http://www.columbiatribune.com/sports/mu...f6eda.html

Quote:It's no different than asking, "Should we take a look at an additional division within Division I?" I happen to think that you should. I think that there are 60-70 schools that are different than everybody else in Division I. Different than anybody else and I think the time has probably come where we need to recognize that, that what goes on Michigan State is different than what they have to deal with at Eastern Michigan. It just is. What happens at Illinois is different than what they deal with at Illinois State. So let's recognize it, let's admit it, and let's just say, "OK, let's find the commonalities of those 60-70 schools and let them deal with some of the issues they need to deal with" while at the same time there are other common denominators that all of us have to deal with — whether it's amateurism or whether it has to do with minimum hours toward graduation or standardized test scores, whatever that may be. All of us should have to deal with that. But I do think the time has come for us to look and to admit that there are 60 schools to 70 schools that are different than everybody else.

15 years ago I was the athletic director at Texas State, an FCS, I-AA football program. Their aspirations always were to be Division I — Division I-A. Now, I was there. I'm living this. Texas is right down the road. I'm living in a stadium of 95,000 people at that time. Now it's over 100,000. I'm thinking, "It is so much different at Texas than it is at Texas State. Why should we even imagine that we should be Division I-A?" The answer generally that you'll see is that we want to associate with I-A so we can look like them. We can get the afterglow effect, the ability to be able to be touched by it. So when you saw that happen and when you saw Louisiana-Monroe saying, "This is what we need to do," when you saw Arkansas State saying, "This is what we need to do" and you saw UT-San Antonio. And again, that's not to offend them. That's just the reality of that.

There couldn't be anything more different than night and day between Texas State and the University of Texas. There's nothing.

(08-14-2013 09:37 AM)slycat Wrote:  http://www.columbiatribune.com/sports/mu...f6eda.html

Quote:It's no different than asking, "Should we take a look at an additional division within Division I?" I happen to think that you should. I think that there are 60-70 schools that are different than everybody else in Division I. Different than anybody else and I think the time has probably come where we need to recognize that, that what goes on Michigan State is different than what they have to deal with at Eastern Michigan. It just is. What happens at Illinois is different than what they deal with at Illinois State. So let's recognize it, let's admit it, and let's just say, "OK, let's find the commonalities of those 60-70 schools and let them deal with some of the issues they need to deal with" while at the same time there are other common denominators that all of us have to deal with — whether it's amateurism or whether it has to do with minimum hours toward graduation or standardized test scores, whatever that may be. All of us should have to deal with that. But I do think the time has come for us to look and to admit that there are 60 schools to 70 schools that are different than everybody else.

15 years ago I was the athletic director at Texas State, an FCS, I-AA football program. Their aspirations always were to be Division I — Division I-A. Now, I was there. I'm living this. Texas is right down the road. I'm living in a stadium of 95,000 people at that time. Now it's over 100,000. I'm thinking, "It is so much different at Texas than it is at Texas State. Why should we even imagine that we should be Division I-A?" The answer generally that you'll see is that we want to associate with I-A so we can look like them. We can get the afterglow effect, the ability to be able to be touched by it. So when you saw that happen and when you saw Louisiana-Monroe saying, "This is what we need to do," when you saw Arkansas State saying, "This is what we need to do" and you saw UT-San Antonio. And again, that's not to offend them. That's just the reality of that.

There couldn't be anything more different than night and day between Texas State and the University of Texas. There's nothing.

It is true that even a large state like texas it is hard to find state-wide following past ut and a-m. they get the lion's share of support. there are other schools that are well supported in their region , but these two get the most. why as a high school kid the question was always "are you going to texas or a-m". I thought gee there are plenty of other schools and besides at that time a-m was all guys and you had to join the corps so I for sure didnt want to go there. now there are many 30,000+ student schools with a wide array of degree offerings in the state and they have built up sizeable numbers of alumni and they want their alma mater to be relevant. but the old-line state flagship schools are just too far ahead in terms of perception and money..I got my degree in Architecture from uta because they have a great program, but many kids dont choose a school because of their career field they choose a school based on the name .

Same thing could be said about the differences between Vandy and Tennessee, Duke and FSU, Kentucky and Louisville. That guy was an idiot that wrote that article.

