(01-13-2022 03:32 PM)RustonBulldog Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 02:59 PM)gdunn Wrote:  [quote='RustonBulldog' pid='18007136' dateline='1642099731']
Frankly I don’t care if you believe this or not, but LA Tech was likely headed to the AAC until the MWC positioned itself for “Texas realignment” causing a scramble amongst ESPN (Not an ESPN conference) and AAC officials.

The AAC’s goal was to create a wall to prevent the MWC from entering the central time zone.

There was never a reason to consider the Sun Belt and it all fell apart rather quickly. I don’t blame Dr. Wood for this one.

That is fine. I really don’t care. If we had been straight up told “No” by the AAC and we didn’t begin posturing for the Sun Belt, that’s on us. But in reality that isn’t what happened. Louisiana Tech thought they were in. Whether we were played like a fiddle by the AAC is up to you to decide, but I see no reason for them to politic like that. I think the AAC was looking for universities with a full commitment to athletics. I do know for a fact LA Tech presented a path to a $40 million dollar budget to go along with a new academic center and indoor practice facility. Ultimately it wasn’t enough and “markets” took center stage. Tech still has a lot of financial flexibility that some of our peers don’t have. We haven’t over extended ourselves. We have practically no debt and no student fee. When the next conference realignment shift comes, we’ll probably put all our eggs back in the basket and hopefully a couple more so it’s good enough. However, we would only do that for the AAC or the MWC. We aren’t going to take the bad pr of a student fee or borrow from the endowment to compete in Conference USA or the Sun Belt. If SMU, Tulane and Tulsa bolt from the AAC I doubt we would do it for them at that point either.

The world can laugh at us, but I’m glad Louisiana Tech always shoots for the stars. It pisses everyone off that we don’t know “our place.” Yet we have always don’t pretty well fighting above our weight class against teams with quite a bit more resources.

Our vision has always been better than the Sun Belt and that goal/desire of staying ahead has allowed us to build what was statistically (form a win/loss standpoint in the big three sports) the most successful program in Conference USA. It’s also probably what kept us from being the final sun belt addition. I can live with that. All we can do now is focus on us and keep moving forward. Building a recognizable brand and continuing to win on field, court and diamond. Invest in facilities while not becoming over leveraged. Engaging the student body so when the student fee is needed, it’ll pass with ease. Realignment is coming again. NIL, transfers and TV deals will shake up the world again in the next three years, I hope we are ready.
----------------------------------------------------------------

You say Tech has practically no debt and no student fee. So, what about the "student facility enhancement fee"? Although it does not use athletics in its description the bonds issued in building the South End Zone are being paid off by that means. The outstanding balance is approximately $11 million and should be repaid within next 20yrs. As long as this facility enhancement fee is in effect, next 20yrs or so, it is doubtful the students would add an additional athletic fee on top of that. Then, so far as debt is concerned what do you consider that remaining $11mil still owed on the end zone structure? Next, what about the $11 mil the athletic dept borrowed from the Foundation a couple of years ago to cover cost of the new press box? Most folks would consider that to be a debt. What about the money still owed on the jumbotron and improvements to Tac center? Anyone who doubts this info can confirm it by checking the athletic department and Foundation audit reports.

(01-14-2022 08:23 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:14 AM)HTOWN_HERD Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:15 AM)ElectroEagle Wrote:  Now, not that it matters. My personal opinion is this. In a few years once the 32-48 schools break away from the NCAA to form their own league the remainders will all be in a big scramble with new conferences and tv deals (which will all suck) and then it wont matter as we will all essentially looked at the same way the SWAC is currently looked at.

This is probably the truest thing you will read on any forum, and it sucks for all of us. In 15 years it will probably not even matter what your conference logo is, because we will all essentially be back to FCS.

IF this happens, maybe CUSA, the SBC and the AAC will finally realign based on geography because it sure didn't happen this go around. We are all still spread out and over lapping each other.

Somehow after the last two or three major realignments, the conferences as a whole have moved farther away from regional consolidation than closer to it. I wish there was a CFB czar that would force every team back into geographic conferences for both P5 and G5 members.

Also money needs to be better distributed. I know this is radical, but it's needed for the survival of CFB as we know and love it. Money is increasingly going only to teams at the top and those teams want to make sure no one else can reach that level. This is where that dreaded P5-G5 split idea is coming from. European Soccer is seeing exactly the same problem. They just recently just tried to start the Super League that excluded all smaller countries and included on the biggest teams from the biggest leagues. The North American sports model, in all its problems it has, still has the right idea about needing some type of parity to keep the sport entertaining, viable, and attainable for all.

Anyway, this is going to derail the thread and should be its own thread for the offseason.

(01-14-2022 08:23 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:14 AM)HTOWN_HERD Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:15 AM)ElectroEagle Wrote:  Now, not that it matters. My personal opinion is this. In a few years once the 32-48 schools break away from the NCAA to form their own league the remainders will all be in a big scramble with new conferences and tv deals (which will all suck) and then it wont matter as we will all essentially looked at the same way the SWAC is currently looked at.

