Started By
Message

Officials say ULM won't be following UAB's football footsteps

Posted on 12/12/14 at 1:52 pm
Posted by hsfolk
Member since Sep 2009
18538 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 1:52 pm
UAB's decision last week to discontinue its football program continues to receive backlash from not only its players but the student body who continues to protest the decision.

The school is the first to cut football since Pacific in 1995 with the school citing the rising costs in college athletics.

As the Blazers' coaching staff and football players pick up the pieces and look for a new school to call home, the decision hits close to home in the Monroe area.

UAB's athletic budget ranked 83rd among FBS schools, and first-year head coach Bill Clark was drawing a $500,000 paycheck annually with a staff expense of $1,011,000.

If UAB can make the decision to cut football, does it make schools like ULM that much more likely to fall in line?

The ULM athletic budget remains the lowest among FBS schools with its most recent revenue recorded at $11,231,311 — UAB reported a total revenue of $28,159,249.

LINK /
Posted by Pettifogger
Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
Member since Feb 2012
79192 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 1:58 pm to
This is what happens when the prominent school in the state cares about more than just sucking up resources for its own football team.

Kudos to you LSU people
Posted by BayouBengals03
lsu14always
Member since Nov 2007
99999 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 1:58 pm to
Does ULM need a football program?
Posted by supadave3
Houston, TX
Member since Dec 2005
30257 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 1:58 pm to
quote:

first-year head coach Bill Clark was drawing a $500,000 paycheck annually with a staff expense of $1,011,000.




It's amazing that small schools with a limited budget still pay this much in coaches salary.
Posted by Draconian Sanctions
Markey's bar
Member since Oct 2008
84857 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 2:07 pm to
We should have all other public fbs programs in the state either shut down or dropped to fcs.
This post was edited on 12/12/14 at 2:08 pm
Posted by LordSaintly
Member since Dec 2005
38884 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 2:21 pm to
quote:

We should have all other public fbs programs in the state either shut down or dropped to fcs.


Shut up.
Posted by TJG210
New Orleans
Member since Aug 2006
28340 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 2:24 pm to
What resources are those? Last I checked LSU football is 100% self sufficient and gives money back to the university.
Posted by BayouBengals03
lsu14always
Member since Nov 2007
99999 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 2:25 pm to
Not all of them.

ULL and Tech are good to have teams.

ULM? Meh.
Posted by Overbrook
Member since May 2013
6088 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 2:51 pm to
ULM uses less taxpayer money than ULL or La Tech.

I think they all should move to student fees and be left alone to do what they want. It would take the politics out of it and all of that.
Posted by TH03
Mogadishu
Member since Dec 2008
171036 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 2:53 pm to
ulm, ull, tech, and Tulane should just kill their sports programs, and ULM should probably just kill the school altogether.
Posted by MWP
Kingwood, TX via Monroe, LA
Member since Jul 2013
10429 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 3:06 pm to
quote:

ULM should probably just kill the school altogether.


I bet ULM's water ski and bass fishing teams will arse rape the teams on whatever school you attended, so frick off.

Posted by JEAUXBLEAUX
Bayonne, NJ
Member since May 2006
55358 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 3:09 pm to
bass fishing team? Really?
This post was edited on 12/12/14 at 3:10 pm
Posted by Smalls
Southern California
Member since Jul 2009
10245 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 3:30 pm to
ULM should drop down to FCS.
Posted by Ralph_Wiggum
Sugarland
Member since Jul 2005
10666 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 3:34 pm to
I agree that ULM and ULL should not be in FBS and I think with the P5 and playoffs you will see more schools either drop FB or down to the FCS level which makes sense.

I just don't see who having FBS FB makes sense for ULM and ULL.

Tulane is private so they can do what they want.
Posted by LordSaintly
Member since Dec 2005
38884 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 3:37 pm to
quote:

I agree that ULM and ULL should not be in FBS and I think with the P5 and playoffs you will see more schools either drop FB or down to the FCS level which makes sense.

I just don't see who having FBS FB makes sense for ULM and ULL.

Tulane is private so they can do what they want.


Why should ULL drop down but not Tech? Their expenditures are similar.
Posted by MrLSU
Yellowstone, Val d'isere
Member since Jan 2004
25982 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 4:56 pm to
ULM is going to have a REAL conversation in 2015 because the state budget cuts are going to be devastating once again for universities and eliminating sports will be topic of discussion.
Posted by Smalls
Southern California
Member since Jul 2009
10245 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 5:01 pm to
quote:

state budget cuts are going to be devastating once again for universities


Shouldn't Louisiana's current "economic boom" be driving increased tax revenues?

Posted by Smalls
Southern California
Member since Jul 2009
10245 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 5:05 pm to
quote:

Why should ULL drop down but not Tech? Their expenditures are similar.



They shouldn't. Both programs have a pulse and potential. ULM has neither. In reality, ULM should be downsized and converted to a pharmacy college only, but our politicians are completely worthless.
Posted by hsfolk
Member since Sep 2009
18538 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 5:05 pm to
what "economic boom"?
Posted by Smalls
Southern California
Member since Jul 2009
10245 posts
Posted on 12/12/14 at 5:17 pm to
I'm playing on the shite that LED spews all the time.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram