Maize Wrote:They were also left behind because they did NOTHING to improve their facilities until it was too late.

As for UAB outside of basketball look at your Non Revenue or even UAB Football during the time period of 2000-2003. It was nothing to really be proud of HD.

You wanted to know which schools some of us considered to be lazy and I gave some of them to you. I figured you would not like the answer.

Your answer is basically your opinion with no credible source. What you seem to be doing is basing what UL has done and comparing it to others program like a UAB or Memphis which I don't think make any sense whatsoever.

As far as Memphis is concern, facilities had nothing to do with it. If that was the case USF would not had been invited. What exactly has Memphis improved on in the last two or three year from facility standpoint? Every knew they were going to move the b-ball games to the Fedex Forum even before expansion took place. Is there something wrong with the Liberty Bowl? I'm not getting this facility thing with Memphis and it was never too late for anything Maize. Memphis was just in the wrong location at the wrong time.

From a UAB Football perspective no one would ever argue that UAB has a long way to go. But it doesn't mean they haven't been trying to take their football program to another level. You know everything that UAB is up against and those are things UL or UC didnt have to face over the past 10 years or so. I would still contend that UAB has done more with nothing than any other upstart Div I Athletic Program in NCAA history.

The comment about UAB Basketball was a very idoitic comment on your part. I seem to remember Denny Crum struggling toward the end of his career at UL. Bartow did the same thing. But UAB has only had 2 or 3 losing basketball seasons in its 26-year history. Even Murry had a little success and left UAB with a winning record.

So Maize, while I can't speak for other CUSA programs I can tell you that UAB is doing the best they can with what they have. It may not be up to standards with what UL and UC has done but to say they are being lazy and not trying is totally false and untrue.

But it is easy to criticize when you're on the outside looking in.

EnterSandman Wrote:

Cowboy Junky Wrote:They wanted to be in a league where an athletic budget of 21 million is the lowest budget in the league.

Mountain West Revenues as of 7/1/2004-6/30/2005

BYU $29,326,287
San Diego State $25,552,359
Utah $25,180,145
UNLV $22,967,557
Texas Christian $21,116,182
Wyoming $20,344,272
New Mexico $18,829,053
Colorado State $17,582,884
Air Force (did not report)

Thats three team's below that 21 million. And who knows what Air Force Revenues are.

That information is probably old. I was going off a recent article that stated CSU had the lowest budget in the league at 20.something million. I'll try to find it. The point is the same. Our budgets are bigger and the espansion candidates the MWC has are Utep, Fresno, and Boise. If you add their budgets to the MWC it will make the average budget gap between the two conferences even wider.

Maize Wrote:

HiddenDragon Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:That's what ticked me off about C-USA. We were THAT close to moving up with the big boys and we had these collection of programs that were lazy and unwilling to dedicate themselves to their athletic departments. That is what killed the league's potential to move up in the world.

Which programs did you consider to be lazy Cat?

I will say this while we were in the league and some programs only cared about 1 sport:

Tulane-Pre Hurricane Katrina

Southern Miss-did not give a rats ass about Basketball and the other Non Revenue sports except Baseball.

Memphis-Pre Raid and that was one of the reasons why they were left behind.

UAB-Outside of Basketball and really did not do anything until you got rid of Murray and hired Mike Anderson.

Houston

Those are pretty much my list to Dragon, except for UAB who has done a good job rebuilding their basketball and football programs, they're definitely more dedicated. I never considered UAB lazy so much as having a down period. Southern Miss is trying to improve their basketball. Tulane, prior to the Hurricane, almost had their athletic department basically shut, particularly football. Memphis is off the charts how they have upgraded themselves though. Basically it was the schools that kept finishing at the bottom but never did anything to improve themselves. Athletics brings in money that helps academics as well.

Cowboy Junky Wrote:

EnterSandman Wrote:

Cowboy Junky Wrote:They wanted to be in a league where an athletic budget of 21 million is the lowest budget in the league.

