|
|
I now see your point on why the Sun Belt for us is a terrible option. Although it would create local rivalries and increase attendance, it would kill us. We are Tech fans, our children will go to Tech,hopefully as good athletes. This is an athletic board. If you were a high school senior with the athletic ability to earn a scholarship, what would you look for and what would entice you to come to Tech. Remove from the equation, your parents,relative etc went to Tech?
It all depends on what your goal for Tech is.
Local college that rules the "little" schools and is a favorite among people in North Louisiana.
or
National name and power that plays anybody, anywhere, anytime and WINS!
Fresno State or Montana?
Boise State or SFA?
Florida State (yes, look at their history) or Florida A&M?
It is tough getting to the big leagues. Programs either give up or go forward. Most Sun Belt teams will end up 1aa in the future. The conference and the teams that make it up will always be the bottom of the 1a world. Programs that want to grow and be recognized move up from there to the WAC and then go on to bigger things from there.
Heck, Tyler Junior College creates a lot of buzz in the the town of Tyler Texas. We could just step down to that level and really create some local interest by beating other Jr. Colleges.
This all comes down to what your goals are....... Plain and simple. I know what I want for Tech and it is NOT ulm, ull, unt status. It is much more than that.
I'm afraid if you removed that from the equation, our enrollment would dwindle to less than double digits.Originally Posted by Barkman
Re: Serious Question
Barkman, what sports are your daughter & son going to play at Tech? Have you decided yet? My guess is Tennis! I hope that they get their Athleticism from their sweet mother! Ha. Ha. Ha..... Is there any chance that they are going to go to a school any further east of here? Keep these post comming!
Good Post , I mostly agree. I think the FSU route is very difficult though and almost impossible.(from the start) I think we have tried it and failed. I think you go the Marshall / Boise St. route first. Then after consistent success you switch to the Fla. St. anyone , anywhere , anytime deal. I think one of our problems was we put the cart ahead of the horse. You can do the anytime anywhere deal a lot easier when you are an INDY and are playing a lot of creampuffs mixed in with the heavyweights. But its hard to ask kids to play a killer 3 game stretch ,all on the road and then go play at Boise or AT Fresno / Hawaii. I don't think 80% of BCS schools could have a good record playing the type of schedules we do. If we have 3 non-conference games I would play one stud top-25 type of BCS program , one weak BCS program , and a CUSA type of program. Then if we have 4 ooc games I would schedule the same way except I would add a belt school or piss poor mac school , someone we could pound. Now if we could get a BCS team to come to S-port than add them to any schedule you already have. I like next years schedule. In other words for the first few years of my plan beating BCS teams isnt the goal. (although when you play them you fight like hell) Bowls are the goal.
Bigdog,
I don't think we disagree at all. I agree with everything you stated. My post had to do with the goal - not on how well we are doing toward acheiving it. We certainly are not doing well right now. The point is that we either go forward (I agree with the Marshal plan) or go backward. The Belt is backward. The WAC/CUSA etc. is forward.
dawgfood,
Yes, the UL's are improving. I think we are stalled, but we are still in a MUCH better place. We have the advantage with the conference we are in over them, though. It all depends on what we do with it. A new coach and a return to our winning ways would do wonders for our program.
Money issues aside, I think we need to schedule creampuffs in all OOC games to build up winning records and go to bowls. After a few years we should be getting better recruits to go against the better schools. Then we can schedule more difficult games. Just think if this year we had UCF, ECU, and UNLV on the schedule in place of the BCS schools. We (probably) go 9-3 and land in a bowl somewhere. Anyway, I just do not think we need to schedule the Miami's and Auburns until we have a least a Fresno like chance to beat them. We take a step backwards when we lose 52-7 to a school like that. Fresno may not win, but they keep it competitive.
We used to compete, as well. That was when we had Tim Rattay. I have mixed emotions about weakening our schedule. I LOVED it when we were playing and winning some of those games. However, if we are just going to show up and not play them, we need to stop doing it. I have friends here in Texas that are always impressed with our schedule. That used to be a bragging point, but not anymore. Until we can compete again, I agree with you.
