(08-20-2020 03:23 PM)pki1998 Wrote:  can’t say I blame Villanova for not playing Georgetown in Football. Villanova is one of the better FCS programs. Meanwhile Georgetown is playing essentially D3 football by not giving scholarships. In 2019 their OCC included Leigh Bucknell and Stoney Brook all about the same distance or less than Georgetown, and all better programs as well.

(You lost me at Bucknell being a better program.)

Do you understand what D-III is? Is Harvard a Division III program? The answer is no to both.

Georgetown offer need-based aid in roughly 20 of its 30 sports. It doesn't make them Division III. If you have full need in football, Georgetown pays 100%. If you make $250K a year, you don't get aid, simple as that. They don't call that a scholarship because it's not paid out of the atheltic budget.

Outside of football, Villanova has roughly the same number of scholarships Georgetown offers. Is Villanova Division III in those other sports, too?

The simple reality is that outside the 20sq miles of Ruston, ULM & La Tech are looked at as two peas in a pod.

(08-22-2020 01:04 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  The simple reality is that outside the 20sq miles of Ruston, ULM & La Tech are looked at as two peas in a pod.

Yeah not really. I do think that App St. and Georgia Southern are looked at as two peas in a pod.
A lot of jealously in this thread and it's by the usual suspects.

(08-22-2020 01:27 AM)deb025 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:04 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  The simple reality is that outside the 20sq miles of Ruston, ULM & La Tech are looked at as two peas in a pod.

Yeah not really. I do think that App St. and Georgia Southern are looked at as two peas in a pod.
A lot of jealously in this thread and it's by the usual suspects.

You are both correct - outside of their immediate areas, both LA Tech and ULM and Georgia State and Georgia Southern are regarded as indistinguishable.

That said, as I said early on, there is ZERO wrong about partisans of each of those four schools claiming very clear distinctions, and acting accordingly. That's the spice of college rivalry and athletic life. Look at the very best rivalries, and usually they are among schools that have very similar institutional status - Army/Navy, USC/Notre Dame, Ohio State/Michigan, etc.

Schools that are obviously not peers tend not to make good rivals, because one is obviously dominant thus lowering the stakes of their competition.

(08-22-2020 01:27 AM)deb025 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:04 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  The simple reality is that outside the 20sq miles of Ruston, ULM & La Tech are looked at as two peas in a pod.

Yeah not really. I do think that App St. and Georgia Southern are looked at as two peas in a pod.
A lot of jealously in this thread and it's by the usual suspects.

Yes, really. Stating a fact that you don’t like doesn’t mean it’s jealousy. Outside of Ruston, no one cares nor sees a difference between La Tech or ULM or Louisiana. I’d say the same about App.

I’m not sure what La Tech had done to convince you all that you’re extra special, but you’re like the Uncle Rico of G5 teams to everyone else.

(08-22-2020 11:46 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:27 AM)deb025 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:04 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  The simple reality is that outside the 20sq miles of Ruston, ULM & La Tech are looked at as two peas in a pod.

Yeah not really. I do think that App St. and Georgia Southern are looked at as two peas in a pod.
A lot of jealously in this thread and it's by the usual suspects.

Yes, really. Stating a fact that you don’t like doesn’t mean it’s jealousy. Outside of Ruston, no one cares nor sees a difference between La Tech or ULM or Louisiana. I’d say the same about App.

I’m not sure what La Tech had done to convince you all that you’re extra special, but you’re like the Uncle Rico of G5 teams to everyone else.

I always had the impression of La Tech being a marginally better school. I think Quo's numbers vs. ULM show that. He just emphasized "marginally."

(08-22-2020 12:07 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 11:46 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:27 AM)deb025 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:04 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  The simple reality is that outside the 20sq miles of Ruston, ULM & La Tech are looked at as two peas in a pod.

Yeah not really. I do think that App St. and Georgia Southern are looked at as two peas in a pod.
A lot of jealously in this thread and it's by the usual suspects.

Yes, really. Stating a fact that you don’t like doesn’t mean it’s jealousy. Outside of Ruston, no one cares nor sees a difference between La Tech or ULM or Louisiana. I’d say the same about App.

I’m not sure what La Tech had done to convince you all that you’re extra special, but you’re like the Uncle Rico of G5 teams to everyone else.

I always had the impression of La Tech being a marginally better school. I think Quo's numbers vs. ULM show that. He just emphasized "marginally."

