(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

You have good football attendance and a history of playing pretty good football consistently. That's important. It's not the whole story. You might look at it before you bash teams that were here BEFORE you were.
Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

Good grief! No wonder ECU fans seem to have a self-esteem issue -

This is Tulane football over the past 10 years:


2004 Chris Scelfo 5–6 3–5 T-6th
2005 Chris Scelfo 2–9 1–7 T-5th (West)
2006 Chris Scelfo 4–8 2–6 6th (West)
2007 Bob Toledo 4–8 3–5 T-3rd (West)
2008 Bob Toledo 2–10 1–7 5th (West)
2009 Bob Toledo 3–9 1–7 6th (West)
2010 Bob Toledo 4–8 2–6 6th (West)
2011 Bob Toledo 2–11 1–7 6th (West)
2012 Curtis Johnson 2–10 2–6 6th (West)
2013 Curtis Johnson 7–6 5–3 4th (West)

(04-15-2014 11:56 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

You have good football attendance and a history of playing pretty good football consistently. That's important. It's not the whole story. You might look at it before you bash teams that were here BEFORE you were.
Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

Most of that is ancient history and/or is a non-factor when talking about how it actually benefits the league as a whole. Nice golf reference.

In the past seven years TU FBall is 24-56 yet TU was STILL accepted in front of ECU. That has to sting a little, right?

(04-15-2014 12:25 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:56 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

You have good football attendance and a history of playing pretty good football consistently. That's important. It's not the whole story. You might look at it before you bash teams that were here BEFORE you were.
Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

Most of that is ancient history and/or is a non-factor when talking about how it actually benefits the league as a whole. Nice golf reference.

In the past seven years TU FBall is 24-56 yet TU was STILL accepted in front of ECU. That has to sting a little, right?

We were accepted at the exact same time. Your bball just got in ahead.

(04-15-2014 12:19 PM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:56 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Most of that is ancient history and/or is a non-factor when talking about how it actually benefits the league as a whole. Nice golf reference.

I only included things that happened DURING C-USA.
All of ECU's basketball gooseggs are current and ancient.
If ECU had a women's golf top 10, there would have been 3 threads started on it.

Not by me. I personally wouldn't have given a damn. Football, basketball and baseball are all that really matter IMHO.

I won't deny that our basketball has been historically pathetic. The long and short of it is that very few people could tell you which of our 2 programs has been better the past 10 years. However, between the 2 schools there's no doubt we're more recognized in the sport that matters the most. Comparing head to head records and Oly sports is really missing my point completely.

I HOPE to be proven wrong about Tulane, I really do, but unless we're talking about spelling and geography bees there's not a lot of value there from a competition or fanbase standpoint.

(04-15-2014 12:25 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:56 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

You have good football attendance and a history of playing pretty good football consistently. That's important. It's not the whole story. You might look at it before you bash teams that were here BEFORE you were.
Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

Most of that is ancient history and/or is a non-factor when talking about how it actually benefits the league as a whole. Nice golf reference.

In the past seven years TU FBall is 24-56 yet TU was STILL accepted in front of ECU. That has to sting a little, right?

Not really. Tulane and ECU were basically given acceptance into the Big East at the same time, albeit Tulane was for all sports and ECU was only for football initially. The C7 had to be excused fully to get ECU included fully into the conference.

(04-15-2014 12:25 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  In the past seven years TU FBall is 24-56 yet TU was STILL accepted in front of ECU. That has to sting a little, right?

Considering the idiots that voted you guys in based on media market, not really.

(04-15-2014 12:21 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  This is Tulane football over the past 10 years:


2004 Chris Scelfo 5–6 3–5 T-6th
2005 Chris Scelfo 2–9 1–7 T-5th (West)
2006 Chris Scelfo 4–8 2–6 6th (West)
2007 Bob Toledo 4–8 3–5 T-3rd (West)
2008 Bob Toledo 2–10 1–7 5th (West)
2009 Bob Toledo 3–9 1–7 6th (West)
2010 Bob Toledo 4–8 2–6 6th (West)
2011 Bob Toledo 2–11 1–7 6th (West)
2012 Curtis Johnson 2–10 2–6 6th (West)
2013 Curtis Johnson 7–6 5–3 4th (West)

Vividly describes what the 2005 hurricane did to us. Everything (practically) I posted above was from 1996-spring 2005. Hopefully, we're on our way back.
11-22-2014. I'll be there. My first visit. Looking forward to it.

(04-15-2014 09:47 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Pretty much solidifies that the B12 wont be expanding anytime soon

Wait... The one issue Dodds doesn't deal with is this: Do you NEED 12 teams to have a CCG?

The B12 asked for a waiver to the 12 team rule. I thought they were denied.

MEANING... it doesn't matter "how" the teams are selected to play in a CCG, the B12 with 10 teams still can't have one.

Unless, the 12-team rule is no longer in effect.

(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

You have good football attendance and a history of playing pretty good football consistently. That's important. It's not the whole story. You might look at it before you bash teams that were here BEFORE you were.
Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

Ummmm no

Nice research

(04-15-2014 12:43 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 09:47 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Pretty much solidifies that the B12 wont be expanding anytime soon

Wait... The one issue Dodds doesn't deal with is this: Do you NEED 12 teams to have a CCG?

The B12 asked for a waiver to the 12 team rule. I thought they were denied.

MEANING... it doesn't matter "how" the teams are selected to play in a CCG, the B12 with 10 teams still can't have one.

Unless, the 12-team rule is no longer in effect.