Mountain West Revenues as of 7/1/2004-6/30/2005

BYU $29,326,287
San Diego State $25,552,359
Utah $25,180,145
UNLV $22,967,557
Texas Christian $21,116,182
Wyoming $20,344,272
New Mexico $18,829,053
Colorado State $17,582,884
Air Force (did not report)

Thats three team's below that 21 million. And who knows what Air Force Revenues are.

That information is probably old. I was going off a recent article that stated CSU had the lowest budget in the league at 20.something million. I'll try to find it. The point is the same. Our budgets are bigger and the espansion candidates the MWC has are Utep, Fresno, and Boise. If you add their budgets to the MWC it will make the average budget gap between the two conferences even wider.

The NCAA reporting period for last year ends June 30th. By the end of summer we should know where everyone stood for the 05-06 season. I will be interested to see if the spending gap between the BCS and non BCS conferences has grown or shrunk.

Sir Galahad Wrote:

Quote:Reread what I wrote. I agree few would jump at a FB only membership at this time, ECU might, but UCF and Memphis I doubt. I was referring to 2010 when I believe at least 1 full membership in the all sports conference will be available. I doubt you'd deny that any CUSA East team would turn down a full membership in a BCS all sports conference.

By 2010, who knows what is going on. By 2010, UCF will have GOL's full set of recruits on the field, been in their new stadium and basketball arena for three years. UCF's medical school will be open and UCF will have surpassed UF for the largest school in the state and the fifth largest in the country. I am not trashing the Big East, but I am thinking bigger by then.

That's all well and good, but the Big East is thinking big, and has improved by leaps and bounds over the last 2 years. They went from a team that barely finished in the BCS Top 25 and having their BCS bid in danger and being "Miami and the little dwarfs" to being a legit BCS league and signing big contracts. By the time UCF get to where they want the Big East will probably already be there, or beyond.

Cowboy Junky Wrote:

EnterSandman Wrote:

Cowboy Junky Wrote:They wanted to be in a league where an athletic budget of 21 million is the lowest budget in the league.

Mountain West Revenues as of 7/1/2004-6/30/2005

BYU $29,326,287
San Diego State $25,552,359
Utah $25,180,145
UNLV $22,967,557
Texas Christian $21,116,182
Wyoming $20,344,272
New Mexico $18,829,053
Colorado State $17,582,884
Air Force (did not report)

Thats three team's below that 21 million. And who knows what Air Force Revenues are.

That information is probably old. I was going off a recent article that stated CSU had the lowest budget in the league at 20.something million. I'll try to find it. The point is the same. Our budgets are bigger and the espansion candidates the MWC has are Utep, Fresno, and Boise. If you add their budgets to the MWC it will make the average budget gap between the two conferences even wider.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. First off, UTEP to the MWC isn't a given. Also, the MWC fans seem to be putting their eggs in a basket that Fresno and Boise will take them to the promised land. But there are a lot of problems with that. First off, if it was that simple the MWC would have taken them 3 years ago when the Big East's BCS bid was in question. Also, just because they're tearing up the WAC doesn't mean they'll be a Top 25 team in the MWC. Right now the MWC is a conference where one team emerges out a conference of parity to finish ranked high. Boise has been solid, but Fresno has a history of crashing and burning at the end of the season. Not exactly a recipe for succeed. Not ripping the MWC at all, but Fresno and Boise doesn't immediatly make the MWC a power.

Claw
You are wasting your time in his world only UCF improves and everyoneelse stays the same or goes backward. let him keep dreaming about the ACC and SEC. This is the same guy that pestered our boards for years calling on doom and gloom for USF football and last year called for UCF to hand it to us, after we whipped their behinds he never appeared again.
Notice how on any USF related thread he needs to make an apperance and add negative comments his hate for USF is even more than his love for UCF.

Cubanbull Wrote:Claw
You are wasting your time in his world only UCF improves and everyoneelse stays the same or goes backward. let him keep dreaming about the ACC and SEC. This is the same guy that pestered our boards for years calling on doom and gloom for USF football and last year called for UCF to hand it to us, after we whipped their behinds he never appeared again.
Notice how on any USF related thread he needs to make an apperance and add negative comments his hate for USF is even more than his love for UCF.

