Chuck summarized a few posts back.Originally Posted by HogDawg
No application doesn’t mean no communication. The application is something the conference invites the schools they’ve already selected to submit.
|
|
|
|
|
Chuck summarized a few posts back.
No application doesn’t mean no communication. The application is something the conference invites the schools they’ve already selected to submit.
Yeah don’t get too hung up on the not applying bit guys. This isn’t like applying for a job or college. The applications are more of a formality that goes along with an invitation.
I know for a fact that Wood couldn't get Aresco to return his phone calls the Week of the SMU game, after he (Wood) was finally advised to reach out. I reported that to you guys myself. here on BB&B.
That would be a god question for Dr. Wood: Did you ever speak DIRECTLY with Aresco about this? He probably didn't.
So, nobody knows "the plan" going forward? I saw Chuck's summary. I'm just asking you to tell me something that Wood said that we didn't already know?
....says a guy with so much experience at this.
But APPARENTLY, nobody has thought to ask Wood if he talked directly to Aresco about LA Tech's application for membership? Kinda hard to get invited to ANYTHING without communication between the 2 parties.
LOL!!!
Now, THAT I believe......
I certainly would. Eldorado, Magnolia, anywhere right above the border to either side of Union County. Minden, Shreveport, Even throw in West Monroe/Monroe. With Baton Rouge and Fayetteville at the far ends North/South of Arkansas and Louisiana, we kind of have a sweet spot to take hold of.
And while I believe that is our bubble, with great potential to take that bubble over, I don’t think these conference leaders are willing to buy that. They just want the quick and easy DFW, Charlotte, Birmingham.
HD, you don't just get to apply for membership. You have to be invited to apply for membership. All invitations to apply were accepted and all applications were approved.
All Guice and Wood could do was call and make Tech's case. No market size with a way too small budget was never going to be enough. If Tech's budget was $35 million there would have at least been a case to present, but even that might not have been enough.
Just need to be ready to be next up when Memphis gets the call. Getting the budget to near $30 million in the next 2-3 years is critical.
Blah, Blah, Blah. Yeah, we see what that "you don't just apply" theory got us.
Beg my pardon FD, but with an attitude like yours, I wouldn't want to partner with Tech either. It's no wonder Aresco went into hiding when Tech called.
This kind of business is about relationships, FD. Relationships have to be cultivated, and nurtured. They also take time. This comes down to the fact that NO ONE at LA Tech ever bothered to establish or cultivate a relationship with AAC Commissioner Mike Aresco, or any of his AAC associates, until it was too late. I GUARANTEE you that UNT AD Wren Baker didn't make THAT stupid mistake. Not only was Baker cultivating these valuable relationships long before the last two weeks, but Baker & UNT were also proactively co-sponsoring events such as last season's NIT Tournament, partnering with the Dallas Cowboys, and more. and despite sharing the same market as SMU, UNT received an invite to the AAC.
As for the $35M budget problem, that one's easy. Just enact a $300 per Qtr Student Athletic Fee --like each and every one of our other peer institutions-- and we'll have a 35M athletic budget overnight. Such a fee would add roughly $10 million to our $25 Million athletic budget overnight. $25 + $10 = $35M.
LA Tech needs to quit being the "nice guy, losers" when it comes to all this stuff. Sell around your shortcomings. Emphasize your strengths. My God, Louisiana Tech has more strengths, better name recognition and a better athletic program than all 6 of the schools we just lost too. That means somebody is not doing a good enough job.
Tech could have sent in the best application of all time. It would have been ignored. Being the loudest voice in the room is not the way to foster goodwill for a possible future invitation to apply either.
Tech is still bound by the annual maximum transfer limit from the Board of Regents. Student fees can only make up any difference between the sum of the maximum basic transfer limit (3% of Tech's annual operating budget) plus the cost of athletic scholarships compared to the total amount actually transferred. If there is a gap between those amounts, it would have to be well under under $1 million annually or a student fee would have already been proposed. It's certainly not enough to justify increasing student fees a significant amount.Blah, Blah, Blah. Yeah, we see what that "you don't just apply" theory got us.
