DITTO!Originally Posted by DogsWin
All this discussion about the SunBelch? That conference serves only one function-
|
|
|
|
|
DITTO!All this discussion about the SunBelch? That conference serves only one function-
C'mon guys lay off ULM. I have a lot of friends out there (last count they outnumbered my enemies by a total of three) and all the window dressing by Cofer is just that. No substance, just form. Things are still going downhill, just at a slower pace, and with Sally Clausen putting her reputation on the line in rehabbing ULM and GSU, you can bet the managed news will all be good. So, when they claim a special olympics NC in cheer leading it is just not nice to "tell the rest of the story".
We really need that "sarcasm" emotionicon don't we...
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
Sorry, Markay, but the wording of my post created two groups of sports. Inclusion on either list is sufficient to be a valid topic in conference comparison, and football is certainly included.
My post read "stick to sports sponsored by those conferences and those that have championships conducted by the NCAA". That's two separate groups of sports to choose from--1) sports sponsored by those conferences, and 2) those with championships conducted by the NCAA. You read my post "stick to sports sponsored by those conferences and that have championships conducted by the NCAA"--one group of sports. Your analysis overlooked the word "those"--that one little word created two groups, not just one.
That's EXACTLY what I've said all along. (Please note, killerdawg!) I still believe LA Tech will sneek into CUSA by default for exactly the reasons you stated.
I'm bothered by the fact that CUSA hasn't made a move already. On the day that TCU anounced it was leaving for the MWC, Jim Oakes told me that it would be March before CUSA added another school. Still.............you would like to think that CUSA has got their sh*&%$% together well enough that they wouldn't have to take this long to make a decision.
In my opinion, CUSA is starting to look WEAK and IMPOTENT because they can't make a decision. This isn't brain surgery. Even if the answer is "no" to Louisiana Tech, CUSA needs to go ahead and announce their intentions.
Otherwise, I think Louisiana Tech should give CUSA a hard deadline (say, March 15th) to issue and invitation or Louisiana Tech will be WITHDRAWING its name from consideration (publically). Afterall, the EWAC has been completely destroyed and Tech officials need to be making STRATEGIC plans for 2005. Other schools, such as UNT and Toledo, still have a conference to play in and don't have to worry about such planning.
HD[/quote:db94a60cfa]
Hogdawg, C-USA and Brittan Banowsky don't want to appear as if a replacement had been chosen before TCU left. Therefor it makes sense for the conference to study its options before invitinf Tech.
Sorry, Markay, but the wording of my post created two groups of sports. Inclusion on either list is sufficient to be a valid topic in conference comparison, and football is certainly included.
My post read "stick to sports sponsored by those conferences and those that have championships conducted by the NCAA". That's two separate groups of sports to choose from--1) sports sponsored by those conferences, and 2) those with championships conducted by the NCAA. You read my post "stick to sports sponsored by those conferences and that have championships conducted by the NCAA"--one group of sports. Your analysis overlooked the word "those"--that one little word created two groups, not just one.[/quote:52445a0863]
Get a grip man! You take this WAY too seriously. I didn't overlook the word. I was not trying to do anything but point out that we talk a whole lot about football and there unfortunately is not a playoff. You gotta be an accountant or an engineer, huh?
That's EXACTLY what I've said all along. (Please note, killerdawg!) I still believe LA Tech will sneek into CUSA by default for exactly the reasons you stated.
I'm bothered by the fact that CUSA hasn't made a move already. On the day that TCU anounced it was leaving for the MWC, Jim Oakes told me that it would be March before CUSA added another school. Still.............you would like to think that CUSA has got their sh*&%$% together well enough that they wouldn't have to take this long to make a decision.
In my opinion, CUSA is starting to look WEAK and IMPOTENT because they can't make a decision. This isn't brain surgery. Even if the answer is "no" to Louisiana Tech, CUSA needs to go ahead and announce their intentions.
Otherwise, I think Louisiana Tech should give CUSA a hard deadline (say, March 15th) to issue and invitation or Louisiana Tech will be WITHDRAWING its name from consideration (publically). Afterall, the EWAC has been completely destroyed and Tech officials need to be making STRATEGIC plans for 2005. Other schools, such as UNT and Toledo, still have a conference to play in and don't have to worry about such planning.
HD[/quote:a1f1980ae0]
Hogdawg, C-USA and Brittan Banowsky don't want to appear as if a replacement had been chosen before TCU left. Therefor it makes sense for the conference to study its options before invitinf Tech.[/quote:a1f1980ae0]
And I appreciate that, Tiger. However, the fact remains that since CUSA has already raided the eastern WAC, Louisiana Tech is essentially a school without a conference home today. That gives Louisiana Tech a sense of urgency that the other CUSA candidates don't have to bear.
UNT has a good geographic home. So does Toledo and Miami of Ohio. And UTEP. But not Louisiana Tech.
So, as the old saying goes, "we don't have time to screw around with this dating bullshit. We need to get straight to the good stuff."