I see. And, for some reason, over the last year or so UCF fans, for the most part, have taken to trashing Cincinnati as well. Lord knows why, we don't have any connection with them at all. In fact, they would still be in the MAC if not for Cincinnati bolting to the Big East so why they're ticked off at us who the heck knows. There doesn't seem to be any reasoning with them either.

CatsClaw Wrote:

Maize Wrote:

HiddenDragon Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:That's what ticked me off about C-USA. We were THAT close to moving up with the big boys and we had these collection of programs that were lazy and unwilling to dedicate themselves to their athletic departments. That is what killed the league's potential to move up in the world.

Which programs did you consider to be lazy Cat?

I will say this while we were in the league and some programs only cared about 1 sport:

Tulane-Pre Hurricane Katrina

Southern Miss-did not give a rats ass about Basketball and the other Non Revenue sports except Baseball.

Memphis-Pre Raid and that was one of the reasons why they were left behind.

UAB-Outside of Basketball and really did not do anything until you got rid of Murray and hired Mike Anderson.

Houston

Those are pretty much my list to Dragon, except for UAB who has done a good job rebuilding their basketball and football programs, they're definitely more dedicated. I never considered UAB lazy so much as having a down period. Southern Miss is trying to improve their basketball. Tulane, prior to the Hurricane, almost had their athletic department basically shut, particularly football. Memphis is off the charts how they have upgraded themselves though. Basically it was the schools that kept finishing at the bottom but never did anything to improve themselves. Athletics brings in money that helps academics as well.

I can live with that. UAB Basketball did hit a dry spell sort of speak but what program doesn't go through that phase at some point? And I would be the first to tell you that while UAB Football has done okay it should have accomplished a lot more than what it has. But they are trying to do something although the cards are totally stacked against them.

CatsClaw Wrote:

Maize Wrote:

HiddenDragon Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:That's what ticked me off about C-USA. We were THAT close to moving up with the big boys and we had these collection of programs that were lazy and unwilling to dedicate themselves to their athletic departments. That is what killed the league's potential to move up in the world.

Which programs did you consider to be lazy Cat?

I will say this while we were in the league and some programs only cared about 1 sport:

Tulane-Pre Hurricane Katrina

Southern Miss-did not give a rats ass about Basketball and the other Non Revenue sports except Baseball.

Memphis-Pre Raid and that was one of the reasons why they were left behind.

UAB-Outside of Basketball and really did not do anything until you got rid of Murray and hired Mike Anderson.

Houston

Those are pretty much my list to Dragon, except for UAB who has done a good job rebuilding their basketball and football programs, they're definitely more dedicated. I never considered UAB lazy so much as having a down period. Southern Miss is trying to improve their basketball. Tulane, prior to the Hurricane, almost had their athletic department basically shut, particularly football. Memphis is off the charts how they have upgraded themselves though. Basically it was the schools that kept finishing at the bottom but never did anything to improve themselves. Athletics brings in money that helps academics as well.

I was trying put it in the 2000-2003 time frame. Now everything is different.

UAB-Has improved and even though Anderson has moved on you still got a coach that took a program to the NCAA Title game in Mike Davis.

Southern Miss-at least they are giving a better effort in basketball.

Tulane-Post Katrina they have other problems besides athletics.

Memphis-Doing what UofL and UC did before Big East/ACC Expansion/Raid.

To add to the list of schools that are working their tails off in C-USA are ECU and UCF. IMHO it is in part to improve themselves for the Big East and in part to keep up with the Jones.

Maize Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:

Maize Wrote:

HiddenDragon Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:That's what ticked me off about C-USA. We were THAT close to moving up with the big boys and we had these collection of programs that were lazy and unwilling to dedicate themselves to their athletic departments. That is what killed the league's potential to move up in the world.

Which programs did you consider to be lazy Cat?

