Tech hits crossroads

MeanGreen61 · July 1, 2005

The WAC and $$$$. Glad we stayed put. NT's WAC invite mentioned in article.

Fund raising key as school's fifth year in WAC begins

July 1, 2005

Tech's WAC football record: 18-14

Tech's WAC baseball record: 36-83

Tech men's basketball WAC record: 40-32

Just four years ago, Louisiana Tech fans were almost giddy anticipating the school's affiliation with the Western Athletic Conference, a move many believed would elevate the Ruston school above the remaining mid-level Division I schools in Louisiana.

As Tech prepares to kick off its fifth season in the WAC, much of the luster of WAC membership has worn off, although many fans, school officials and coaches believe the school is better off now than it was in 2001.

That's despite the changes over the past year, which include having SMU, Rice, Tulsa and UTEP, Tech's closest rivals in the league, depart for Conference USA. Today, the WAC will welcome the giddiness of fans from Idaho, New Mexico State and Utah State as replacements.

"I think WAC membership has mostly been good, based on where we were before we joined," Shreveporter John Douglas said. "The competition in men's basketball and football has been a definite improvement. WAC men's basketball is substantially higher than the Sun Belt and it remains so, despite the recent shake up."

In order to move Tech's athletic programs to a higher level of success, Tech Athletic Director Jim Oakes has announced a fund-raising campaign designed to raise $2 million per year. Brochures detailing the campaign, including how the money will be spent, will be mailed to 10,000 Tech alumni in the next couple of weeks.

"It's important to let people know what our plans are with clear objectives," Oakes said. "We've come a long way, doubling our athletic budget in the past 10 years, but to continue advancing, we have to keep the money coming in."

WAC membership has provided numerous dividends for the Tech athletic teams and the school with increased television exposure in football and more revenue sharing than it received prior to joining the league on July 1, 2001.

During the past football season, 11 of Tech's 12 games were televised in some fashion and for three consecutive seasons at least one game has received national exposure on either ESPN or ESPN2. Although details haven't been finalized, another game is scheduled to be broadcast nationally in 2005.

Tech recently received its revenue sharing check for 2004-05 from the WAC and it was for approximately $992,000, according to Oakes. The figure was higher than normal, since the four departing WAC schools did not receive a full share.

WAC Commissioner Karl Benson said that Tech has been "a loyal, supportive member of the WAC," and that the football team, Bulldogs basketball team and the Lady Techsters appearing in the postseason over the last four years shows what Tech has brought to the WAC table.

"As far as I'm concerned, Tech has a spot at the table as long as they see the WAC as an advantage," Benson said. "If there comes a time when they see themselves aligned with the C-USA members, then I would understand. I'm glad they're currently under the WAC umbrella."

Benson said that both before and after the C-USA issue fell through, Tech President Dan Reneau and Oakes have been solid in their support of the WAC.

"Both of them have been as strong an advocate of the WAC as anyone and both have provided key leadership roles," Benson said. "They've also been willing to do some innovative things, like playing a Labor Day football game last season. That was good for Tech and good for the WAC."

Tech athletic officials made an ill-fated attempt to join C-USA last year and the rejection left them in a league with their closest partner some 900 miles away. Travel was already more expensive for Tech in the WAC than in the Sun Belt, but now travel costs are expected to increase in the 2005-06 fiscal year, which begins today.

The Tech football team spent $547,190 on all travel last year, including flights to Miami and Tennessee, along with a bus trip to Auburn. They will fly to Kansas and Florida this year, but the third road trip has been changed to a home game against the University of North Texas.

Bus trips to Rice and SMU last season will be replaced with flights to Moscow, Idaho, and Ogden, Utah.

The Bulldogs football and men's basketball teams benefited the most by joining the WAC, elevating the schedule and helping coaches Jack Bicknell and Keith Richard respectively attract recruits that wouldn't visit the school before.

"Initially, I didn't see the talent level shoot up, but I'm sure that we've signed some guys who might have gone elsewhere without WAC membership," said former Caddo Parish School Board President and Tech fan Mark Milam. "I still think of the Terry Bradshaw, Denny Duron eras in terms of talent.

"But playing football in the WAC was a definite step up, so it might have camouflaged the increase in talent level. The quality of athletes was already there in the WAC before we got there."

Richard's basketball teams haven't been able to match the 14-4, third-place team that he had during his initial WAC campaign but they're 40-32 in league play over the four seasons, the fourth-best mark in the league.

"The quality of this league from top to bottom has been outstanding and I personally like the quality, even though it can add to a coach's loss column," Richard said. "We've been getting WAC-level players but what we've discovered is that we have to get top tier WAC-level players to win this league.

