- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tech/ULM football series
Posted on 8/22/09 at 1:59 pm to johnnylightnin
Posted on 8/22/09 at 1:59 pm to johnnylightnin
quote:
touch issues
What's a touch issue? I didn't go to ULM either.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 2:02 pm to JJ27
quote:
What's a touch issue? I didn't go to ULM either.
You win the typo debate. Congrats.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 3:22 pm to johnnylightnin
Still waiting for some solid info on net revenue/loss from the I-Bowl. Did the bowl give Tech a higher payout than they did to Northern Illinois? According to that article, both got $750K before expenses. Did Tech bus over the day of the game to minimize costs or stay in Shreveport? The true cost (or profit) would be useful to know. A lot of minor bowls are losses for the teams but done for exposure and to reward the players.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 3:33 pm to CalBengal
quote:
Still waiting for some solid info on net revenue/loss from the I-Bowl. Did the bowl give Tech a higher payout than they did to Northern Illinois? According to that article, both got $750K before expenses. Did Tech bus over the day of the game to minimize costs or stay in Shreveport? The true cost (or profit) would be useful to know. A lot of minor bowls are losses for the teams but done for exposure and to reward the players.
Tech got a higher pay-out. It was 900K. We stayed in Shreveport the night before. Not sure what the net was and pretty sure the 900K isn't documented.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 3:36 pm to CalBengal
Shouldn't any Louisiana taxpayer have a say in La Tech athletics? Especially with those athletic endeavors are underwritten by that hardworking taxpayer?
Look at report page 9 (actually page 11 of 14 of pdf)
State Auditor's Report - Latech Athletics
Fiscal year ended: (2005 football season)
Football revenue: $600K (for a SEASON!)
Football away games and guarantees (i.e., whore games): $1.1 million
Total Direct Institutional Support (Money out of your pockets, taxpayers) $4.3 million (and they report it as revenue, of which it is one third of total reported revenue!)
Now this is the most current info found on the web. Perhaps you all can provide more recent numbers.
Look at report page 9 (actually page 11 of 14 of pdf)
State Auditor's Report - Latech Athletics
Fiscal year ended: (2005 football season)
Football revenue: $600K (for a SEASON!)
Football away games and guarantees (i.e., whore games): $1.1 million
Total Direct Institutional Support (Money out of your pockets, taxpayers) $4.3 million (and they report it as revenue, of which it is one third of total reported revenue!)
Now this is the most current info found on the web. Perhaps you all can provide more recent numbers.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 3:49 pm to CalBengal
quote:
houldn't any Louisiana taxpayer have a say in La Tech athletics? Especially with those athletic endeavors are underwritten by that hardworking taxpayer?
We've got the government we deserve. If you don't like how they run things, vote them out. Good luck.
For the record, every athletic program in this state (probably except Tulane) has taken money from the state. Of course LSU doesn't now, but that doesn't mean they never have...look it up.
You really think the taxpayer cares whether or not Tech and ULM play? If you do, you'll need to show them how playing ULM would help ease the taxpayer burden.
This post was edited on 8/22/09 at 4:08 pm
Posted on 8/22/09 at 3:50 pm to CalBengal
quote:
Shouldn't any Louisiana taxpayer have a say in La Tech athletics? Especially with those athletic endeavors are underwritten by that hardworking taxpayer?
Unless they've changed the form of government, the taxpayers are represented by elected officials who "have a say".
Posted on 8/23/09 at 7:45 am to captfun
quote:Not playing ULM has nothing to do with a move forward. UTEP moved "forward" from the WAC to CUSA, and they have no plans to cancel their home/away with New Mexico State. That's basically the same type of rivalry.
Agreed...that is why they are trying to move the program forward.
quote:They are catching heat because of elitism. Ambition is good. Thinking that ULM is beneath them is elitism.