I will say this while we were in the league and some programs only cared about 1 sport:

Tulane-Pre Hurricane Katrina

Southern Miss-did not give a rats ass about Basketball and the other Non Revenue sports except Baseball.

Memphis-Pre Raid and that was one of the reasons why they were left behind.

UAB-Outside of Basketball and really did not do anything until you got rid of Murray and hired Mike Anderson.

Houston

Those are pretty much my list to Dragon, except for UAB who has done a good job rebuilding their basketball and football programs, they're definitely more dedicated. I never considered UAB lazy so much as having a down period. Southern Miss is trying to improve their basketball. Tulane, prior to the Hurricane, almost had their athletic department basically shut, particularly football. Memphis is off the charts how they have upgraded themselves though. Basically it was the schools that kept finishing at the bottom but never did anything to improve themselves. Athletics brings in money that helps academics as well.

I was trying put it in the 2000-2003 time frame. Now everything is different.

UAB-Has improved and even though Anderson has moved on you still got a coach that took a program to the NCAA Title game in Mike Davis.

Southern Miss-at least they are giving a better effort in basketball.

Tulane-Post Katrina they have other problems besides athletics.

Memphis-Doing what UofL and UC did before Big East/ACC Expansion/Raid.

To add to the list of schools that are working their tails off in C-USA are ECU and UCF. IMHO it is in part to improve themselves for the Big East and in part to keep up with the Jones.

Valid points, though I think UAB has done more then most of the old C-USA to keep up with the rest of the conference. The point you're making is the exact point I was making as well. Instead of trying to improve themselves to make themselves and the conference better a lot of program are reactive instead of proactive. A lot of these programs maintained the status quo and laid dormant relying on the top programs to carry the load, especially in basketball. But once many of those teams left THEN you saw a lot of programs trying to improve. That is frustrating.

CatsClaw Wrote:

Cowboy Junky Wrote:

EnterSandman Wrote:

Cowboy Junky Wrote:They wanted to be in a league where an athletic budget of 21 million is the lowest budget in the league.

Mountain West Revenues as of 7/1/2004-6/30/2005

BYU $29,326,287
San Diego State $25,552,359
Utah $25,180,145
UNLV $22,967,557
Texas Christian $21,116,182
Wyoming $20,344,272
New Mexico $18,829,053
Colorado State $17,582,884
Air Force (did not report)

Thats three team's below that 21 million. And who knows what Air Force Revenues are.

That information is probably old. I was going off a recent article that stated CSU had the lowest budget in the league at 20.something million. I'll try to find it. The point is the same. Our budgets are bigger and the espansion candidates the MWC has are Utep, Fresno, and Boise. If you add their budgets to the MWC it will make the average budget gap between the two conferences even wider.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. First off, UTEP to the MWC isn't a given. Also, the MWC fans seem to be putting their eggs in a basket that Fresno and Boise will take them to the promised land. But there are a lot of problems with that. First off, if it was that simple the MWC would have taken them 3 years ago when the Big East's BCS bid was in question. Also, just because they're tearing up the WAC doesn't mean they'll be a Top 25 team in the MWC. Right now the MWC is a conference where one team emerges out a conference of parity to finish ranked high. Boise has been solid, but Fresno has a history of crashing and burning at the end of the season. Not exactly a recipe for succeed. Not ripping the MWC at all, but Fresno and Boise doesn't immediatly make the MWC a power.

True, but we don't really need to expand. We are hanging with the Big East as is. It's not like we have to add teams to keep up with the Big East. We kind of want to wait a while and see who wins the expansion arms race. Boise and Fresno are both battling it out to see who can build facilities, expand their stadiums, and expand their budgets quicker. When it's obvious those teams will enhance the MWC, they'll probably get added. Until then, there isn't any seperation on the gridiron between the Big East and the MWC as is.

The three teams that are on the lower end of that budget list are expanding their budgets faster than anyone. Wyoming has invested 10 million in facilities the last two years, is investing 15 million this year, and will invest 15 more over the next two years. Our athletic program has made it an immediate goal to reach the top half of the MWC for budgets. New Mexico, like Wyoming, is getting rich off of energy. They're dropping money all over the place and expanding their budgets as well.