(08-14-2013 09:37 AM)slycat Wrote:  http://www.columbiatribune.com/sports/mu...f6eda.html

Quote:It's no different than asking, "Should we take a look at an additional division within Division I?" I happen to think that you should. I think that there are 60-70 schools that are different than everybody else in Division I. Different than anybody else and I think the time has probably come where we need to recognize that, that what goes on Michigan State is different than what they have to deal with at Eastern Michigan. It just is. What happens at Illinois is different than what they deal with at Illinois State. So let's recognize it, let's admit it, and let's just say, "OK, let's find the commonalities of those 60-70 schools and let them deal with some of the issues they need to deal with" while at the same time there are other common denominators that all of us have to deal with — whether it's amateurism or whether it has to do with minimum hours toward graduation or standardized test scores, whatever that may be. All of us should have to deal with that. But I do think the time has come for us to look and to admit that there are 60 schools to 70 schools that are different than everybody else.

15 years ago I was the athletic director at Texas State, an FCS, I-AA football program. Their aspirations always were to be Division I — Division I-A. Now, I was there. I'm living this. Texas is right down the road. I'm living in a stadium of 95,000 people at that time. Now it's over 100,000. I'm thinking, "It is so much different at Texas than it is at Texas State. Why should we even imagine that we should be Division I-A?" The answer generally that you'll see is that we want to associate with I-A so we can look like them. We can get the afterglow effect, the ability to be able to be touched by it. So when you saw that happen and when you saw Louisiana-Monroe saying, "This is what we need to do," when you saw Arkansas State saying, "This is what we need to do" and you saw UT-San Antonio. And again, that's not to offend them. That's just the reality of that.

There couldn't be anything more different than night and day between Texas State and the University of Texas. There's nothing.

Typical "elite" mentality. stAte has endured much more of this type of put down than most.

I hope the "afterglow" he speaks of in this case is from the red-asses of humiliated and embarrassed Missouri football fans....................

Whats ironic is that Missouri is closer to Sun Belt teams in terms of budget and attendance then they are to Texas.

(08-14-2013 11:36 AM)Senatobia Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 09:37 AM)slycat Wrote:  http://www.columbiatribune.com/sports/mu...f6eda.html

Quote:It's no different than asking, "Should we take a look at an additional division within Division I?" I happen to think that you should. I think that there are 60-70 schools that are different than everybody else in Division I. Different than anybody else and I think the time has probably come where we need to recognize that, that what goes on Michigan State is different than what they have to deal with at Eastern Michigan. It just is. What happens at Illinois is different than what they deal with at Illinois State. So let's recognize it, let's admit it, and let's just say, "OK, let's find the commonalities of those 60-70 schools and let them deal with some of the issues they need to deal with" while at the same time there are other common denominators that all of us have to deal with — whether it's amateurism or whether it has to do with minimum hours toward graduation or standardized test scores, whatever that may be. All of us should have to deal with that. But I do think the time has come for us to look and to admit that there are 60 schools to 70 schools that are different than everybody else.

15 years ago I was the athletic director at Texas State, an FCS, I-AA football program. Their aspirations always were to be Division I — Division I-A. Now, I was there. I'm living this. Texas is right down the road. I'm living in a stadium of 95,000 people at that time. Now it's over 100,000. I'm thinking, "It is so much different at Texas than it is at Texas State. Why should we even imagine that we should be Division I-A?" The answer generally that you'll see is that we want to associate with I-A so we can look like them. We can get the afterglow effect, the ability to be able to be touched by it. So when you saw that happen and when you saw Louisiana-Monroe saying, "This is what we need to do," when you saw Arkansas State saying, "This is what we need to do" and you saw UT-San Antonio. And again, that's not to offend them. That's just the reality of that.

There couldn't be anything more different than night and day between Texas State and the University of Texas. There's nothing.

Typical "elite" mentality. stAte has endured much more of this type of put down than most.

I hope the "afterglow" he speaks of in this case is from the red-asses of humiliated and embarrassed Missouri football fans....................

You can add GS to that list. GS has had to put up with this same mentality from the UGA domination of Georgia forever. Hopefully with the move to FBS we may get a little breathing room but believe me, GS will still have to battle UGA for every inch to get out from under their shadow.

Oh yeah, take em' down stAte!

Since we play at 6 on September 28, I'll make sure we have this game on at the tailgate, if possible. Would LOVE to see the Red Wolves beat down the Tigers and make that AD eat crow.

We need as many SBC over SEC victories as possible to change perception in the South.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2

(08-14-2013 03:06 PM)Ole Sleepy Wrote:  Since we play at 6 on September 28, I'll make sure we have this game on at the tailgate, if possible. Would LOVE to see the Red Wolves beat down the Tigers and make that AD eat crow.

We need as many SBC over SEC victories as possible to change perception in the South.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2

Nice. Are you at a LTG?

Alden is an well you guys know the term for it. I mean he hired a doper for a basketball coach, his football coach is a drunk, his major donor's daughter got caught cheating, etc. Ironic thing is when he was hired - MU's budget in 1998 was 15 million dollars. That's Sun Belt and MVC level spending today.