"We have been competitive in the WAC, but what we're trying to do right now is to take it up another notch "» to go win this league. And therein lies the challenge of the league."

The Tech football team won the league in 2001 with a 7-1 WAC mark, but went 3-5 in 2002 and 2003. The Bulldogs rebounded last season with a 5-3 mark, making Bicknell 18-14 in the league in four seasons.

Even before the new schools were added to the WAC, the extensive travel to league games was enough to drive Hall of Fame coach Leon Barmore into retirement from the Lady Techsters. Richard doesn't see extremely long road trips as a problem, however,

"Travel is tough, no doubt, but these kids are young, and I think travel is made out to be more than it is," Richard said. "We've done very well on the road in this league."

Benson admits that the WAC is "geographically challenged" with Hawaii about 2,000 miles away from its nearest WAC neighbor.

"I don't see the travel as a detriment," Benson said. "If you have to get on a plane, it doesn't matter much if you fly 400 or 900 miles."

Benson also added that there are no current plans to add a Central Time Zone member as a travel partner for Tech. North Texas declined an invitation to join the league last year.

The Lady Techsters' program is the only one of the big three that didn't benefit from the move to the WAC. Even though the team has been the most consistent winner of Tech athletic programs, the Techsters have shown signs of decline over the past two years. They narrowly made the NCAA Tournament for the 24th consecutive time this season after losing to Rice in the WAC Tournament finals.

"I think that the Lady Techsters have been on a downward spiral ever since they joined the WAC because it confined them on their recruiting," said Mickey Murphy of Ruston. "I wouldn't mind them being an independent again, because I believe that's the only way they'll get back on top."

Jimmy Watson

The Shreveport Times

Edited July 1, 2005 by MeanGreen61

MeanGreen61 · July 1, 2005

Here's another Shreveport Times article. Is this writer anti-Tech or just tellin' it like it is ?

Lack of fan support hurting Tech programs

July 1, 2005

John Douglas recently took out a map of the United States and drew a circle 90 miles out from every BCS school in the nation. He figured that 90 miles was a reasonable traveling distance for a football fan to see a game and return home without having to spend the night.

Most of the circles touched, except for a few areas in the Midwest and a glaring area in north Louisiana, east Texas, southern Arkansas and western Mississippi.

Guess which school is located right in the center of that latter spot ... Louisiana Tech.

"It was an eyeopener," Douglas said.

Like many faithful Tech supporters, Douglas wonders why his own fans are largely apathetic and why other football fans in this area don't flock to Louisiana Tech games.

"Tech needs more help from its fans. We have something that could be really special if people would just get behind it," Douglas said. "Frustrating is the mildest word you can say about our lack of support."

As they begin their fifth season of competition in the WAC, the Bulldogs and the Lady Techsters athletic teams struggle to compete against league schools that have much larger operating budgets than Louisiana Tech.

Groups of Tech fans often rail on the Internet about why more money isn't being pumped into this program or that program. But if the money isn't there, you have nothing to pump.

Sure, you could drop the engineering program or eliminate the band and give that money to the football team. But we know that isn't going to happen.

Simply put, there are only so many ways that an athletic department can generate revenue. Ticket sales, corporate sponsorships, conference revenue sharing, television revenue and private donations are at the forefront.

Since most folks don't have thousands of dollars to donate at the drop of a hat, the easiest way for the multitudes to contribute is by purchasing a ticket and putting their fanny in a seat.

That isn't happening on a consistent basis for Louisiana Tech. The Bulldogs football team drew a season-high 22,467 fans for a home game last season against UL-Lafayette in 30,000-seat Joe Aillet Stadium but could manage just 7,713 folks in Shreveport's Independence Stadium for a WAC "home" game against Tulsa.

That ain't gettin' it done, Tech fans, and the appalling turnout prompted Tech officials to eliminate Shreveport as a host site for a game on the 2005 schedule.

Athletic Director Jim Oakes is preparing a $2 million annual fund-raising effort that he believes will allow the school to become a consistent winner in the WAC in all sports.

At the heart of the proposal and the easiest way for most Tech supporters to help their school achieve its goal is to purchase more season tickets to the sport of their choice.

If they can't do at least that much, they shouldn't whine about the football team finishing 6-6, the men's basketball team going 9-9 in the WAC or the Lady Techsters losing in the first round of the NCAA Tournament.

All three of those teams have overall winning records in the WAC during the past four seasons. But if they are expected to move up to another level, then more people need to pay to see them play.