The MWC doesn't need to expand to improve. The bottom half MWC teams are in states that have the biggest surpluses in the country. In fact, Wyoming is building a natural gas pipeline to the heart of Big East country as we speak. All we need to do is keep spending part of our two billion dollar a year surplus on facilities and we'll surpass the Big East soon enough. You may have the most t.v. sets, but you have the most gas pumps and heaters as well. You're need for energy and our supply of it is what seperates the MWC from the other non-bcs conferences. The MWC is growning faster than any conference in America.

Quote:In football you are putting most of your eggs on an old coach with a bad ticker and you are imagining that both football and basketball attendances will improve while not having BCS access. Your stadium wil hold 45,000 and basketball 10,000 even if you sell both outs continually, you would still be behind Memphis and Louisville in attendance and who knows who else by 2010

What an absolute ignorant thing to say, but it comes as no surprise when you consider the source.

GOL has a "bad ticker" I know many people in the 40's that have had heart attacks, they seem to be doing fine. And what is wrong with putting your coach under contract for ten years. Considering that coach has won the National Coach of the year, and three conference coaches of the year, I would say he is a steal at $1MM a year. Also consider that USF pays their coach $1MM a year and he has never won a playoff game, never won a conference championship, never won any coach of the year awards, and can't seem to keep his peter out of the payroll.

Our attendance will improve, that is what happens when you build and on campus football stadium, I know you can't understand that being a Miami fan and a Bulls fan, you know nothing of college tradition.

UL had:

42,692 for Pitt
37,896 for Cuse
41,219 for Rutgers
41,334 for UNC
40,219 for FAU
42,647 for Oregon State

Considering the stadium holds 45,000, UL did not sell out their stadium once.

Memphis had:

53,339 for Ole Miss
30,772 for UT-Chat
30,053 for UTEP
31,710 for ECU
47,669 for UAB
46,403 for Marshall

Impressive first game, other than that, its no different than UCF selling out theirs.

And basketball, judging from USF getting into the big east, it does not matter.

Sir Galahad Wrote:

Quote:In football you are putting most of your eggs on an old coach with a bad ticker and you are imagining that both football and basketball attendances will improve while not having BCS access. Your stadium wil hold 45,000 and basketball 10,000 even if you sell both outs continually, you would still be behind Memphis and Louisville in attendance and who knows who else by 2010

What an absolute ignorant thing to say, but it comes as no surprise when you consider the source.

GOL has a "bad ticker" I know many people in the 40's that have had heart attacks, they seem to be doing fine. And what is wrong with putting your coach under contract for ten years. Considering that coach has won the National Coach of the year, and three conference coaches of the year, I would say he is a steal at $1MM a year. Also consider that USF pays their coach $1MM a year and he has never won a playoff game, never won a conference championship, never won any coach of the year awards, and can't seem to keep his peter out of the payroll.

Our attendance will improve, that is what happens when you build and on campus football stadium, I know you can't understand that being a Miami fan and a Bulls fan, you know nothing of college tradition.

UL had:

42,692 for Pitt
37,896 for Cuse
41,219 for Rutgers
41,334 for UNC
40,219 for FAU
42,647 for Oregon State

Considering the stadium holds 45,000, UL did not sell out their stadium once.

Memphis had:

53,339 for Ole Miss
30,772 for UT-Chat
30,053 for UTEP
31,710 for ECU
47,669 for UAB
46,403 for Marshall

Impressive first game, other than that, its no different than UCF selling out theirs.

And basketball, judging from USF getting into the big east, it does not matter.

Papa John's Cardinal Stadium holds 42,000 not 45000.

Well i do know one thing our coach can do and thats beat the living daylights out of the team tour coach won coach of the year award for.
You are lucky he wasnt another type of coach or he would have run up the score.