This is probably the truest thing you will read on any forum, and it sucks for all of us. In 15 years it will probably not even matter what your conference logo is, because we will all essentially be back to FCS.

IF this happens, maybe CUSA, the SBC and the AAC will finally realign based on geography because it sure didn't happen this go around. We are all still spread out and over lapping each other.

While not perfect, the two divisions of the SB are pretty tight,

(01-13-2022 09:18 PM)Reggie Favre Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 12:02 AM)ElectroEagle Wrote:  There was said to be a loophole for the founding members that USM and possibly UAB could exploit to may no or only a portion of the exit fee.

Great post. Thank you.

Ive been telling these morons this part for years.

Yes. At one point this was also true for UAB. That may have changed since, particularly with our dropping and restarting football.

The exit fees, like any business arrangement, will be negotiated. So before anyone invests that money in your pool boy's youth hostel, remember that the CUSA side of the table will be led by Judy McLeod. She might end up paying us all to leave.

(01-14-2022 10:52 AM)high flyer Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 03:32 PM)RustonBulldog Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 02:59 PM)gdunn Wrote:  [quote='RustonBulldog' pid='18007136' dateline='1642099731']
Frankly I don’t care if you believe this or not, but LA Tech was likely headed to the AAC until the MWC positioned itself for “Texas realignment” causing a scramble amongst ESPN (Not an ESPN conference) and AAC officials.

The AAC’s goal was to create a wall to prevent the MWC from entering the central time zone.

There was never a reason to consider the Sun Belt and it all fell apart rather quickly. I don’t blame Dr. Wood for this one.

That is fine. I really don’t care. If we had been straight up told “No” by the AAC and we didn’t begin posturing for the Sun Belt, that’s on us. But in reality that isn’t what happened. Louisiana Tech thought they were in. Whether we were played like a fiddle by the AAC is up to you to decide, but I see no reason for them to politic like that. I think the AAC was looking for universities with a full commitment to athletics. I do know for a fact LA Tech presented a path to a $40 million dollar budget to go along with a new academic center and indoor practice facility. Ultimately it wasn’t enough and “markets” took center stage. Tech still has a lot of financial flexibility that some of our peers don’t have. We haven’t over extended ourselves. We have practically no debt and no student fee. When the next conference realignment shift comes, we’ll probably put all our eggs back in the basket and hopefully a couple more so it’s good enough. However, we would only do that for the AAC or the MWC. We aren’t going to take the bad pr of a student fee or borrow from the endowment to compete in Conference USA or the Sun Belt. If SMU, Tulane and Tulsa bolt from the AAC I doubt we would do it for them at that point either.

The world can laugh at us, but I’m glad Louisiana Tech always shoots for the stars. It pisses everyone off that we don’t know “our place.” Yet we have always don’t pretty well fighting above our weight class against teams with quite a bit more resources.

Our vision has always been better than the Sun Belt and that goal/desire of staying ahead has allowed us to build what was statistically (form a win/loss standpoint in the big three sports) the most successful program in Conference USA. It’s also probably what kept us from being the final sun belt addition. I can live with that. All we can do now is focus on us and keep moving forward. Building a recognizable brand and continuing to win on field, court and diamond. Invest in facilities while not becoming over leveraged. Engaging the student body so when the student fee is needed, it’ll pass with ease. Realignment is coming again. NIL, transfers and TV deals will shake up the world again in the next three years, I hope we are ready.
----------------------------------------------------------------

You say Tech has practically no debt and no student fee. So, what about the "student facility enhancement fee"? Although it does not use athletics in its description the bonds issued in building the South End Zone are being paid off by that means. The outstanding balance is approximately $11 million and should be repaid within next 20yrs. As long as this facility enhancement fee is in effect, next 20yrs or so, it is doubtful the students would add an additional athletic fee on top of that. Then, so far as debt is concerned what do you consider that remaining $11mil still owed on the end zone structure? Next, what about the $11 mil the athletic dept borrowed from the Foundation a couple of years ago to cover cost of the new press box? Most folks would consider that to be a debt. What about the money still owed on the jumbotron and improvements to Tac center? Anyone who doubts this info can confirm it by checking the athletic department and Foundation audit reports.

Lambright Intramural Center is the focus of that and it is not an athletic operations student fee. I think you are wrong about passing one in the next 20 years as there is a strong argument to be made for one. Maybe 1% of student on campus attribute that Lambright fee to the DAC. It’s known as the Lambright fee. We are practically the only program in the country without a fee related to athletic operations. Many G5 programs, as you know, thrive on that student fee. The catch (and this is what makes it so hard) is how affordable Louisiana Tech is. We are constantly ranked in best “bang for your buck” type listings. Any fee has to be carefully considered because it will impact the value proposition that is currently being offered.

Paul Millsap donated more in 2014 than the cost of the video board. TAC enhancements have been paid for by private donors.

Press box is our big one. You are correct, it is borrowed from the foundation. However, it isn’t a backbreaker. We have plenty of room to borrow if necessary for whatever would be needed (Exit/Entry Fees, IPF, etc.). In comparison to most of the G5 world we are in a great position from a debt standpoint.