Jimmy Watson

The Shreveport Times

Edited July 1, 2005 by MeanGreen61

LoveMG · July 1, 2005

but could manage just 7,713 folks in Shreveport's Independence Stadium for a WAC "home" game against Tulsa.
That ain't gettin' it done, Tech fans, and the appalling turnout prompted Tech officials to eliminate Shreveport as a host site for a game on the 2005 schedule.

Maybe the North Texas game was originally scheduled for SHV?

Arkstfan · July 1, 2005

In order to move Tech's athletic programs to a higher level of success, Tech Athletic Director Jim Oakes has announced a fund-raising campaign designed to raise $2 million per year. Brochures detailing the campaign, including how the money will be spent, will be mailed to 10,000 Tech alumni in the next couple of weeks.

There it is.

Cut that out and save it. If Tech moves to the Belt 2-3 years down the road you'll see this mentioned again.

I'll bet Harry's sun glasses that $2 million in new revenue is within a few dollars of what the administration at Tech is calculating is the cost of being able to stay in the WAC at a competitive level. If the fans step up they stick, if they don't they announce that they have studied the options and have concluded the Sun Belt is a better fit because of the potential to play regional opponents.

LoveMG · July 1, 2005

Benson also added that there are no current plans to add a Central Time Zone member as a travel partner for Tech. North Texas declined an invitation to join the league last year.

I would have preferred the WAC with La Tech and NMSU, only until a CUSA spot opened. I know, I know about the costs, but games with Fresno, Boise, and Hawaii and more appealing to the general fan than what we have now. It is a step up even if it's about to fall apart.

GreenEddieNT · July 1, 2005

I would have preferred the WAC with La Tech and NMSU, only until a CUSA spot opened. I know, I know about the costs, but games with Fresno, Boise, and Hawaii and more appealing to the general fan than what we have now. It is a step up even if it's about to fall apart.

I agree, I also believe that it is easier to get an invite to C-USA from the WAC than from the Sun Belt. I really believe C-USA will first look at every available team from the WAC and MAC than the Sun Belt because they are embarrassed to raid the league considered the worst(at least as far as public perception goes) in division 1-A. They may eventually take teams from the Sun Belt but only when there are no more viable options in the WAC and/or MAC. That's the reason why no Sun Belt team has ever been invited to join Conference USA.

PlummMeanGreen · July 1, 2005

It is a step up even if it's about to fall apart.

Uh...........Huh?!?!?!?

Maybe its Fresno State and Boise State who are a step up, but if they left the WAC, then we would have Doo-WAC-A-Doo-WAC-A-Doo-Doo-ed on ourselves had we elected for the WAC. I think NMSU is (undertandably) glad to be in the WAC because of their location, but if the WAC fell apart, how long would it take for their school's fine president to call SBC Commissioner Wright Waters?

At present, the WAC has about as many in the Bottom 20 as the Sun Belt. It's basically FSU and Boise who are the big difference-makers in all this, but these days with the stability of non BCS leagues who would take any chances in joining league so far-flung?

If NORTH TEXAS had had our new Mean Green Athletic Village completed (with new stadium) during the last conference shake-ups, I don't think CUSA Commish' Banosky allows SMU to even hint of black-balling us. Our out-of-date facilities seemed to have always kept up barefoot and pregnant (so to speak).

BUILD IT!

Edited July 1, 2005 by PlummMeanGreen

GreenEddieNT · July 1, 2005

Uh...........Huh?!?!?!?
Maybe its Fresno State and Boise State who are a step up, but if they left the WAC, then we would have Doo-WAC-A-Doo-WAC-A-Doo-Doo-ed on ourselves had we elected for the WAC. I think NMSU is (undertandably) glad to be in the WAC because of their location, but if the WAC fell apart, how long would it take for their school's fine president to call Commissioner Wright Waters?
At present, the WAC has about as many in the Bottom 20 as the Sun Belt. It's basically FSU and Boise who are the big difference-makers in all this, but these days with the stability of non BCS leagues who would take any chances in joining league so far-flung?
If NORTH TEXAS had had our new Mean Green Athletic Village completed (with new stadium) during the last conference shake-ups, I don't think CUSA Commish' Banosky allows SMU to black-ball us. Our facilities have seemed to always kept up barefoot and pregnant (so to speak) too many times to mention and is the very reason we need to:
BUILD IT!

It would help. Another thing we need to do is start taking basketball seriously. We need to start earning NCAA tourney money and putting at least 8K butts in the seats. Remember that at the non-BCS level the biggest actual moneymaker is men's basketball and in C-USA bb is taken very seriously. I still think we should have taken a chance on the WAC.

