I'd definitely prefer LaTech (or ODU or some other from a list schools) to UMass at this point. It bugs me that they're being mentioned again.
I'd definitely prefer LaTech (or ODU or some other from a list schools) to UMass at this point. It bugs me that they're being mentioned again.
Paralex, you are in great standing on this Board. We like you. You need to say you prefer La Tech over anyone else. ODU doesn't even have close to the reputation that we have nationally. I am shocked that UMass is even being considered. I know the "market" issue, but Southern Miss is being considered. Also, market is so much more than just the city you are in.........
I wouldn't be honest if I said I would prefer you over Southern Miss. You're my choice after that. I mention ODU because if they went that direction, I'd be happier with it than if they went with the UMass. Ditto UTSA, Rice, and UTEP (In no particular order, as an incomplete list).
Aside from market, the only reason I can think of why UMass/ODU might have an advantage is divisioning.I
I don't think that market is all-important, which is one of the reasons I think USM is being considered and I'd hope you would be, too. ODU does have good market position, and a lot of potential, though they're still new and an unknown. They're my next preference after you, though. UMass just leaves me cold, the more I read about their current situation.
Last edited by parialex; 02-11-2013 at 03:35 PM. Reason: For some reason, the word UMass appeared where it shouldn't have. Also, added final paragraph.
I've been saying from the start that UH didn't want to be with NT, UTSA, and that U_F didn't want to be with F_U.
If you believe USM has a shot to get in you aren't keeping up. USM fans know they have some major housekeeping to do. They have zero chance for at least two years.
We are behind them in the running.
I'd hate to see long-term decisions be made on the basis of a two-or-three year hardship. Of course, the same could be said of UMass (maybe everything will be awesome when they get their stadium done and all that), but at least with USM we know that contributing isn't their problem. It seems to me that one of the biggest things the conference needs to worry about at the moment is competitiveness*. Not being left behind by the MWC. That's where I'd like to think USM comes in, and why I hope they've been name-checked a couple times.
* - So what's up with ODU being so high on my list? I believe that they will be a dominant force in C*USA East.
University of Houston '01. Any references to "we" or "us" likely refer to UH. Cheers!
I was referring to the Tech in the Belch. I may have misunderstood the comparison. My point was that I haven't heard Houston, SMU, Tulsa, etc.... say anything about they didn't want to be in a conference with us. I understand not wanting to be in a conference with UNT, F_U, or UTSA. We don't either....... And the comparison holds true with us not wanting to be associated with belch schools.
But that is the reason that you can't just split the conjectured list up above down the middle.
From a Tech standpoint, it just looks like a no-brainer decision (just like most non-Tech folks could never understand why we'd travel in the WAC instead of playing closer to home in the SB). But the reason it won't happen (as awesome as it would be for Tech) is because Houston and SMU don't want to play with UTSA and UNT, and USF/UCF don't want to play with FIU/FAU. It doesn't have anything (or at least not much) with anyone wanting or not wanting to play with Tech per se.
If you swapped us and Tulane for some reason, you'd still get opposition to splitting that group geographically for the same reasons.