Actually, we're all BCS. Non-AQ is the right way to dub a conference school who doesn't have an automatic bid to a BCS bowl game.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, we're all BCS. Non-AQ is the right way to dub a conference school who doesn't have an automatic bid to a BCS bowl game.
We are in such a better position than we were last go around. Now we have a ways to go but at least we are pointed and moving in the right direction. I know there is talk about market and other things like that but just look at our FB Coach last time. Look at what we were paying him. Look at the performance on the field and more than that the fact that it was acceptable to our Admin. Look at our facilities, no committment, no basic maintenance. Facilities = Committment. We are not where we need to be but everyday, everymonth there is progress. The lights, the locker room, the new weights, the new turf, the jumbotron, now the multi-million dollar endzone complex is about to be announced. Baseball, track, basketball facilities are much improved. More evidence of commitment, look at our scheduling. We now schedule for success instead of scheduling for income. Finally seeing past the end of our nose and realizing that success will bring income. Head coaching salary is much better. Look at what Dooley and Dykes make compared to JB3. Maybe more importantly what do our OC and DC make now compared with the JB3 era? Much improved.
I think we are being mentioned because we are committed and engaged now. This doesn't get us in but this plus geographics at least gives us a fighting shot.
We averaged 20K this year. Not outstanding but respectable for our record and schedule. We will probably be somewhere between 22K and 25K this year. Would be more if we count the Grambling game that will probably sell out Independence Stadium.Originally Posted by Hummell
And in terms of facilities, we are catching up to everything. It took a while before we were willing to make changes but now we have the ball rolling. Plans for a new fieldhouse should come out soon which will be VERY nice. Just added Dawgzilla last year. Year before we got brand new basketball court (as well as various other basketball related upgrades). I believe we are either getting a new scoreboard or just a video board in basketball this year and possibly more upgrades there.
Good summary!
Paint me in as someone who thinks TV markets are a bunch of BS. If you have a solid football program and people watch you play because you play solid football, TV market rankings are a bunch of crap. What C-USA should be interested in is bringing in a competitive football program, not a TV market. I want a solid, blue-collar, football team who isn't afraid to strap it on against the big boys. If you have that, you may submit your resume' IMO, TV Markets be damned.
I'd agree that TV markets are overrated. ESPN had a story on LeBron James a few weeks ago that made a very good point. In the internet age, it doesn't matter where you play. You will get exposure.
That said I think we do provide a decent TV market. We have Shreveport, Monroe, and El Dorado as our area.
I agree, but this whole (hypothetical) situation is driven by TV markets aka money, money, money.
I think the market talk is more important for the Big 10, Big 12, SEC, ect. Those huge landgrant schools that graduate 10K a year (or whatever) really do bring HUGE chunks of those markets with them. SMU and Rice, not so much.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
CUSA was exposed on the market deal when they picked UTEP. Many will argue that UTEP had Tech beaten in market size. I don't agree. Juarez doesn't count. They picked UTEP because UTEP had shown a commitment to athletics. That was it.
cusa is hung up on market size. The last two times they considered us they ended up with teams in bigger markets, not necessarily more competive programs, just bigger markets. It is their perception that we have to overcome, not ours. Maybe the third time will be the charm. We finally got off our lethargic asses with the DD hire and hopefully we have taken enough steps to try to catch up with the rest of the college athletics business world to garner some attention. I am so ready to be in a better geographical situation where I can travel to road games and we can develop some real rivalries. Time is running out for some of us old dawgs.
Hummell:
Good to have you on our board. We've been discussing markets on this board for the last few weeks. Tech's market was an obstacle back in 2004. But maybe not this time around.
Market really only matters if it translates into viewers and moves TV numbers. Tech has had enough national television games in the past few years to have a good idea of what type of viewership we could bring to the table.
In fact, Tech has outperformed its market. We might bring as much if not more from a TV standpoint than some of our competition for potential CUSA openings. Some of those schools have little to no following in their larger markets. See this article.
http://www.neworleans.com/index.php?...837&Itemid=578
LA Tech's Sept. 30 game against Hawai'i, a game in which the Bulldogs dominated in a 27-6 win, close to a million people tuned in as the game recorded a 0.99 share on ESPN2, more viewers than Major League Baseball's AL Central race being broadcasted simultaneously on ESPN.
UTEP (El Paso)did not have a bigger market that Sheveport, Monroe, and ElDorado combined. Those three are our markets. Our admin. just wanted everybody to think that was the reason.
Plus El Paso market is more into fútbol (soccer).
I'm with you 100%.
Our Administration did not sell Shreveport, Monroe, and ElDorado as our market. They didn't try. It was Joakes.
CUSA had consistently gone after market (or what they THOUGHT was market). They took the our bottom dwellers in performance from the WAC because of their market - SMU anyone? Problem is that SMU did not and will never deliver Dallas. We outdraw SMU and have even outnumbered them in their own stadium. The TV sets they deliver are some alumni and a few others. I bet we outdraw the number of TV sets than many CUSA teams.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