(01-14-2022 11:26 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:23 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:14 AM)HTOWN_HERD Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:15 AM)ElectroEagle Wrote:  Now, not that it matters. My personal opinion is this. In a few years once the 32-48 schools break away from the NCAA to form their own league the remainders will all be in a big scramble with new conferences and tv deals (which will all suck) and then it wont matter as we will all essentially looked at the same way the SWAC is currently looked at.

This is probably the truest thing you will read on any forum, and it sucks for all of us. In 15 years it will probably not even matter what your conference logo is, because we will all essentially be back to FCS.

IF this happens, maybe CUSA, the SBC and the AAC will finally realign based on geography because it sure didn't happen this go around. We are all still spread out and over lapping each other.

While not perfect, the two divisions of the SB are pretty tight,

A lot of the divisions are fine in themselves (or as good as you could hope to do). The old 12 teams AAC was not bad except for Navy in the West. The current CUSA west isn't too bad except for UTEP, and if UTEP is going to be in FBS there just isn't going to be a place where they aren't an outlier for someone. The old SB and the new SB both have decent divisional groupings. Where it's always been wonky is when you get the other side, but even then as conferences (and divisions) have grown you play the other side so much less often that it really shouldn't matter that much.

I still really don't see why one cross-divisional road game per year was so awful in the current CUSA (I know other sports play more often, but we still tended to emphasize the divisions, and arguably could have done so even more).

(01-14-2022 12:33 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 11:26 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:23 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:14 AM)HTOWN_HERD Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:15 AM)ElectroEagle Wrote:  Now, not that it matters. My personal opinion is this. In a few years once the 32-48 schools break away from the NCAA to form their own league the remainders will all be in a big scramble with new conferences and tv deals (which will all suck) and then it wont matter as we will all essentially looked at the same way the SWAC is currently looked at.

This is probably the truest thing you will read on any forum, and it sucks for all of us. In 15 years it will probably not even matter what your conference logo is, because we will all essentially be back to FCS.

IF this happens, maybe CUSA, the SBC and the AAC will finally realign based on geography because it sure didn't happen this go around. We are all still spread out and over lapping each other.

While not perfect, the two divisions of the SB are pretty tight,

A lot of the divisions are fine in themselves (or as good as you could hope to do). The old 12 teams AAC was not bad except for Navy in the West. The current CUSA west isn't too bad except for UTEP, and if UTEP is going to be in FBS there just isn't going to be a place where they aren't an outlier for someone. The old SB and the new SB both have decent divisional groupings. Where it's always been wonky is when you get the other side, but even then as conferences (and divisions) have grown you play the other side so much less often that it really shouldn't matter that much.

I still really don't see why one cross-divisional road game per year was so awful in the current CUSA (I know other sports play more often, but we still tended to emphasize the divisions, and arguably could have done so even more).

I really think there was just too much unhappiness in CUSA and the unhappiest of members found anything possible to complain about and used anything possible as evidence of the problem of CUSA. It was one game in Texas, but they had so much resentment towards the Texas wing, that they hated any game there. I think the resentment though really just came from the media deal and lack of big success in the conference. If we had a more desirable media deal and a team breaking through like Cincinnati, App St, or Boise then all members would have been content in the conference. But we didn't, they weren't happy and one trip across the Mississippi became a scapegoat.

(01-14-2022 12:54 PM)dawgonit Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:33 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 11:26 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:23 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:14 AM)HTOWN_HERD Wrote:  [/b]

This is probably the truest thing you will read on any forum, and it sucks for all of us. In 15 years it will probably not even matter what your conference logo is, because we will all essentially be back to FCS.

IF this happens, maybe CUSA, the SBC and the AAC will finally realign based on geography because it sure didn't happen this go around. We are all still spread out and over lapping each other.

While not perfect, the two divisions of the SB are pretty tight,

A lot of the divisions are fine in themselves (or as good as you could hope to do). The old 12 teams AAC was not bad except for Navy in the West. The current CUSA west isn't too bad except for UTEP, and if UTEP is going to be in FBS there just isn't going to be a place where they aren't an outlier for someone. The old SB and the new SB both have decent divisional groupings. Where it's always been wonky is when you get the other side, but even then as conferences (and divisions) have grown you play the other side so much less often that it really shouldn't matter that much.

I still really don't see why one cross-divisional road game per year was so awful in the current CUSA (I know other sports play more often, but we still tended to emphasize the divisions, and arguably could have done so even more).

I really think there was just too much unhappiness in CUSA and the unhappiest of members found anything possible to complain about and used anything possible as evidence of the problem of CUSA. It was one game in Texas, but they had so much resentment towards the Texas wing, that they hated any game there. I think the resentment though really just came from the media deal and lack of big success in the conference. If we had a more desirable media deal and a team breaking through like Cincinnati, Louisiana, App St, or Boise then all members would have been content in the conference. But we didn't, they weren't happy and one trip across the Mississippi became a scapegoat.

For some reason it seems that you left out a very obvious one, so I fixed it for you.