I like the arguments though - heck up above we have some people arguing about whether Bucknell or Georgetown has the better football program!

Molecule-splitting of that nature is the spice of college rivalries.

I used to shrug my shoulder over the prospect of playing Georgia State in football every year, but the game has been a coffer filler and has had objectively good attendance considering where it's been played on our schedule over the last 6 seasons. In the end I don't care who sees us and Georgia State as peer programs, you build a brand by winning, and if you don't win you can't blame who you associate with as far as conference mates and non-conference opponents.

I'm betting most Georgia Southern fans agree with me, and most App fans would say the same about Charlotte.

(08-22-2020 01:48 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  I used to shrug my shoulder over the prospect of playing Georgia State in football every year, but the game has been a coffer filler and has had objectively good attendance considering where it's been played on our schedule over the last 6 seasons. In the end I don't care who sees us and Georgia State as peer programs, you build a brand by winning, and if you don't win you can't blame who you associate with as far as conference mates and non-conference opponents.

I'm betting most Georgia Southern fans agree with me, and most App fans would say the same about Charlotte.

Exactly. These local games, when played up as big rivalry games, can be much needed money makers for these smaller budget programs.

(08-22-2020 01:48 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  I used to shrug my shoulder over the prospect of playing Georgia State in football every year, but the game has been a coffer filler and has had objectively good attendance considering where it's been played on our schedule over the last 6 seasons. In the end I don't care who sees us and Georgia State as peer programs, you build a brand by winning, and if you don't win you can't blame who you associate with as far as conference mates and non-conference opponents.

I'm betting most Georgia Southern fans agree with me, and most App fans would say the same about Charlotte.

I definitely agree with you. It would be hypocritical of me not to. How can App or Georgia Southern fans crow about P5 teams unwilling to play us and then in the same breath tell UNCC/Ga State or really anyone “no”. Heck I am still of the belief that App should host Western Carolina annually (or every other year) as our FCS game.

As far as FBS is concerned I hope App continues to operate at an “anyone/anywhere” mentality and I suspect GaSouthern feels the same.

(08-22-2020 11:46 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:27 AM)deb025 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:04 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  The simple reality is that outside the 20sq miles of Ruston, ULM & La Tech are looked at as two peas in a pod.

Yeah not really. I do think that App St. and Georgia Southern are looked at as two peas in a pod.
A lot of jealously in this thread and it's by the usual suspects.

Yes, really. Stating a fact that you don’t like doesn’t mean it’s jealousy. Outside of Ruston, no one cares nor sees a difference between La Tech or ULM or Louisiana. I’d say the same about App.

I’m not sure what La Tech had done to convince you all that you’re extra special, but you’re like the Uncle Rico of G5 teams to everyone else.

The ‘Uncle Rio of G5 teams.’
Quote. Of. The. Year.
Perfect summary of Ruston it’s people and ‘school.’

(08-22-2020 02:51 PM)FrankyP Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 11:46 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:27 AM)deb025 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:04 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  The simple reality is that outside the 20sq miles of Ruston, ULM & La Tech are looked at as two peas in a pod.

Yeah not really. I do think that App St. and Georgia Southern are looked at as two peas in a pod.
A lot of jealously in this thread and it's by the usual suspects.

Yes, really. Stating a fact that you don’t like doesn’t mean it’s jealousy. Outside of Ruston, no one cares nor sees a difference between La Tech or ULM or Louisiana. I’d say the same about App.

I’m not sure what La Tech had done to convince you all that you’re extra special, but you’re like the Uncle Rico of G5 teams to everyone else.

The ‘Uncle Rio of G5 teams.’
Quote. Of. The. Year.
Perfect summary of Ruston it’s people and ‘school.’

(08-21-2020 12:54 PM)NuMexAg Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 12:48 PM)Inkblot Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 12:34 PM)NuMexAg Wrote:  The irony to the La Tech -ULM situation is that La Tech had a significant role in elevating ULM to an FBS school.

When the Sun Belt (reorganized with and from the American South Conference I believe) started discussions to sponsor football in 2000 the conference needed football playing members. The new Sun Belt asked La Tech to join. La Tech was already a member of the American South Conference, but an independent for football. Tech declined - instead shooting for higher aspirations of the Western Athletic Conference, which they ultimately obtained.

When La Tech refused to join the Sun Belt, ULM was admitted as a provisional member, and thus elevated their football to FBS when the Sun Belt began play in 2001. Had La Tech chosen to join the more geographically sensible Sun Belt it is highly unlikely ULM would have had the opportunity to move up to FBS. Certainly not for a long time anyway.