Beg my pardon FD, but with an attitude like yours, I wouldn't want to partner with Tech either. It's no wonder Aresco went into hiding when Tech called.
This kind of business is about relationships, FD. Relationships have to be cultivated, and nurtured. They also take time. This comes down to the fact that NO ONE at LA Tech ever bothered to establish or cultivate a relationship with AAC Commissioner Mike Aresco, or any of his AAC associates, until it was too late. I GUARANTEE you that UNT AD Wren Baker didn't make THAT stupid mistake. Not only was Baker cultivating these valuable relationships long before the last two weeks, but Baker & UNT were also proactively co-sponsoring events such as last season's NIT Tournament, partnering with the Dallas Cowboys, and more. and despite sharing the same market as SMU, UNT received an invite to the AAC.
As for the $35M budget problem, that one's easy. Just enact a $300 per Qtr Student Athletic Fee --like each and every one of our other peer institutions-- and we'll have a 35M athletic budget overnight. Such a fee would add roughly $10 million to our $25 Million athletic budget overnight. $25 + $10 = $35M.
LA Tech needs to quit being the "nice guy, losers" when it comes to all this stuff. Sell around your shortcomings. Emphasize your strengths. My God, Louisiana Tech has more strengths, better name recognition and a better athletic program than all 6 of the schools we just lost too. That means somebody is not doing a good enough job.
Last edited by FriscoDawg; 10-22-2021 at 04:29 AM.
He has been asked privately. He acknowledged that he has/had not talked to him. The old punch line..."I don't believe I'd have told that."
Most of us understand this, but silence is never the best answer when you are just totally embarrassed. He should have leaked something regarding this weeks ago instead of waiting until it hit the wires. Instead fans have been kept TOTALLY in the dark since the Texas/Oklahoma announcement.
LOL! you just made my morning. And Sgt. Shultz represents the entire Tech athletic department in particular, and the administration in general. Perfect!
The old CUSA and now the new AAC, are all about "market size." Never mind that 99% of Houston doesn't give a rat's ass about Rice, they happen to be located in a large populated area. Same can be said about the other invitees. UNT? UNT? Really? No baseball, no football either!Performance on the field doesn't matter to them.
I am not shocked, nor disappointed because I have told y'all before, it's all about managing "expectations." Tech had ZERO chance of an invite from the AAC, which is now just a watered-down version of the current CUSA. And Dr. Wood is an empty suit. If you hook your cart to his horse, you are in for more disappointments to come.
We are Louisiana Tech! Embrace the suck!
AMEN to this post, especially the big print!Blah, Blah, Blah. Yeah, we see what that "you don't just apply" theory got us.
Beg my pardon FD, but with an attitude like yours, I wouldn't want to partner with Tech either. It's no wonder Aresco went into hiding when Tech called.
This kind of business is about relationships, FD. Relationships have to be cultivated, and nurtured. They also take time. This comes down to the fact that NO ONE at LA Tech ever bothered to establish or cultivate a relationship with AAC Commissioner Mike Aresco, or any of his AAC associates, until it was too late. I GUARANTEE you that UNT AD Wren Baker didn't make THAT stupid mistake. Not only was Baker cultivating these valuable relationships long before the last two weeks, but Baker & UNT were also proactively co-sponsoring events such as last season's NIT Tournament, partnering with the Dallas Cowboys, and more. and despite sharing the same market as SMU, UNT received an invite to the AAC.
As for the $35M budget problem, that one's easy. Just enact a $300 per Qtr Student Athletic Fee --like each and every one of our other peer institutions-- and we'll have a 35M athletic budget overnight. Such a fee would add roughly $10 million to our $25 Million athletic budget overnight. $25 + $10 = $35M.
LA Tech needs to quit being the "nice guy, losers" when it comes to all this stuff. Sell around your shortcomings. Emphasize your strengths. My God, Louisiana Tech has more strengths, better name recognition and a better athletic program than all 6 of the schools we just lost too. That means somebody is not doing a good enough job.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