Winning consistently cures most ills - our atleast removes most ills to the recesses of our minds -
And we will not win with the OOC schedules we are consistently playing the last few years -
And when a commitment is not there to COMPETE and try to win those ball games - why schedule them?
If you are doing it just for the money - we really need to take a LONG hard look at where our athletic programs are at and decide if that is where they belong -
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
with all due respect to fresno, the two "bcs conference teams" they beat during the regular season were washington, who was terrible this season, and kansas state, who also had a very down year for their standards. however, beating virginia is impressive, they were a very good team this year.
rather than playing auburn, miami, tenessee, to get a shot at the big schools, why not try playing some teams from those conferences like kentucky, mississippi, missouri, baylor, north carolina, northwestern. basically trying to pick on some of the middle to lower tier programs in the big conferences, rather than playing 3 top 15 teams. i am suggesting this until we have the athletes to at least compete with teams like tenessee, auburn, or miami.
UW and KSU were down this year, I am not sure when Fresno added them to their schedule. Sometimes these games are drawn up years in advance and who knows what the situation for either team is going to be at that time. My ideal OOC schedule for us (at this time) would be Baylor (in Shreveport?), Vanderbilt, and Mississippi State. All are BCS and all are beatable. Might even be able to work 2 for 1 deals with them in Shreveport. I am guessing that Vandy and MSU would pay pretty well, though not on the level of UT or Auburn. Anyway, before we try to compete with the big boys, we need the athletes to do so. And as Dwayne said, if we are doing it just for money, we seriously need to reassess our athletic programs and what we are doing.
It looks like the two extremes on this board are moving to middle ground. Even if you make your schedule 5 years in advance, you know who the powerhouses of NCAA football are. Why would you schedule them if you are not going to make the committment and give your team the resources to compete with them. Like you guys are saying, it makes a lot more sense to schedule middle and lower tier bcsbs schools that will give us a decent payout, a chance to win, and maybe return games in Shreveport. I just hope our administration is starting to see the light.
The original question is and still stands, If you were 19 years old and were a big time recruit, what would you look for and why? The point I was trying to make is this. We go after big time recruits, most of the time we lose them to BCS schools. First of all do you agree or disagree with that statement, #2 If a student athlete is choosing between us and another non-bcs school would you look at the quality of education, playing time, or the amount of fun things to do in town. As a 19 year old recruit what would you look for in being recruited. We love Tech, We know it is a great place to learn, make lifetime friends, and learn to be productive responsible citizens. Why did you choose TECH? Mom/Dad went, proximity to your home, offered your major, followed a cute girl here. My point is if you remove the above from the equation, you have football/basketball etc recruiting, Again I ask what would you look for? Just curious, maybe we can get some idea of these big time recruits head and convinve them to come to TECH If not we have to have a coach who can recognize potential, untapped talent, that no one recognizes ala Pat Dye 1981-1992, Jeff Bower 1990-present, Just curious what would you look for in a school if you were a recruit.
Re: Serious Question
Good thoughts and post Barkman!
Here is what I would want. Now remember this is just me.
#1 I want to win a N.C. ---we can't help 'em here
#2 I want to play for a big-time program with cool tradition in front of thousands of fans (think A&M, Notre Dame)-- can't help 'em here but there are a lot of BCS programs that don't fit this mold either. Does Iowa St. , Mizz. , Vandy , Kentucky , or even KSU have a lot of tradition & atmosphere....NO. I could name a lot more.
#3 P.T. I wanna play early & often. --We CAN help here
#4 I want to go to Bowls. --We are in a great position to help a kid here although we are blowing opportunity after opportunity.
#5 I want to travel and see different parts of the country. -- We are good here as well.
I didn't mention education because I would imagine MOST kids are not looking for specific areas of Education like our Micromanufacturing center. Now some do look for these things. I know Luke was very interested in our Forestry program so for some a specific degree program would be more towards the top of the list. For some like Ryan Moats they end up here even though we don't even offer the degree he is interested in.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