(01-14-2022 12:33 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 11:26 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:23 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:14 AM)HTOWN_HERD Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:15 AM)ElectroEagle Wrote:  Now, not that it matters. My personal opinion is this. In a few years once the 32-48 schools break away from the NCAA to form their own league the remainders will all be in a big scramble with new conferences and tv deals (which will all suck) and then it wont matter as we will all essentially looked at the same way the SWAC is currently looked at.

This is probably the truest thing you will read on any forum, and it sucks for all of us. In 15 years it will probably not even matter what your conference logo is, because we will all essentially be back to FCS.

IF this happens, maybe CUSA, the SBC and the AAC will finally realign based on geography because it sure didn't happen this go around. We are all still spread out and over lapping each other.

While not perfect, the two divisions of the SB are pretty tight,

A lot of the divisions are fine in themselves (or as good as you could hope to do). The old 12 teams AAC was not bad except for Navy in the West. The current CUSA west isn't too bad except for UTEP, and if UTEP is going to be in FBS there just isn't going to be a place where they aren't an outlier for someone. The old SB and the new SB both have decent divisional groupings. Where it's always been wonky is when you get the other side, but even then as conferences (and divisions) have grown you play the other side so much less often that it really shouldn't matter that much.

I still really don't see why one cross-divisional road game per year was so awful in the current CUSA (I know other sports play more often, but we still tended to emphasize the divisions, and arguably could have done so even more).

In the past 10 years Marshall has played in Texas SEVEN times. LaTech is close to the geographic center of the conference so it's no big deal for you all to play cross division games. Marshall is one of the farthest teams from Texas and yet we played there almost every year. In the SBC we'll rarely play in Texas since there is only 1 Texas team.

(01-14-2022 02:01 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:33 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 11:26 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:23 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:14 AM)HTOWN_HERD Wrote:  [/b]

This is probably the truest thing you will read on any forum, and it sucks for all of us. In 15 years it will probably not even matter what your conference logo is, because we will all essentially be back to FCS.

IF this happens, maybe CUSA, the SBC and the AAC will finally realign based on geography because it sure didn't happen this go around. We are all still spread out and over lapping each other.

While not perfect, the two divisions of the SB are pretty tight,

A lot of the divisions are fine in themselves (or as good as you could hope to do). The old 12 teams AAC was not bad except for Navy in the West. The current CUSA west isn't too bad except for UTEP, and if UTEP is going to be in FBS there just isn't going to be a place where they aren't an outlier for someone. The old SB and the new SB both have decent divisional groupings. Where it's always been wonky is when you get the other side, but even then as conferences (and divisions) have grown you play the other side so much less often that it really shouldn't matter that much.

I still really don't see why one cross-divisional road game per year was so awful in the current CUSA (I know other sports play more often, but we still tended to emphasize the divisions, and arguably could have done so even more).

In the past 10 years Marshall has played in Texas SEVEN times. LaTech is close to the geographic center of the conference so it's no big deal for you all to play cross division games. Marshall is one of the farthest teams from Texas and yet we played there almost every year. In the SBC we'll rarely play in Texas since there is only 1 Texas team.

Gosh. Y'all had to play a game a year that wasn't nearby? Sounds awful.

Reckon y'all will be taking buses to the non-Texas cross-divisional games? That'll be nice.

(01-14-2022 02:29 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:01 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:33 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 11:26 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 08:23 AM)topper1296 Wrote:  IF this happens, maybe CUSA, the SBC and the AAC will finally realign based on geography because it sure didn't happen this go around. We are all still spread out and over lapping each other.

While not perfect, the two divisions of the SB are pretty tight,

A lot of the divisions are fine in themselves (or as good as you could hope to do). The old 12 teams AAC was not bad except for Navy in the West. The current CUSA west isn't too bad except for UTEP, and if UTEP is going to be in FBS there just isn't going to be a place where they aren't an outlier for someone. The old SB and the new SB both have decent divisional groupings. Where it's always been wonky is when you get the other side, but even then as conferences (and divisions) have grown you play the other side so much less often that it really shouldn't matter that much.

I still really don't see why one cross-divisional road game per year was so awful in the current CUSA (I know other sports play more often, but we still tended to emphasize the divisions, and arguably could have done so even more).

In the past 10 years Marshall has played in Texas SEVEN times. LaTech is close to the geographic center of the conference so it's no big deal for you all to play cross division games. Marshall is one of the farthest teams from Texas and yet we played there almost every year. In the SBC we'll rarely play in Texas since there is only 1 Texas team.

Gosh. Y'all had to play a game a year that wasn't nearby? Sounds awful.

Reckon y'all will be taking buses to the non-Texas cross-divisional games? That'll be nice.

Oh it's going to be a hell of a lot better. We wouldn't have joined the SBC if that weren't the case. But of course the cross divisional games are just one of many reasons why we wanted out. You made a comment specifically about cross division games so that what I responded about.

Oh that was only football, we made a crap load of trips to Texas for other sports every year.