Louisiana Tech was in the Sun Belt for most of the 90s, and left at the same time that the conference added football.

Yes, thanks, I stand corrected - they were not members of the American South, but rather the Sun Belt and chose to leave the newly reorganized Belt instead of playing football there.

You had it right the first time about Louisiana Tech. Louisiana Tech became a Sun Belt member with the other American South members as part of the American South / Sun Belt Conference merger. They competed as a Sun Belt member in all conference sponsored sports they participated in from the merger in 1991 until they left for the WAC in 2001.

I don't think Louisiana Tech elevated ULM except maybe by way of a "Keep up with the Joneses" situation. ULM had already been a Division I-A (now FBS) member for several years before becoming a Sun Belt Conference associate member beginning transition to Division I-A in 1994. Before leaving the Southland Conference in 2005-06, ULM competed as a non-football Southland Conference member in all sports they participated from 1994-2006. For football, they started the transition from Division I-AA (now FCS) to Division I-A (now FBS) in 1994. They joined the Sun Belt as a fully qualified Division I-A (now FBS) football associate member in 2001 becoming a member in all sports in 2006. They had played as an independent in football for the years between their full membership SLC / SBC periods.

(08-22-2020 03:10 PM)debragga Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 02:51 PM)FrankyP Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 11:46 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:27 AM)deb025 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 01:04 AM)ah59396 Wrote:  The simple reality is that outside the 20sq miles of Ruston, ULM & La Tech are looked at as two peas in a pod.

Yeah not really. I do think that App St. and Georgia Southern are looked at as two peas in a pod.
A lot of jealously in this thread and it's by the usual suspects.

Yes, really. Stating a fact that you don’t like doesn’t mean it’s jealousy. Outside of Ruston, no one cares nor sees a difference between La Tech or ULM or Louisiana. I’d say the same about App.

I’m not sure what La Tech had done to convince you all that you’re extra special, but you’re like the Uncle Rico of G5 teams to everyone else.

The ‘Uncle Rio of G5 teams.’
Quote. Of. The. Year.
Perfect summary of Ruston it’s people and ‘school.’

Wonderful. The only diff is that as delusional as Rico is (or maybe because of it?) there is a cool vibe to him. Something that is definitely not applicable to those dog killers from rustonia.

(08-20-2020 03:23 PM)pki1998 Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 12:02 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 05:39 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(08-19-2020 10:33 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Some schools simply do not and will not play obvious rivals.

(Ask Villanova about that one.)

Wait, they play in the Big Five every year.

I was speaking about football. It's been a while, you know.

can’t say I blame Villanova for not playing Georgetown in Football. Villanova is one of the better FCS programs. Meanwhile Georgetown is playing essentially D3 football by not giving scholarships. In 2019 their OCC included Leigh Bucknell and Stoney Brook all about the same distance or less than Georgetown, and all better programs as well.

I wonder if there isn’t a push at Nova to play Georgetown because of the residual bitterness of some alumni and fans from when the school shut down the program. That decision was made in a vacuum and was inspired by the logic of when Georgetown cut their program so many years ago. I think there is enough fear within the smallish Villanova football fan camp that thinks it’s only a matter of time until the school gives itself over to the Patriot for football. I think the association to see Georgetown football more is not popular amongst the current fans and donors, though I suspect the OSA would rather associate with the PL schools in football than many in the CAAF.

It strikes me odd the two don’t play. Villanova wishes so hard it could be like two of its Jesuit colleagues: Georgetown and Boston College. I can understand the difficulty in getting BC on the football schedule. Georgetown...my guess is, making sure there is room for UPenn and Lehigh or Lafayette seems more a priority? That the PA Patriot members are more a priority for football?

(08-21-2020 03:26 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 03:23 PM)pki1998 Wrote:  can’t say I blame Villanova for not playing Georgetown in Football. Villanova is one of the better FCS programs. Meanwhile Georgetown is playing essentially D3 football by not giving scholarships. In 2019 their OCC included Leigh Bucknell and Stoney Brook all about the same distance or less than Georgetown, and all better programs as well.

(You lost me at Bucknell being a better program.)

Do you understand what D-III is? Is Harvard a Division III program? The answer is no to both.

