- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- 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
0
Posted on 8/22/09 at 9:53 am to xiv
Tech and NLU talking smack - now I've heard everything! 
Posted on 8/22/09 at 9:58 am to captfun
What does that prove? It proves that Tech has had more recent success. Ok, congrats. I think what you are missing is you have two schools with similar programs (and if want to rank them then yes Tech has the better program now) that could benefit from the small travel and a good attendance. If Tech is so superior as you say then it makes even less sense. Good attendance, no travel costs, and a guaranteed 1A win. What's hard to understand about that.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:00 am to Lemon Head
quote:
Tech and NLU talking smack - now I've heard everything!
I wasn't going to say anything, but . . .
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:01 am to CAT
It makes no sense for ULM and Tech not to play. It's a natural. I didn't realize Ruston had a chicken farm.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:03 am to CAT
Why make that trip to Monroe, when the trip to Houston and Hattiesburg pay more money, and get more exposure.
On top of that, with the improvements Derrick Dooley is making in the infrastructure @ Tech, if CUSA expands or has to replace teams, the goodwill and travel exposure from those games will help Techs cause. Not sure if it will help enough,but that is a different story.
Look, for better or worse, Tech has made the decision not to play ULM. Not sure if it is the right one or not, but Dooley seems to have that entire athletic program moving in the right direction, so until some blows up, Tech fans will follow his lead. It seems to be working.
On top of that, with the improvements Derrick Dooley is making in the infrastructure @ Tech, if CUSA expands or has to replace teams, the goodwill and travel exposure from those games will help Techs cause. Not sure if it will help enough,but that is a different story.
Look, for better or worse, Tech has made the decision not to play ULM. Not sure if it is the right one or not, but Dooley seems to have that entire athletic program moving in the right direction, so until some blows up, Tech fans will follow his lead. It seems to be working.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:04 am to VOR
If you look at that thread I linked, which cites state audit information, you'll see Latech, ULL, ULm, etc. do not remotely break even financially. Hence the taxpayer makes up the shortfall.
These programs should have to play one another as long as they are on the dole. Become self-sufficient and they should be able to play/not play whomever.
These programs should have to play one another as long as they are on the dole. Become self-sufficient and they should be able to play/not play whomever.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:07 am to captfun
quote:The CUSA boner surfaces.
On top of that, with the improvements Derrick Dooley is making in the infrastructure @ Tech, if CUSA expands or has to replace teams, the goodwill and travel exposure from those games will help Techs cause. Not sure if it will help enough,but that is a different story.
quote:All the things he is doing will amount to nothing for Tech in ten years. They will, however, amount to a better AD job for Dooley. Tech is a stepping stone right here. Enjoy the ride and try not to be bitter when the WAC considers removing Tech in 2017.
Dooley
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:08 am to CalBengal
quote:+1000
If you look at that thread I linked, which cites state audit information, you'll see Latech, ULL, ULm, etc. do not remotely break even financially. Hence the taxpayer makes up the shortfall.
These programs should have to play one another as long as they are on the dole. Become self-sufficient and they should be able to play/not play whomever.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:11 am to xiv
Do you even read? I said I don't think it would be enough, but if you are going to sit there and tell me that ULM would not choose CUSA over the Sun Belt, or do anything that they could to improve their chances to get into any better conference, then you are lying to both of us.
The travel would be equal to the Belt, and the TV money would be much better. Which one would you prefer?
The travel would be equal to the Belt, and the TV money would be much better. Which one would you prefer?
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:15 am to captfun
quote:Not what I'm saying. I'm saying that Tech is so insignificant that if CUSA lost one, and the choice was between adding Tech to stay at 12, or staying at 11, they might choose to stay at 11. Seriously, Tech is a "Sun Belt" type of program.
Do you even read? I said I don't think it would be enough, but if you are going to sit there and tell me that ULM would not choose CUSA over the Sun Belt, or do anything that they could to improve their chances to get into any better conference, then you are lying to both of us.
The travel would be equal to the Belt, and the TV money would be much better. Which one would you prefer?
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:20 am to xiv
They could not stay at 11 b/c they would lose the championship game in football. That game brings in too much money and TV exposure to give up. Personally, I think Troy would be who they tap if they lost one, but who knows....
Your assertaion of Tech being a "SunBelt" type team could be correct, but it seems that, even if they are, they are being bashed for trying to improve.
Also, as far as Tech being insignificant, that seems to be changing in the eyes of some schools, as they are signing much better home and home deals than 5 or 6 years ago.
Your assertaion of Tech being a "SunBelt" type team could be correct, but it seems that, even if they are, they are being bashed for trying to improve.
Also, as far as Tech being insignificant, that seems to be changing in the eyes of some schools, as they are signing much better home and home deals than 5 or 6 years ago.
This post was edited on 8/22/09 at 10:21 am
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:24 am to captfun
quote:...really? Even the ACC hasn't benefited much from theirs.
They could not stay at 11 b/c they would lose the championship game in football. That game brings in too much money and TV exposure to give up.
quote:Maybe. Maybe North Texas, too.
Personally, I think Troy would be who they tap if they lost one, but who knows....
Posted on 8/22/09 at 10:30 am to xiv
CUSA gets prime time national coverage out of their game. For CUSA, that showcase for their teams is advertisement that they can't buy. The exposure alone is worth it. That will be the decideing factor for the shake ups, if any come, in the Big East. The need for that TV money and exposure could cause them to expand their football playing schools, or even break away the basketball only schools to get a championship game.
Also, not sure SMU would want North Texas in the same league. Lot of bad blood between those two.
Also, not sure SMU would want North Texas in the same league. Lot of bad blood between those two.
This post was edited on 8/22/09 at 10:32 am
Posted on 8/22/09 at 11:04 am to captfun
quote:
Also, don't talk about attendance when you played a "home" game vs Arkansas in Little Rock War Memorial. Nice way to skirt the rules.
True? If so, was it to boost their attendance because of 1A?
Posted on 8/22/09 at 11:07 am to captfun
Tech doesn't really bring anything to the CUSA table, other than a warm body.
* No market of any size (oh, Shreveport. Right.)
* No fan base of any size
* More likely a taker, rather than provider, of conference bowl revenue shares on an ongoing basis
BTW, what amount did they distribute to the WAC members for participating in the I-Bowl?
* No market of any size (oh, Shreveport. Right.)
* No fan base of any size
* More likely a taker, rather than provider, of conference bowl revenue shares on an ongoing basis
BTW, what amount did they distribute to the WAC members for participating in the I-Bowl?
Posted on 8/22/09 at 11:14 am to arrakis
quote:
True? If so, was it to boost their attendance because of 1A?
100%
Posted on 8/22/09 at 11:18 am to CalBengal
quote:
BTW, what amount did they distribute to the WAC members for participating in the I-Bowl?
I think the at large share was around 750K total.
Posted on 8/22/09 at 11:27 am to captfun
Is that the payout to Tech or what Tech gave to the conference after taking their share?
Posted on 8/22/09 at 11:32 am to captfun
quote:
quote:
True? If so, was it to boost their attendance because of 1A?
100%
Damn, that's WEAK. I didn't realize Northeast was trying to make a go of it at 1A.
Page 2 of 75
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News