barney fife

quote:

---

Their games with USM and Houston have nothing to do with this. Why didn't they offer USM or Houston a one and done in Ruston? If they did, do you think USM or Houston would have signed that deal? Absolutely not. So why should ULM agree to it? ULM doesn't need it any more than Tech does. But they both would benefit with a renewed rivalry, playing home and homes from here on out. My point is, LSU can sign Tech, ULL, ULM, etc. to one and dones, but Tech is not in the same position. No school equal to them would do this. In their minds they think they are close to the level of LSU and try to treat ULM that way.

---

No Tech supporter believes Tech is equal to LSU in athletics or support. But ULM did not support the last two series' between ULM and Louisiana Tech. Both schools need revenue and ULM's unwillingness to attend the games at EITHER venue makes it a losing proposition for Tech. During the past few years Tech has proposed a few options to renew the series, including an arrangement where games would be played in Monroe. ULM turned them down.

Because ULM has not/would not support the game, therefore making it unattractive financially, considering that both schools need revenue. I would like to see them play regularly. However, ULM talks like they want to play but have not supported the games that were played in the '90's and '00's.

bullshite, Turbo. NLU won 9 of 12 from 1978 to 1989. LINK

Tech then spanked NLU twice and pussed out of the series. They then proceeded to suck donkey balls for four years, during which NLU was consistently a top ten 1AA team. Plain and simple, Tech didn't want to lose repeatedly to a 1AA team.

"Then NLU moves up and has a better 1A record than Tech for three years. Tech finally felt comfortable resuming the series once they were decent again (under Crowton).

No two ways about it; they're a bunch of pussies. And the only way to prove me wrong is on the field. First at the Joe, then at the Jim. There's no other way." - xiv

Man, you are wrong. Northeast did not win 9/12 games between 78-89. Tech bought out the last game of the series because they were playing 1A and Northeast was not. That game was scheduled to be played in Monroe and it is totally reasonable that a 1A team would not play a 1AA on the road. Those are facts. Actually, Tech won in '88, '89, '90 and '91 and then won every game between the schools since then. I beleive those were '97-'01, but I'm not sure. I do know the series was resumed as soon as possible after Northeast moved to 1A, but it took a few years due to scheduling conflicts. Northeast did not support the series upon its renewal and a business decision was made to not renew at that time. You can say Tech was scared, yada, yada, yada, but the facts are that Tech moved in a different direction in an attempt to improve. You can argue whatever you want but those are the facts. You can argue Tech's success however you choose but you can't logically defend a stance that an institution shouldn't try to improve. Tech offerred to play ULM but ULM refused. Had ULM accepted and actually support the game, maybe a home/home arrangement would be made. Based on ULM's lack of support the last series, it is reasonable that in today's financial landscape, neither school can afford a home/home OOC series that is not supported. Apparently, ULM lacks the confidence that their fans will support a game and is unwilling to do what is necessary to show a resumption of the series would be financially beneficial to both parties.

"It would actually be your income statement, not your balance sheet. But could you cite some numbers supporting this? Just curious, how many of your conference away games are profitable. Other than probably Boise and maybe Fresno, chances are good it costs more to travel and play the game than is paid to you. I certainly can't imagine a trip to Nevada or Idaho being better than playing ULM in Monroe. No telling what a loss that a Hawaii trip causes." - CalBengal

I read the income/loss statements from athletic of Louisiana schools somewhere a year or so ago. I can't recall the exact figures, but in the cited year (which I don't recall either), Tech's revenue far exceeded the ULx's and income(loss) was comparable to the two, both Sunbelt affiliated universities. So actually Tech's finances from athletics doesn't negatively compare with thos in the Sunbelt and the potential for revenue/profit is much better in the WAC.

Tech is not afraid to play ULM. Louisiana Tech recently offerred ULM $325,000 to take a bus ride to Ruston and play Tech. ULM refused. Explain that.

I really doubt that LSU fans are very interested in Tech/ULM cyberspace "battles". They have bigger fish to fry in the SEC. Hopefully one day soon, Louisiana Tech will have the support and success LSU enjoys on the field.

Thank you guys for letting me support my school on your forum.