The last go round of realignment, Marshall lost all of our East Division rivals and the ones that stayed were moved over to the West Division. So we were in a Division that didn't really spark any fan excitement, we had no history with any of these teams in the East, throw in the Texas teams that didn't spark any fan excitement and it's a mess. SoMiss and UAB are all we really had left that fans cared about. Add in Judy and the horrible media deal. It was time to go.

(01-14-2022 02:58 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:29 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:01 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:33 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 11:26 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  While not perfect, the two divisions of the SB are pretty tight,

A lot of the divisions are fine in themselves (or as good as you could hope to do). The old 12 teams AAC was not bad except for Navy in the West. The current CUSA west isn't too bad except for UTEP, and if UTEP is going to be in FBS there just isn't going to be a place where they aren't an outlier for someone. The old SB and the new SB both have decent divisional groupings. Where it's always been wonky is when you get the other side, but even then as conferences (and divisions) have grown you play the other side so much less often that it really shouldn't matter that much.

I still really don't see why one cross-divisional road game per year was so awful in the current CUSA (I know other sports play more often, but we still tended to emphasize the divisions, and arguably could have done so even more).

In the past 10 years Marshall has played in Texas SEVEN times. LaTech is close to the geographic center of the conference so it's no big deal for you all to play cross division games. Marshall is one of the farthest teams from Texas and yet we played there almost every year. In the SBC we'll rarely play in Texas since there is only 1 Texas team.

Gosh. Y'all had to play a game a year that wasn't nearby? Sounds awful.

Reckon y'all will be taking buses to the non-Texas cross-divisional games? That'll be nice.

Oh it's going to be a hell of a lot better. We wouldn't have joined the SBC if that weren't the case. But of course the cross divisional games are just one of many reasons why we wanted out. You made a comment specifically about cross division games so that what I responded about.

Oh that was only football, we made a crap load of trips to Texas for other sports every year.

The last go round of realignment, Marshall lost all of our East Division rivals and the ones that stayed were moved over to the West Division. So we were in a Division that didn't really spark any fan excitement, we had no history with any of these teams in the East, throw in the Texas teams that didn't spark any fan excitement and it's a mess. SoMiss and UAB are all we really had left that fans cared about. Add in Judy and the horrible media deal. It was time to go.

Your travel in the 'belt will be easier on you. Sure.

But my point was (and is) that cross-divisional travel in the current CUSA really isn't bad at all. Not for Tech. Not for Marshall (one trip to Texas in many years and all). Not for anyone really.

Instead of flying to DFW to play UNT every 7 years or whatever, you'll fly to Mobile to play USA. And instead of flying to San Antonio or Shreveport (then busing over to Ruston) or El Paso you'll fly to Austin (I guess, and then bus) or Jonesboro (or maybe Memphis) or Monroe. The flights will be a little shorter. Yes.

But just like now, it'll just be one a year. One flight to a cross-divisional opponent per year.

Like you said, I didn't comment on how you feel about your own division (we liked ours mostly, or liked playing them). I can see that you'd rather play the SB east than the current CUSA east. But cross-divisional travel wasn't/isn't bad at all.

Even if UAB did screw up the rotation. Thanks a lot Blazers - y'all sent Marshall to Texas too often.

(01-14-2022 06:22 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:58 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:29 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:01 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 12:33 PM)inutech Wrote:  A lot of the divisions are fine in themselves (or as good as you could hope to do). The old 12 teams AAC was not bad except for Navy in the West. The current CUSA west isn't too bad except for UTEP, and if UTEP is going to be in FBS there just isn't going to be a place where they aren't an outlier for someone. The old SB and the new SB both have decent divisional groupings. Where it's always been wonky is when you get the other side, but even then as conferences (and divisions) have grown you play the other side so much less often that it really shouldn't matter that much.

I still really don't see why one cross-divisional road game per year was so awful in the current CUSA (I know other sports play more often, but we still tended to emphasize the divisions, and arguably could have done so even more).

In the past 10 years Marshall has played in Texas SEVEN times. LaTech is close to the geographic center of the conference so it's no big deal for you all to play cross division games. Marshall is one of the farthest teams from Texas and yet we played there almost every year. In the SBC we'll rarely play in Texas since there is only 1 Texas team.

Gosh. Y'all had to play a game a year that wasn't nearby? Sounds awful.

Reckon y'all will be taking buses to the non-Texas cross-divisional games? That'll be nice.

Oh it's going to be a hell of a lot better. We wouldn't have joined the SBC if that weren't the case. But of course the cross divisional games are just one of many reasons why we wanted out. You made a comment specifically about cross division games so that what I responded about.

Oh that was only football, we made a crap load of trips to Texas for other sports every year.

The last go round of realignment, Marshall lost all of our East Division rivals and the ones that stayed were moved over to the West Division. So we were in a Division that didn't really spark any fan excitement, we had no history with any of these teams in the East, throw in the Texas teams that didn't spark any fan excitement and it's a mess. SoMiss and UAB are all we really had left that fans cared about. Add in Judy and the horrible media deal. It was time to go.

Your travel in the 'belt will be easier on you. Sure.

But my point was (and is) that cross-divisional travel in the current CUSA really isn't bad at all. Not for Tech. Not for Marshall (one trip to Texas in many years and all). Not for anyone really.