LA Tech just needs an answer, even if the answer is "no". If the answer is "no", then Tech can move on and make other arrangements that are beneficial to our program. If CUSA officials don't consider LA Tech to be an adequate reoplacement for TCU, then JUST SAY SO!! Surely they already know the answer by now.
Tech Athletic Director Jim Oakes should tell CUSA officials that they've got until March 15th to issue Tech a FORMAL invitation, otherwise, we will be making other arrangements and they can formally remove us from consideration. And no, I'm NOT kidding. I'm very serious. Time is wasting, and LA Tech is the only Div 1A school in the country without a legitimate geographic home. Besides, it's better for LA Tech to remove itself from CUSA consideration than it is to get REJECTED by CUSA. We need to move on.
HD
HD, as usual, you make a very good point. Must admit I've been so wrapped up in the "will CUSA invite us or not" worry-wart thingy, I never stopped to consider that viewpoint.
But, I am afraid we all know the answer to our "future" if we indeed withdraw from CUSA consideration: the Belch! eegads!
When huge egos are involved in negotiations, a hard deadline demand will more often backfire than achieve the desired result. In upper management of higher ed, the egos are about as big as you find in the NBA. The guys in higher ed just have degrees to go with their egos.
As much as my heart is with the hard deadline idea, I just don't think it is the right thing to do at all.
Hog Dog ,
Out of curiosity , what would you pursue if the answer from C-USA is no? Considering these three things.... WAC=financial suicide, Indy=Financial suicide, Belt=Step Backwards
The Sun Belt is not suicide.
You don't know what those schools are capable of doing in order to meet NCAA requirements.
Heck, even if they all have to play home games in another state like ULM is doing, that is still keeping your program in 1-A and is a non-issue.
As far as La Tech getting into the Sun Belt, that conferences presidents are seeing what the fans of Sun Belt schools are seeing from La Tech fans and La Tech's administration--a school in Ruston who would be lobbying for any conference in America whether they have even remotely mentioned expansion or not just to get out of the Sun Belt before they are asking the Sun Belt to get in.
La Tech is making their relationship with the Sun Belt worse and worse with each passing day.
I'm sure messages from this board are making their way to Sun Belt presidents in lobbying efforts to keep La Tech out of the Sun Belt. You can't blame anyone for not wanting La Tech in the Sun Belt. The school would be spending too much time getting out that it wouldn't even try to help the Sun Belt become better.
I am 90% sure that the Sun Belt will not invite La Tech even if CUSA does not ask your school to become a member.
If CUSA doesn't happen you guys are going to have two options because the Sun Belt option will be closed--I promise you that.
Your options are:
1. Stay WAC
2. Independence
Nah, I don't think so. The Belt option will always be open to Tech. Take your bravado where it might play....like on the SWAC forum.
Blue Raider,
So what if the Belt wouldn't have us. I hope we never do that. I have nothing against the Belt. I just don't believe that you should go back. TECH must keep moving forward. If we don't get is CUSA, then we do have options that don't include the Belt. I for one hope that those are explored first.
All of the proof that Tech administrators may need to question the Sun Belt as a viable option can be found on the NCAA's official 2003 football attendance report http://www.ncaa.org/stats/football/a...attendance.pdf
Division I-A list
94 Troy State 20,899
99 North Texas 18,694
101 Arkansas State 17,488
----------------------------------
108 Louisiana-Lafayette 13,995
113 Idaho 12,064
116 Miiddle Tennessee State 11,021
Division I-AA list
50 Florida International 7,571
74 Florida Atlantic 5,882
If at least seven current or prospective Sun Belt all-sports members don't average 15,000 in 2004, even adding Tech would not give the SBC the required eight all-sports members to be a Division I-A conference on August 1, 2005.
Tech's home attendance at the listed link has been corrected to 20,778 by including the Miami game. This link can now be used to support Tech's 2003 home attendance figure.
It's very nice of you to base your findings on just one season of football.
MTSU averaged over 17,000 in 2001 when we went 8-3. Our home games were against Troy State, Idaho, New Mexico State, Arkansas State, and UConn. I think when we aren't foolishly giving games away, we can keep fans in the stands.
Our season average for just this one season past is indicitive of some very pathetic play schemes.
Consider we went 4-8 and lost to five opponents by eight points or less that include:
An 8-point loss to Temple that was one play and a 2-point conversion away from tying.
A 5-point loss to Sun Belt Champ, North Texas. MTSU had a bobbled snap from their own five yard line that wound up being recovered in the endzone for a UNT touchdown.
A 1-point loss off a fluke miracle hail mary play by 4th-ranked 1-AA, Florida Atlantic as time in the game expired.
A 6-point triple overtime loss off a tipped pass that was intercepted by the Cajuns close to the goaline for MTSU to get the go ahead touchdown.
A 1-point overtime loss to then 23rd-ranked Missouri after MTSU missed a PAT. MTSU could've stopped a 2-point conversion off the last Mizzou touchdown to seal the win.
It was a season of missed opportunities for MTSU. We are a helluva lot better than what our schedule showed.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