"You wouldn't any longer have to have 12 (teams)," Bowlsby said. "You wouldn't any longer have to play a full round-robin in your subdivision. That would actually afford us the opportunity to have a playoff between two selected teams by whatever process we would want to select.

(04-15-2014 12:29 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 12:25 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  In the past seven years TU FBall is 24-56 yet TU was STILL accepted in front of ECU. That has to sting a little, right?

Considering the idiots that voted you guys in based on media market, not really.

and endowment, recruiting, destination city, academics, NATIONAL reputation.......a few ECU fans are dangerously teetering on the ULL/Texas Tech cliff.

(04-15-2014 12:51 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0

Ummmm no

Nice research

That wasn't while in C-USA.

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 09:51 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Why did we need 12 schools again? Can we create a new league and leave Tulsa & Tulane out?

I'd like to keep Tulsa. Bottom line is Tulane was a horrendous addition. However, you can thank UCF leadership for that boneheaded move.

Quote:Central Florida Played A Role In Bringing Tulane Into Big East

Text messages from Central Florida President John Hitt to Big East commissioner Mike Aresco show the school played a role in one of the league's more surprising moves.

Hitt sent a text message to Aresco about Tulane's interest in the Big East, according to records obtained by the Orlando Sentinel.

"Scott Cowen at Tulane wants to talk with me about possibilities for Tulane in the Big East. Scott is a friend. Will listen and then call you. John," Hitt wrote to Aresco on Nov. 18.

http://articles.courant.com/2013-01-29/s...sco-tulane

Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

Not only were we extended full membership by a vote of the entire conference, we were extended full membership before ECU. So any discussion of what "we" should have done as a conference is very odd to hear from an ECU fan...Considering that you were not a part of the "we" at the time.

(04-15-2014 01:12 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 09:51 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Why did we need 12 schools again? Can we create a new league and leave Tulsa & Tulane out?

I'd like to keep Tulsa. Bottom line is Tulane was a horrendous addition. However, you can thank UCF leadership for that boneheaded move.

Quote:Central Florida Played A Role In Bringing Tulane Into Big East

Text messages from Central Florida President John Hitt to Big East commissioner Mike Aresco show the school played a role in one of the league's more surprising moves.

Hitt sent a text message to Aresco about Tulane's interest in the Big East, according to records obtained by the Orlando Sentinel.

"Scott Cowen at Tulane wants to talk with me about possibilities for Tulane in the Big East. Scott is a friend. Will listen and then call you. John," Hitt wrote to Aresco on Nov. 18.

http://articles.courant.com/2013-01-29/s...sco-tulane

Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

Not only were we extended full membership by a vote of the entire conference, we were extended full membership before ECU. So any discussion of what "we" should have done as a conference is very odd to hear from an ECU fan...Considering that you were not a part of the "we" at the time.

I didn't type the word "we" once in my post.

(04-15-2014 01:00 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 12:29 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 12:25 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  In the past seven years TU FBall is 24-56 yet TU was STILL accepted in front of ECU. That has to sting a little, right?

Considering the idiots that voted you guys in based on media market, not really.

and endowment, recruiting, destination city, academics, NATIONAL reputation.......a few ECU fans are dangerously teetering on the ULL/Texas Tech cliff.

Sweet. Let's get Rice, Carnegie Melon and Case Western Reserve on board and we're set.

(04-15-2014 09:51 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Why did we need 12 schools again? Can we create a new league and leave Tulsa & Tulane out?

this

(04-15-2014 12:27 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 12:25 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:56 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

You have good football attendance and a history of playing pretty good football consistently. That's important. It's not the whole story. You might look at it before you bash teams that were here BEFORE you were.
Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

Most of that is ancient history and/or is a non-factor when talking about how it actually benefits the league as a whole. Nice golf reference.

In the past seven years TU FBall is 24-56 yet TU was STILL accepted in front of ECU. That has to sting a little, right?

Not really. Tulane and ECU were basically given acceptance into the Big East at the same time, albeit Tulane was for all sports and ECU was only for football initially. The C7 had to be excused fully to get ECU included fully into the conference.

Actually the c7 were not excused, they saw what this conference was becoming with each new addition, and decided to get out while the getting was good. I don't blame them.

(04-15-2014 01:21 PM)redbirdTD Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 12:27 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 12:25 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:56 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  You have good football attendance and a history of playing pretty good football consistently. That's important. It's not the whole story. You might look at it before you bash teams that were here BEFORE you were.
Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

Most of that is ancient history and/or is a non-factor when talking about how it actually benefits the league as a whole. Nice golf reference.

In the past seven years TU FBall is 24-56 yet TU was STILL accepted in front of ECU. That has to sting a little, right?

Not really. Tulane and ECU were basically given acceptance into the Big East at the same time, albeit Tulane was for all sports and ECU was only for football initially. The C7 had to be excused fully to get ECU included fully into the conference.

Actually the c7 were not excused, they saw what this conference was becoming with each new addition, and decided to get out while the getting was good. I don't blame them.

Lol, yeah its really turned out awful

ECU had been mentioned for many years to join the old BE. Tulane seems to come out of nowhere. If Tulane was not located in New Orleans, do not think they are in the AAC. Sports have been horrendous at Tulane for a decade, so it was not their athletic program that got them the nvite. I like Tulane, they have a great deal of potential. My question is when, when will Tulane use their considerable resources and excellent location to make a real splash in terms of athletics. At this point, they are just another small wealthy school that has not learned to leverage it's assets for athletic success.