Instead of flying to DFW to play UNT every 7 years or whatever, you'll fly to Mobile to play USA. And instead of flying to San Antonio or Shreveport (then busing over to Ruston) or El Paso you'll fly to Austin (I guess, and then bus) or Jonesboro (or maybe Memphis) or Monroe. The flights will be a little shorter. Yes.

But just like now, it'll just be one a year. One flight to a cross-divisional opponent per year.

Like you said, I didn't comment on how you feel about your own division (we liked ours mostly, or liked playing them). I can see that you'd rather play the SB east than the current CUSA east. But cross-divisional travel wasn't/isn't bad at all.

Even if UAB did screw up the rotation. Thanks a lot Blazers - y'all sent Marshall to Texas too often.

Cross Division games is only one piece of the puzzle. I won't rehash all the issues as Marshall and SoMiss have fixed it ourselves.

(01-15-2022 01:09 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 06:22 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:58 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:29 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:01 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  In the past 10 years Marshall has played in Texas SEVEN times. LaTech is close to the geographic center of the conference so it's no big deal for you all to play cross division games. Marshall is one of the farthest teams from Texas and yet we played there almost every year. In the SBC we'll rarely play in Texas since there is only 1 Texas team.

Gosh. Y'all had to play a game a year that wasn't nearby? Sounds awful.

Reckon y'all will be taking buses to the non-Texas cross-divisional games? That'll be nice.

Oh it's going to be a hell of a lot better. We wouldn't have joined the SBC if that weren't the case. But of course the cross divisional games are just one of many reasons why we wanted out. You made a comment specifically about cross division games so that what I responded about.

Oh that was only football, we made a crap load of trips to Texas for other sports every year.

The last go round of realignment, Marshall lost all of our East Division rivals and the ones that stayed were moved over to the West Division. So we were in a Division that didn't really spark any fan excitement, we had no history with any of these teams in the East, throw in the Texas teams that didn't spark any fan excitement and it's a mess. SoMiss and UAB are all we really had left that fans cared about. Add in Judy and the horrible media deal. It was time to go.

Your travel in the 'belt will be easier on you. Sure.

But my point was (and is) that cross-divisional travel in the current CUSA really isn't bad at all. Not for Tech. Not for Marshall (one trip to Texas in many years and all). Not for anyone really.

Instead of flying to DFW to play UNT every 7 years or whatever, you'll fly to Mobile to play USA. And instead of flying to San Antonio or Shreveport (then busing over to Ruston) or El Paso you'll fly to Austin (I guess, and then bus) or Jonesboro (or maybe Memphis) or Monroe. The flights will be a little shorter. Yes.

But just like now, it'll just be one a year. One flight to a cross-divisional opponent per year.

Like you said, I didn't comment on how you feel about your own division (we liked ours mostly, or liked playing them). I can see that you'd rather play the SB east than the current CUSA east. But cross-divisional travel wasn't/isn't bad at all.

Even if UAB did screw up the rotation. Thanks a lot Blazers - y'all sent Marshall to Texas too often.

Cross Division games is only one piece of the puzzle. I won't rehash all the issues as Marshall and SoMiss have fixed it ourselves.

It's the only piece I mentioned.

I don't think all of the issues marshall fans had with CUSA are as hollow as this one.

(01-15-2022 04:17 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-15-2022 01:09 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 06:22 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:58 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 02:29 PM)inutech Wrote:  Gosh. Y'all had to play a game a year that wasn't nearby? Sounds awful.

Reckon y'all will be taking buses to the non-Texas cross-divisional games? That'll be nice.

Oh it's going to be a hell of a lot better. We wouldn't have joined the SBC if that weren't the case. But of course the cross divisional games are just one of many reasons why we wanted out. You made a comment specifically about cross division games so that what I responded about.

Oh that was only football, we made a crap load of trips to Texas for other sports every year.

The last go round of realignment, Marshall lost all of our East Division rivals and the ones that stayed were moved over to the West Division. So we were in a Division that didn't really spark any fan excitement, we had no history with any of these teams in the East, throw in the Texas teams that didn't spark any fan excitement and it's a mess. SoMiss and UAB are all we really had left that fans cared about. Add in Judy and the horrible media deal. It was time to go.

Your travel in the 'belt will be easier on you. Sure.

But my point was (and is) that cross-divisional travel in the current CUSA really isn't bad at all. Not for Tech. Not for Marshall (one trip to Texas in many years and all). Not for anyone really.

Instead of flying to DFW to play UNT every 7 years or whatever, you'll fly to Mobile to play USA. And instead of flying to San Antonio or Shreveport (then busing over to Ruston) or El Paso you'll fly to Austin (I guess, and then bus) or Jonesboro (or maybe Memphis) or Monroe. The flights will be a little shorter. Yes.

But just like now, it'll just be one a year. One flight to a cross-divisional opponent per year.

Like you said, I didn't comment on how you feel about your own division (we liked ours mostly, or liked playing them). I can see that you'd rather play the SB east than the current CUSA east. But cross-divisional travel wasn't/isn't bad at all.

