and lead to more games. I'd love to play there in years we don't go to UNT)
Tulane - 27-28
Cincy - 22-25, 27-28
UCF - 22-28

others:
UL-L: 22-28
ArkSt- 22-28

[sportdawg]

My question is regarding the positive of playing FCS teams. I can't find any other than it being an easy win for our HC.

Ideally we wouldn't have to play them. We'd have h/h with lower P5 and AAC teams. but we know we need $ games, so it almost becomes a necessity to have FCS so our schedule doesn't get out of whack.

1. P5 $ game
2. G5 Home
3. G5 Away
4. FCS

If we have 3 G5 h/h in same year, we'll be at 5 home games some years (assuming 1 $ game).

[PawDawg]

Ideally we wouldn't have to play them. We'd have h/h with lower P5 and AAC teams. but we know we need $ games, so it almost becomes a necessity to have FCS so our schedule doesn't get out of whack.

1. P5 $ game
2. G5 Home
3. G5 Away
4. FCS

If we have 3 G5 h/h in same year, we'll be at 5 home games some years (assuming 1 $ game).

I'm pretty sure we need two money games, not just one. More power to our AD if he can make $1Mish per year work for our budget.

I agree that we should use FCS games as fillers only, but looking at next year we possibly have the worst home schedule since we went 1A. 6 home games every other year is not good for the fans.

[Amos Moses]

I wasn't at the Grambling "Dehydration Classic" game this year at the Joe but it didn't look like an easy win on tv! I'm tired of watching this crap too. When the best thing that can be promoted about these games is - "Show Up -it's going to be a great Halftime Show!", you know you are in trouble.

I have always been for us playing home and home with ULL. I think it makes tremendous sense financailly, even though I know we travel better to Lafayette than they travel to Ruston. How much money are we paying Grambling to drive less than two miles play at the Joe??
At this point in life I'm now over the fact that playing ULM helps them more than it helps us. There is no amount of help that program can receive that will ever make them competitive with us in recruiting or facilities but we can make some extra money off the gate. A two for one short term deal would not hurt us. They can also deal with the fact that we will probably put more butts in the seats at a game in Malone Stadium than they will. The 1980's are a long time ago for the under 50 alumni.

..

Why, we paid them their fair share, of course!

[inudesu]

My question is regarding the positive of playing FCS teams. I can't find any other than it being an easy win for our HC.

It's the home game. That's the plus.

It balances a money game every year. To get that home game playing ULX, you've got to do both, every year. And while that probably buys you some stability in terms of guaranteeing at least one OOC home game each year, the trade-off is one OOC away game each year. So you only have 2 left in which to play money games, try to work in 2-for-1 deals, or find other 1-for-1 G5 series (like SMU and Tulsa on the positive side or UMass and UNLV and Bowling Green on the, let's say "neutral" side).

With the FCS game always at home, you have 3 games to work with. You can stagger 2 G5 1-for-1 deals like we did this year (ideally with more interesting teams) and get 6 home games and only one money game. Or you could balance having two money games and a 1-for-1 over two seasons (a crappy 5 game home schedule like next year countered by a schedule with an FCS at home, a G5 at home, a money game, and then either another money game or the away part of another G5 series). Once in a while it all breaks just right and we have the dream season with 7 at home like we did in 2017.

You trade the flexibility of a guaranteed non-return game when you drop the FCS game. I'm not necessarily against it, and I'd probably really like it if we could afford just one money game every year (meaning we'd have 3 1-for-1 series going all the time, and alternate between 5 and 6 home games each year). I'd be ok with working ULX in there for sure, they're both better options than BGU, UNLV, or UMass. But I probably wouldn't want to tie us up with long term or permanent deals.

If I'm being honest, the best possible (half-way realistic) scheduling set-up for us is FCS, @money game, G5 home, different G5 road. With maybe a P5 1-for-1 worked in where we can get them. But even that would mean just 1 money game per year and I don't think that's something we can get away with every single year.

[PawDawg]

But even that would mean just 1 money game per year and I don't think that's something we can get away with every single year.

That's what I'm thinking.

I also think the 2 for 1s are yet to be determined on how they cash flow. I would say Miss St part 2 has been a break even at best.

[sportdawg]

I'm pretty sure we need two money games, not just one. More power to our AD if he can make $1Mish per year work for our budget.

I agree that we should use FCS games as fillers only, but looking at next year we possibly have the worst home schedule since we went 1A. 6 home games every other year is not good for the fans.

Looking at our current and future schedules, we only have 1 $ game annually. I'm not counting 2-for-1 as $ games.


2013: NC State, KU
2014: OU, AU
2015: KState, MS State ($?)
2016: Ark, TX Tech
2017: SC
2018: LSU, MS State ($?)
2019: TX
2020: Vandy
2021: MS State ($?)
2022: Clemson
2023: Nebraska

[PawDawg]

Looking at our current and future schedules, we only have 1 $ game annually. I'm not counting 2-for-1 as $ games.


2013: NC State, KU
2014: OU, AU
2015: KState, MS State ($?)
2016: Ark, TX Tech
2017: SC
2018: LSU, MS State ($?)
2019: TX
2020: Vandy
2021: MS State ($?)
2022: Clemson
2023: Nebraska

Yes, I had noticed and I think it spells trouble. Maybe our AD's friends will bail him out as needed.

[sportdawg]

Yes, I had noticed and I think it spells trouble. Maybe our AD's friends will bail him out as needed.

Maybe current TV package makes up for $ game (doubt it).

[PawDawg]

Maybe current TV package makes up for $ game (doubt it).

Yeah, I doubt it too. I think we are getting less than we were getting 5 years ago.

This shell game has got to catch up soon. I think we'll see in the next report.