EnterSandman Wrote:

Sir Galahad Wrote:

Quote:In football you are putting most of your eggs on an old coach with a bad ticker and you are imagining that both football and basketball attendances will improve while not having BCS access. Your stadium wil hold 45,000 and basketball 10,000 even if you sell both outs continually, you would still be behind Memphis and Louisville in attendance and who knows who else by 2010

What an absolute ignorant thing to say, but it comes as no surprise when you consider the source.

GOL has a "bad ticker" I know many people in the 40's that have had heart attacks, they seem to be doing fine. And what is wrong with putting your coach under contract for ten years. Considering that coach has won the National Coach of the year, and three conference coaches of the year, I would say he is a steal at $1MM a year. Also consider that USF pays their coach $1MM a year and he has never won a playoff game, never won a conference championship, never won any coach of the year awards, and can't seem to keep his peter out of the payroll.

Our attendance will improve, that is what happens when you build and on campus football stadium, I know you can't understand that being a Miami fan and a Bulls fan, you know nothing of college tradition.

UL had:

42,692 for Pitt
37,896 for Cuse
41,219 for Rutgers
41,334 for UNC
40,219 for FAU
42,647 for Oregon State

Considering the stadium holds 45,000, UL did not sell out their stadium once.

Memphis had:

53,339 for Ole Miss
30,772 for UT-Chat
30,053 for UTEP
31,710 for ECU
47,669 for UAB
46,403 for Marshall

Impressive first game, other than that, its no different than UCF selling out theirs.

And basketball, judging from USF getting into the big east, it does not matter.

Papa John's Cardinal Stadium holds 42,000 not 45000.

Maybe we did expand our stadium by 3000 seats.

Papa John's Cardinal Stadium
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Papa John's Cardinal Stadium

Facility statistics
Location 2800 South Floyd Street
Louisville, KY 40292
Broke ground 1997
Opened 1998
Closed Open
Demolished N/A
Owner University of Louisville
Operator University of Louisville
Surface FieldTurf
Construction cost $63 million USD
Architect
Former names
N/A
Tenants Louisville Cardinals (NCAA) (1998-Present)
Seating capacity
42,000

Papa John?s Cardinal Stadium is a football stadium located in Louisville, Kentucky, USA and serves as the home of the football team of the Louisville Cardinals.

It opened in 1998, making it the second newest on-campus football stadium in NCAA Division I-A behind SMU?s Gerald J. Ford Stadium. The official seating capacity in the horseshoe-shaped facility is 42,000. The stadium cost $63 million to build with Papa John's Pizza's John Schnatter donating $5 million for the naming rights to the stadium. The stadium was entirely funded from private donations, as the Kentucky General Assembly refused to provide any state funding for its construction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papa_John's...al_Stadium

this is where i got the number from:

Papa John Stadium Seating Chart, Papa John Stadium Tickets

Opening Night: 1998 Capacity: 45,000

http://www.gotickets.com/venues/ky/papa_...tadium.php


Cuban, I do hope you remember that game, because you will need to look back upon that. As for running the score up, USF can't do that, that takes a QB who can throw or a RB that can run more than 20 times a game, something USF had neither.

Sir Galahad Wrote:

Quote:Reread what I wrote. I agree few would jump at a FB only membership at this time, ECU might, but UCF and Memphis I doubt. I was referring to 2010 when I believe at least 1 full membership in the all sports conference will be available. I doubt you'd deny that any CUSA East team would turn down a full membership in a BCS all sports conference.

By 2010, who knows what is going on. By 2010, UCF will have GOL's full set of recruits on the field, been in their new stadium and basketball arena for three years. UCF's medical school will be open and UCF will have surpassed UF for the largest school in the state and the fifth largest in the country. I am not trashing the Big East, but I am thinking bigger by then.

lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao

laughing from a cuse fan, well if anyone knows comedy, its go to be a cuse fan.

Sir Galahad Wrote:laughing from a cuse fan, well if anyone knows comedy, its go to be a cuse fan.

Wow, one season removed from 0-11 in the MAC and your talking smack on Syracuse.??