Even if UAB did screw up the rotation. Thanks a lot Blazers - y'all sent Marshall to Texas too often.

Cross Division games is only one piece of the puzzle. I won't rehash all the issues as Marshall and SoMiss have fixed it ourselves.

It's the only piece I mentioned.

I don't think all of the issues marshall fans had with CUSA are as hollow as this one.

Agreed... I will truly miss playing LaTech, FAU and UAB.

(01-12-2022 11:41 AM)SouthernMissSNu Wrote:  

(01-12-2022 10:06 AM)RustonBulldog Wrote:  

(01-12-2022 12:08 AM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Should pay the leaving early penalty$$.

Actually if my understanding is correct, the Sun Belt teams are actually raising the “exit fees” for AAC departing teams. Our CFP payout will rise on a per team basis with those three gone next year and the AAC departures won’t get any cut of that raise nor their own cut. So in reality, we are getting additional dollars out of it.

See ya and thank you for the extra cash USM.

No worries. Always feels good to donate to the poor and help little brother out.

"...feels good to donate to the poor ...." says the the fan of a university with the least amount of money of anybody in CUSA 3.0 Good luck in the Sun Belt Southern Miss. You can really afford to give away future revenue

(01-14-2022 11:58 AM)RustonBulldog Wrote:  

(01-14-2022 10:52 AM)high flyer Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 03:32 PM)RustonBulldog Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 02:59 PM)gdunn Wrote:  [quote='RustonBulldog' pid='18007136' dateline='1642099731']
Frankly I don’t care if you believe this or not, but LA Tech was likely headed to the AAC until the MWC positioned itself for “Texas realignment” causing a scramble amongst ESPN (Not an ESPN conference) and AAC officials.

The AAC’s goal was to create a wall to prevent the MWC from entering the central time zone.

There was never a reason to consider the Sun Belt and it all fell apart rather quickly. I don’t blame Dr. Wood for this one.

That is fine. I really don’t care. If we had been straight up told “No” by the AAC and we didn’t begin posturing for the Sun Belt, that’s on us. But in reality that isn’t what happened. Louisiana Tech thought they were in. Whether we were played like a fiddle by the AAC is up to you to decide, but I see no reason for them to politic like that. I think the AAC was looking for universities with a full commitment to athletics. I do know for a fact LA Tech presented a path to a $40 million dollar budget to go along with a new academic center and indoor practice facility. Ultimately it wasn’t enough and “markets” took center stage. Tech still has a lot of financial flexibility that some of our peers don’t have. We haven’t over extended ourselves. We have practically no debt and no student fee. When the next conference realignment shift comes, we’ll probably put all our eggs back in the basket and hopefully a couple more so it’s good enough. However, we would only do that for the AAC or the MWC. We aren’t going to take the bad pr of a student fee or borrow from the endowment to compete in Conference USA or the Sun Belt. If SMU, Tulane and Tulsa bolt from the AAC I doubt we would do it for them at that point either.

The world can laugh at us, but I’m glad Louisiana Tech always shoots for the stars. It pisses everyone off that we don’t know “our place.” Yet we have always don’t pretty well fighting above our weight class against teams with quite a bit more resources.

Our vision has always been better than the Sun Belt and that goal/desire of staying ahead has allowed us to build what was statistically (form a win/loss standpoint in the big three sports) the most successful program in Conference USA. It’s also probably what kept us from being the final sun belt addition. I can live with that. All we can do now is focus on us and keep moving forward. Building a recognizable brand and continuing to win on field, court and diamond. Invest in facilities while not becoming over leveraged. Engaging the student body so when the student fee is needed, it’ll pass with ease. Realignment is coming again. NIL, transfers and TV deals will shake up the world again in the next three years, I hope we are ready.
----------------------------------------------------------------

You say Tech has practically no debt and no student fee. So, what about the "student facility enhancement fee"? Although it does not use athletics in its description the bonds issued in building the South End Zone are being paid off by that means. The outstanding balance is approximately $11 million and should be repaid within next 20yrs. As long as this facility enhancement fee is in effect, next 20yrs or so, it is doubtful the students would add an additional athletic fee on top of that. Then, so far as debt is concerned what do you consider that remaining $11mil still owed on the end zone structure? Next, what about the $11 mil the athletic dept borrowed from the Foundation a couple of years ago to cover cost of the new press box? Most folks would consider that to be a debt. What about the money still owed on the jumbotron and improvements to Tac center? Anyone who doubts this info can confirm it by checking the athletic department and Foundation audit reports.

Lambright Intramural Center is the focus of that and it is not an athletic operations student fee. I think you are wrong about passing one in the next 20 years as there is a strong argument to be made for one. Maybe 1% of student on campus attribute that Lambright fee to the DAC. It’s known as the Lambright fee. We are practically the only program in the country without a fee related to athletic operations. Many G5 programs, as you know, thrive on that student fee. The catch (and this is what makes it so hard) is how affordable Louisiana Tech is. We are constantly ranked in best “bang for your buck” type listings. Any fee has to be carefully considered because it will impact the value proposition that is currently being offered.