They are catching heat because they have ambition
quote:The Sun Belt definitely is where Tech belongs. They'd be one of the conference's "powerhouses," which means they should expect a Sun Belt title at least every five years, meaning they'd be in the New Orleans Bowl fairly often. This would make the program much more interesting, and it would mean renewals of three traditional rivalries: ULL, ULM, and Arkansas State. Tech is 34-30 all-time in the WAC, and I believe they've won it once. They're more or less an average WAC team (34-30 all-time, 1 title), and they hardly ever come close to filling the Joe, meaning CUSA probably wants to avoid having to add them; and even when Texas teams were in the WAC, it still made no sense for them to be in it. Being in the WAC has done nothing for the Tech athletic program in terms of national respect; they are a completely overlooked program. The only thing that being in the WAC has done for Tech is get them to the Humanitarian Bowl in 2001.
(The Sun Belt) may be where they belong, but why not make every effort to get in a better home?
Being an average WAC team (and Tech will never be more than above average for the long term in the WAC) will never find Tech a better home. Owning the Sun Belt for a decade might. (The Sun Belt is a better home for them anyway.)
The Sun Belt is at nine right now, and I believe South Alabama and Texas State are on the way. Too bad Tech has the delusion that they have; if they didn't, the Sun Belt could have 12 and a title game.
Sun Belt East - FAU, FIU, MTSU, USA, Troy, WKU
Sun Belt West - ASU, ULL, ULM, LT, UNT, TSU
I'd love to see that.
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 7:49 am
Posted on 8/23/09 at 7:55 am to JJ27
quote:They weren't quite prepared for the move. Funny thing about it--had they tried to do it the same year Tech did, that would be quite interesting. NLU was tops in 1AA, and they had owned Tech for a decade. The series likely would have continued because each school would view the other as an equal. The Sun Belt football conference probably would have been created sooner, and Tech, who was a member of the Sun Belt for other sports, certainly would have been a member.
ULM should be in 1AA
Unfortunately, NLU made the move a little too late in my opinion, and they've never quite recovered (albeit they did win a SBC co-championship in 2005).
Posted on 8/23/09 at 8:00 am to xiv
NLU grad chiming in. Everytime that NLU and Tech played football during my time at NLU (79-86), both stadiums were packed. One time at Northeast it was raining so hard the field was flooding, the place was still packed. I think it would help both schools to play again.
Oh yeah, 7 years to get a BS and MS.
What the hell do the ULM kids do now, without Wreck Tech week? or to some Tuck Fech.
Oh yeah, 7 years to get a BS and MS.
What the hell do the ULM kids do now, without Wreck Tech week? or to some Tuck Fech.
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 8:06 am
Posted on 8/23/09 at 8:21 am to LSUFanNTX
quote:Both teams were generally competitive during that time, mediocre at worst.
Everytime that NLU and Tech played football during my time at NLU (79-86), both stadiums were packed.
For the 1997-2000 series:
1997: Tech was good, and NLU was mediocre. Aillet was packed.
1998: Mediocre/mediocre. Malone was packed.
1999: Decent/mediocre. Aillet was a little over half full if I remember correctly.
2000: Terrible/terrible. 15K.
If Tech was in the SBC, they'd be in the running for the title virtually every year, and ULM is in striking distance by the beginning of every November if Troy isn't undefeated. Also, ULL is competitive in the conference more often than not. I'm telling you, if ULL/ULM/LT finished their season with a three-week round robin like Kentucky/Tennessee/Vanderbilt, those three games would more often than have a New Orleans Bowl bid at stake, and the stadiums would be packed.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:17 am to xiv
It would be great for the old Gulf States Conference to re-form from the current Southland, Sunbelt, and including Tech.
Imagine this:
SLU
Nicholls
ULL
ULM
McNeese
La Tech
Northwestern
Louisiana College
From outside the state, throw in:
SFA
Sam Houston State
Lamar (Returning to football soon)
UCA
That would be one solid conference with light travel. The teams could bus to every game!
Imagine this:
SLU
Nicholls
ULL
ULM
McNeese
La Tech
Northwestern
Louisiana College
From outside the state, throw in:
SFA
Sam Houston State
Lamar (Returning to football soon)
UCA
That would be one solid conference with light travel. The teams could bus to every game!