Georgetown offer need-based aid in roughly 20 of its 30 sports. It doesn't make them Division III. If you have full need in football, Georgetown pays 100%. If you make $250K a year, you don't get aid, simple as that. They don't call that a scholarship because it's not paid out of the atheltic budget.

Outside of football, Villanova has roughly the same number of scholarships Georgetown offers. Is Villanova Division III in those other sports, too?

I lost you with Bucknell being a better program? Below are the confernce records for both Bucknell and Georgetown since the Patriot League began offering scholarships in 2013

Bucknell
2019 3-3 Tied 3rd Place
2018 1-5 7th Place
2017 2-4 6th Place
2016 3-3 4th Place
2015 1-5 6th Place
2014 4-2 2nd Place
2013 3-3 Tied 3rd Place

Total 17-25 - 40.48% Winning Percnetage

Georgetown
2019 1-5 7th Place
2018 4-2 Tied second place
2017 0-6 7th Place
2016 0-6 7th Place
2015 2-4 5th place
2014 1-5 7th Place
2013 1-5 7th Place

Total 9-33 - 21.43 Winning percentage. Not even if I exclude Georgetown’s two 0-6 seasons, their winning percentage would be 30.00%.

So in the seven years that the patriot league has offered scholarships Georgetown has finished last 5 times. and wins about half as many games as Bucknell. That clearly shows they are a stronger program. I never said they were a great program, just a better program.

And I am standing by my comment about G’town essentially running a D3 program, How is there program any different than a UAA schools football program? You don’t think their athletes are eligible for financial aide like other students. You don’t even have to be an ultra prestigious school to do this. Look at St Thomas (MN) they give a lot of need based aide to students that are on the football team.

(08-20-2020 07:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 07:32 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  This is one of the unfortunate things about college sports.

Actually, the LAT - ULM situation is the spice of life of college sports. The situation is, Tech looks down its nose at ULM. It thinks it is a better institution and so doesn't want to rub elbows with ULM.

Given that Tech and ULM are about of equal academic stature (both way down the USNWR rankings) and athletic rankings (both G5) is this Tech stance rational to anyone outside northern Louisiana? Of course not.

But it is such irrational beliefs and feelings that college athletics are built on. So I have no beef with Tech's silly attitude. It gives Tech a reason to feel superior, and ULM a reason to burn up about it, both of which feed the fire, LOL, so that when they do play, the sparks will fly.

I don't know that I'd consider LaTech and ULM of equal stature on the football field just because they are both in G5 conferences. Would you say that Central Florida and Charlotte are of equal athletic stature?

Over the past ten years, Tech's football performance would rank them #73 in the FBS, while Monroe is #114. That's a pretty big gap. What they do have in common is that neither of them have any chance of escaping the G5 (or whatever the lower tier of the FBS will be called in the future post-realignment) for reasons that have nothing to do with football.

But other long standing rivalries have survived performance gaps of that magnitude. That can't be the main reason for these two not playing each other.

(08-25-2020 09:21 AM)pki1998 Wrote:  And I am standing by my comment about G’town essentially running a D3 program, How is there program any different than a UAA schools football program? You don’t think their athletes are eligible for financial aide like other students. You don’t even have to be an ultra prestigious school to do this. Look at St Thomas (MN) they give a lot of need based aide to students that are on the football team.

From the NCAA: "Division III athletic programs are non-revenue-generating, extracurricular programs that are staffed and funded like any other university department. They feature student-athletes who receive no financial aid related to their athletic ability."

Georgetown's football team is the second highest funded program at the school, approx $2.4 million. That number is comparable to the second half of the Northeast Conference, which offers 40 scholarships. Georgetown's number is never publicly listed because it's not athletic money but it's likely somewhere between 15 and 30 equivalencies. But it's definitely not zero like D-III schools.

Can it do better? Yes, recruiting can be problematic and admissions aren't guaranteed. But in the end, it's a numbers game. As a comparison, the Pioneer League runs budgets between $800K and $1.7 million, the Ivy League $2.9-$5 million, and the Patriot League ranges between $5.0 and a whopping $7.6 million budget at Fordham, third highest in the subdivision.

Now, if your're arguing Harvard and Yale are Division III as well, that's another topic.

(08-25-2020 12:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 07:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 07:32 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  This is one of the unfortunate things about college sports.

Actually, the LAT - ULM situation is the spice of life of college sports. The situation is, Tech looks down its nose at ULM. It thinks it is a better institution and so doesn't want to rub elbows with ULM.