Paul Millsap donated more in 2014 than the cost of the video board. TAC enhancements have been paid for by private donors.

Press box is our big one. You are correct, it is borrowed from the foundation. However, it isn’t a backbreaker. We have plenty of room to borrow if necessary for whatever would be needed (Exit/Entry Fees, IPF, etc.). In comparison to most of the G5 world we are in a great position from a debt standpoint.

First, the "Student facility enhancement fee" was voted on and passed by the students back in 2013-14 at which time it became possible to issue about $11 mil in bonds enabling the school to build the stadium South End Zone (SEZ). That fee was about $50. per quarter per student and when the proposal was presented to the board of regents it was estimated to collect about $1,050,000 per year. The bond redemption payment would be around $675,000 per year which left about another half mil for other campus improvements (parking, etc). You might want to call it Lambright Intramural Center, etc or anything you want but it is officially the Student Facility Enhancement Fee. Maybe 1% of the students refer to it as facility enhancement but thats probably because very few were around 7yr ago when it was voted on and know little if any of its origin. The fee will be collected for another 19yrs or until some wealthy donor steps in and pays off the bonds. Secondly, I dont know how much Paul Milsap gave for the TAC video board or what other doners pitched in but the university quoted in their financial records covering year ending June 2021 that they owed Orign bank, for stadium and tac video boards, a total of $687,000 with the note being due on 1-15-2024. They borrowed $233,000 from CUSA with the note being due on 5/31/2023. Yes, Tech does rank high in the "bang for your buck" schools, minimal student debt, but that is due to a number of reasons such as most students receive free tuition due to the Louisiana TOPS program, most are commuters living at home or apartments which is less than on campus rates.

(01-13-2022 01:00 PM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 12:31 PM)FairwayEagle Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 11:00 AM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 08:42 AM)FairwayEagle Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 07:22 AM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  Well, Fairway, because it will directly affect every CUSA athletic schedule for 2022.

Everyone knows that is happening without you tossing more gas on the fire on the CUSA board. It led to a thread of more sniping. Great job!

So in your rules, I shouldn't post items about the conference on the conference board because it is causing sniping? Ok, boomer. Are you for real? This is a sports message board FOR C-USA sports.

It's not about rules, it's about not being an ass.

You're serious? Wow. I hope your day gets better, bro.
Moving along now...

Honestly, I'd be more concerned that he wore Georgia Bulldogs stuff over Southern Miss. In fact, none of your Southern Miss elite reps photographed there are wearing anything Southern Miss-related.

I'd be ashamed too if I was going to a football game against two REAL football teams wearing the gear of a 3-9 future Belch team. They'd get laughs. The Bama fans would just talk about how bad they kicked your ass this year too.

(01-21-2022 09:09 AM)All4One Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 01:00 PM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 12:31 PM)FairwayEagle Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 11:00 AM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 08:42 AM)FairwayEagle Wrote:  Everyone knows that is happening without you tossing more gas on the fire on the CUSA board. It led to a thread of more sniping. Great job!

So in your rules, I shouldn't post items about the conference on the conference board because it is causing sniping? Ok, boomer. Are you for real? This is a sports message board FOR C-USA sports.

It's not about rules, it's about not being an ass.

You're serious? Wow. I hope your day gets better, bro.
Moving along now...

Honestly, I'd be more concerned that he wore Georgia Bulldogs stuff over Southern Miss. In fact, none of your Southern Miss elite reps photographed there are wearing anything Southern Miss-related.

I'd be ashamed too if I was going to a football game against two REAL football teams wearing the gear of a 3-9 future Belch team. They'd get laughs. The Bama fans would just talk about how bad they kicked your ass this year too.

Well, let's look at that from a neutral perspective. He was at the natty game, he has a background with Georgia, so wearing some Georgia garb is understandable. I know we can't "all just get along" but maybe we can at least ignore some of the antagonistic posts. Then again, maybe not.

(01-21-2022 09:22 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(01-21-2022 09:09 AM)All4One Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 01:00 PM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 12:31 PM)FairwayEagle Wrote:  

(01-13-2022 11:00 AM)Eagle in the gym Wrote:  So in your rules, I shouldn't post items about the conference on the conference board because it is causing sniping? Ok, boomer. Are you for real? This is a sports message board FOR C-USA sports.

It's not about rules, it's about not being an ass.

You're serious? Wow. I hope your day gets better, bro.
Moving along now...

Honestly, I'd be more concerned that he wore Georgia Bulldogs stuff over Southern Miss. In fact, none of your Southern Miss elite reps photographed there are wearing anything Southern Miss-related.

I'd be ashamed too if I was going to a football game against two REAL football teams wearing the gear of a 3-9 future Belch team. They'd get laughs. The Bama fans would just talk about how bad they kicked your ass this year too.

Well, let's look at that from a neutral perspective. He was at the natty game, he has a background with Georgia, so wearing some Georgia garb is understandable. I know we can't "all just get along" but maybe we can at least ignore some of the antagonistic posts. Then again, maybe not.

That was my first comment in the topic. We can't get along because Southern Miss fans here don't want that.