Green Grenade II · July 2, 2005

Uh...........Huh?!?!?!?
Maybe its Fresno State and Boise State who are a step up, but if they left the WAC, then we would have Doo-WAC-A-Doo-WAC-A-Doo-Doo-ed on ourselves had we elected for the WAC. I think NMSU is (undertandably) glad to be in the WAC because of their location, but if the WAC fell apart, how long would it take for their school's fine president to call SBC Commissioner Wright Waters?
At present, the WAC has about as many in the Bottom 20 as the Sun Belt. It's basically FSU and Boise who are the big difference-makers in all this, but these days with the stability of non BCS leagues who would take any chances in joining league so far-flung?
If NORTH TEXAS had had our new Mean Green Athletic Village completed (with new stadium) during the last conference shake-ups, I don't think CUSA Commish' Banosky allows SMU to even hint of black-balling us. Our out-of-date facilities seemed to have always kept up barefoot and pregnant (so to speak).
BUILD IT!

I can see it in the tabloids...Plum announces he is barefoot and pregnant...not a pretty site.

Arkstfan · July 2, 2005

I would have preferred the WAC with La Tech and NMSU, only until a CUSA spot opened. I know, I know about the costs, but games with Fresno, Boise, and Hawaii and more appealing to the general fan than what we have now. It is a step up even if it's about to fall apart.

I wonder if the attendance numbers at SMU back that up.

SilverEagle · July 5, 2005

I wonder if the attendance numbers at SMU back that up.

Fresno and Hawaii would be more appealing than what we have now?

Let me remind you (and everyone else for that matter for the 157th time) that our FIRST Fouts Field sell-out was as a 1-AA team, and our opponent was SFA! Odus Mitchell never did that, Rod Rust never did that, Hayden Fry never did that, and Jerry Moore never did that.

IMHO we achieved that (the first Fouts sell-out in the school's history) by having an entertaining team to watch, and we had people working in promotions who were passionate about the North Texas athletic program.

It also didn't hurt anything that we had a very "noticable" OCC win, and a very close call against two SWC opponents prior to our game with SFA.

Until we have some OCC wins, and until we get some competent promotions going, we are always going to struggle with our attendance....regardless of which league we are in.

eulesseagle · July 5, 2005

I think we all know that the "conference shake up/shake downs" are not completely over!!

As long as we are winning and getting ever increasing exposure like we have been over the last 2-3 years UNT will be in position to move to (1) C-USA or (2) A newly formed conference with possible teams from WAC/C-USA/Sun Belt teams.

We all know that DD is building a football dominate program in our region. The only drawbacks are:

1. No new stadium complex, yet!! We all know how important that is for conference affiliation!! We have a first rate program playing in an outdated and ugly stadium. You have to give it to DD and his recruiters to bring recruits to UNT and show them our present facilities and get them to sign on the dotted line. We need progress on the NEW stadium NOW!!

2. Scheduling some OOC games that we can win. Slim chance to win at LSU but great exposure if we keep it close with no blow out.....anything can happen. NTSU 21...Tenn 14. Anything can happen. K-State I think will be closer than what a lot of people think. Perhaps last year was the begining of the end of K-State dominance. Tulsa and LaTech should be hard fought wins. DD has been recruiting better than Tulsa and LaTech over the last 2 - 3 years. Our OOC record may not show it but we have played some pretty tough OOC games since DD arrived.

3. Attendance.

Support DD and what he has done at UNT because look where we were and where we have come and what we are about to do!!

GrayEagle · July 5, 2005

"I don't see the travel as a detriment," Benson said. "If you have to get on a plane, it doesn't matter much if you fly 400 or 900 miles."

Let's see Karl, is there not a lot more money and time involved in flying two, three, five times that 400 miles? Travel is a HUGE detriment to getting central time zone members for the WAC.

FirefightnRick · July 6, 2005

SilverEagle

Fresno and Hawaii would be more appealing than what we have now?
Let me remind you (and everyone else for that matter for the 157th time) that our FIRST Fouts Field sell-out was as a 1-AA team, and our opponent was SFA! Odus Mitchell never did that, Rod Rust never did that, Hayden Fry never did that, and Jerry Moore never did that.
IMHO we achieved that (the first Fouts sell-out in the school's history) by having an entertaining team to watch, and we had people working in promotions who were passionate about the North Texas athletic program.
It also didn't hurt anything that we had a very "noticable" OCC win, and a very close call against two SWC opponents prior to our game with SFA.
Until we have some OCC wins, and until we get some competent promotions going, we are always going to struggle with our attendance....regardless of which league we are in.

Allow me to make it 158th.

Rick