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 9:19 am
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:28 am to xiv
Just to throw my 2 cents in. It really is simple: they should play. If Tech can play a 1AA school every year then they can find room for ULM. It's a win win for both sides not just ULM. Its also a win for North LA. Honestly I think it would be a good recruiting tool for both sides, especially for North LA recruits.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:39 am to CalBengal
quote:
It would be great for the old Gulf States Conference to re-form from the current Southland, Sunbelt, and including Tech.
Imagine this:
SLU
Nicholls
ULL
ULM
McNeese
La Tech
Northwestern
Louisiana College
From outside the state, throw in:
SFA
Sam Houston State
Lamar (Returning to football soon)
UCA
That would be one solid conference with light travel. The teams could bus to every game!
I know that scenario doesn't fit the delusional aspirations of certain football programs in the state, but I think that would be great. I remember the old GSC. It had great rivalries and made economic sense.
A serious dream that Tech, ULM or ULL will ever compete for a Div I national championship is laughable.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:51 am to lsuesac
quote:
Just to throw my 2 cents in. It really is simple: they should play. If Tech can play a 1AA school every year then they can find room for ULM. It's a win win for both sides not just ULM. Its also a win for North LA. Honestly I think it would be a good recruiting tool for both sides, especially for North LA recruits.
I agree.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:53 am to CalBengal
quote:Something tells me that CUSA will fall apart in the next decade. I think the Big East will end up having to pick up a couple CUSA schools (UCF and Memphis being obvious choices, with Marshall and ECU being distant maybes). I would love to see the remainder of CUSA split into two separate conferences and pick up SBC schools to fill out their lineup:
It would be great for the old Gulf States Conference to re-form from the current Southland, Sunbelt, and including Tech.
New SWC:
East
Arkansas State
Louisiana-Monroe
Louisiana-Lafayette
Louisiana Tech
Tulane
Tulsa
West
Houston
North Texas
Rice
Southern Methodist
Texas-El Paso
Texas State
New SIAA:
East
Appalachian State
East Carolina
Florida Atlantic
Florida International
Georgia Southern
Marshall
West
Alabama-Birmingham
Middle Tennessee State
South Alabama
Southern Mississippi
Troy
Western Kentucky
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 9:54 am
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:55 am to lsuesac
quote:There's simply nothing with which to disagree here. Nothing at all.
Just to throw my 2 cents in. It really is simple: they should play. If Tech can play a 1AA school every year then they can find room for ULM. It's a win win for both sides not just ULM. Its also a win for North LA. Honestly I think it would be a good recruiting tool for both sides, especially for North LA recruits.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 10:00 am to xiv
quote:
We all know that Tech views itself as a CUSA school, when in fact it belongs in the Sun Belt and nowhere else
So true!
Posted on 8/23/09 at 10:10 am to GatorTrunk
Here is some common sense thinking when it comes to La Tech. Look at their football facilities! They are a joke...1-AA at best. Hell West Monroe High School has BETTER facilities than La Tech and Tech THINKS they are bigtime college football? I cannot understand why any player in Louisiana would want to go to Tech if LSU does not offer them? What the hell does La Tech have to offer a mid-major propsect? It surely is not any better than ULM or ULL!
Posted on 8/23/09 at 10:22 am to GatorTrunk
Although both schools seem to be making moderate progress as a mid major, I seriously doubt that either school will agree to play without the legislature requiring it for the financial reasons discussed or until it is apparent that Tech will not be invited to Conf USA. I also thought that ULM was assured that Tech would not receive an invite into the SB so long as ULM was in the conference. I believe that Tech was asked to join before or at the same time as ULM. Again, It does not look like a game between the two is on the horizon without action by the legislature.It cannot be said that there is any appreciable differences in the two programs with ULM having beaten a good Ala team a few yars ag and Tech beating a not so good Miss St. but having a little better success in their conf. Both of the schools cost the taxpayers of Louisiana $ which could be reduced if they would play. It was also great bragging rights in North Louisiana similar to ULL and McNeese in S louisiana. They should be made to play , imo.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News