Given that Tech and ULM are about of equal academic stature (both way down the USNWR rankings) and athletic rankings (both G5) is this Tech stance rational to anyone outside northern Louisiana? Of course not.

But it is such irrational beliefs and feelings that college athletics are built on. So I have no beef with Tech's silly attitude. It gives Tech a reason to feel superior, and ULM a reason to burn up about it, both of which feed the fire, LOL, so that when they do play, the sparks will fly.

I don't know that I'd consider LaTech and ULM of equal stature on the football field just because they are both in G5 conferences. Would you say that Central Florida and Charlotte are of equal athletic stature?

Over the past ten years, Tech's football performance would rank them #73 in the FBS, while Monroe is #114. That's a pretty big gap. What they do have in common is that neither of them have any chance of escaping the G5 (or whatever the lower tier of the FBS will be called in the future post-realignment) for reasons that have nothing to do with football.

But other long standing rivalries have survived performance gaps of that magnitude. That can't be the main reason for these two not playing each other.

I'll take the blame for casually saying "both are G5" in passing, thus allowing that opening for you to critique my position on that ground. I would say the difference is that while most football fans are aware that UCF has clearly out-performed Charlotte, and also that Boise has clearly outperformed say Texas State, thus proving that fans do sometimes categorize G5 schools at different levels of performance, absolutely nobody in the known universe was aware that LA-Tech had out-performed ULM by a 73 to 114 margin** in recent years until you just told us that.

Heck, I would argue that most CFB fans are unaware of the existence of the LA-Tech and ULM football teams, much less can distinguish between them. And perception is the core of this issue.




** FWIW, I'm not sure 73 to 114, though a large gap in numbers in a field of 132, is in practice really a large difference. There's a lot of diminishing returns once you get down that far, it's splitting some tangled hairs. A good verbal description might be "a bad team vs a badder team" or something similar. But both are in the same craptastic ballpark.

(08-25-2020 03:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2020 12:44 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 07:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 07:32 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  This is one of the unfortunate things about college sports.

Actually, the LAT - ULM situation is the spice of life of college sports. The situation is, Tech looks down its nose at ULM. It thinks it is a better institution and so doesn't want to rub elbows with ULM.

Given that Tech and ULM are about of equal academic stature (both way down the USNWR rankings) and athletic rankings (both G5) is this Tech stance rational to anyone outside northern Louisiana? Of course not.

But it is such irrational beliefs and feelings that college athletics are built on. So I have no beef with Tech's silly attitude. It gives Tech a reason to feel superior, and ULM a reason to burn up about it, both of which feed the fire, LOL, so that when they do play, the sparks will fly.

I don't know that I'd consider LaTech and ULM of equal stature on the football field just because they are both in G5 conferences. Would you say that Central Florida and Charlotte are of equal athletic stature?

Over the past ten years, Tech's football performance would rank them #73 in the FBS, while Monroe is #114. That's a pretty big gap. What they do have in common is that neither of them have any chance of escaping the G5 (or whatever the lower tier of the FBS will be called in the future post-realignment) for reasons that have nothing to do with football.

But other long standing rivalries have survived performance gaps of that magnitude. That can't be the main reason for these two not playing each other.

I'll take the blame for casually saying "both are G5" in passing, thus allowing that opening for you to critique my position on that ground. I would say the difference is that while most football fans are aware that UCF has clearly out-performed Charlotte, and also that Boise has clearly outperformed say Texas State, thus proving that fans do sometimes categorize G5 schools at different levels of performance, absolutely nobody in the known universe was aware that LA-Tech had out-performed ULM by a 73 to 114 margin** in recent years until you just told us that.

Heck, I would argue that most CFB fans are unaware of the existence of the LA-Tech and ULM football teams, much less can distinguish between them. And perception is the core of this issue.




** FWIW, I'm not sure 73 to 114, though a large gap in numbers in a field of 132, is in practice really a large difference. There's a lot of diminishing returns once you get down that far, it's splitting some tangled hairs. A good verbal description might be "a bad team vs a badder team" or something similar. But both are in the same craptastic ballpark.

One thing I've learned over the years about analysis and chart presentations is that scale means a lot. This, IMO, doesn't look as great when you use a scale that includes all FBS teams than it does if you only show where each stands within the G5 only. In that case, LaTech ranks #12 (out of 64) while ULM is #48. But you are right - almost nobody would know that. I didn't until (and because of) this thread I ran the numbers.