Middle Tennessee Should Make A Conference Switch

greenminer · June 5, 2007

crickets

Hasn't even been 24 hours. Give'm a break.

MeanMag · June 5, 2007

I think Montana would be a quality addition. Not sure about the others' facilities, budgets, fans, etc. I heard at one time that Montana couldn't move up without Montana State coming too, not sure if it's true.

It probably is...

Montana loves that rivalry. It seems like everyone in that state attends both of those teams games, no matter who plays. They are as close to pro as any team in Montana comes.

stebo · June 5, 2007

When I pull that page up it comes up as a blank page... regardless, two of those three members were original founding members and are probably grandfathered in. As for Marshall- you got me (altough I haven't seen their budget because your link didn't work).... but maybe they made an agreement with CUSA to get it to $20 million within "x" amount of years. Honestly, I do not know. All that I know is that Britton told our athletic dept that we were lacking in three areas and I listed those three. Since then, we have quietly been moving towards reaching those goals. The CUSA bylaws are not on any public website, a poster tried to find them back whent he article came out in the Denton Record Chronicle to see if that was a snow job or an SMU tactic to keep up out.... they were not published at the time. I suppose I could post an empty link like yours and claim that it is there but that nobody else can see it, lol. Seriously though man - you guys are operating on a IAA budget and you know it... We were too for the longest time and have just recently (the last couple of years) gotten our budget up to a respectable amount... but we have a LONG ways to go - just not as long as La Tech. Sorry man, the numbers don't lie.

johnnylightnin · June 5, 2007

When I pull that page up it comes up as a blank page... regardless, two of those three members were original founding members and are probably grandfathered in. As for Marshall- you got me (altough I haven't seen their budget because your link didn't work).... but maybe they made an agreement with CUSA to get it to $20 million within "x" amount of years. Honestly, I do not know. All that I know is that Britton told our athletic dept that we were lacking in three areas and I listed those three. Since then, we have quietly been moving towards reaching those goals. The CUSA bylaws are not on any public website, a poster tried to find them back whent he article came out in the Denton Record Chronicle to see if that was a snow job or an SMU tactic to keep up out.... they were not published at the time. I suppose I could post an empty link like yours and claim that it is there but that nobody else can see it, lol. Seriously though man - you guys are operating on a IAA budget and you know it... We were too for the longest time and have just recently (the last couple of years) gotten our budget up to a respectable amount... but we have a LONG ways to go - just not as long as La Tech. Sorry man, the numbers don't lie.

Here's the link. It works on my computer...

http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/

These figures are from 2005 I believe and they show that Tech's athletic budget is larger than UNTs. So, you must've done quite a bit of work in the last year. As far as the by-law, I call BS on it. By your own admission, it's based on a second hand account and it is contridictory to the fact that three CUSA members have budgets lower than what you claim.

Further, those are only the public schools...the link doesn't have the numbers for Tulsa, Rice, Tulane, or SMU.

Edited June 5, 2007 by johnnylightnin

NT80 · June 5, 2007

...the link doesn't have the numbers for Tulsa, Rice, Tulane, or SMU.

Never trust any numbers relating to SMUt athletics :whip:

Edited June 5, 2007 by NT80

MeanGreen61 · June 5, 2007

Here's the link. It works on my computer...
http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/
These figures are from 2005 I believe and they show that Tech's athletic budget is larger than UNTs. So, you must've done quite a bit of work in the last year. As far as the by-law, I call BS on it. By your own admission, it's based on a second hand account and it is contridictory to the fact that three CUSA members have budgets lower than what you claim.
Further, those are only the public schools...the link doesn't have the numbers for Tulsa, Rice, Tulane, or SMU.

Not getting into yours & Stebos private tat for tat, but the US Department of Educations shows the following for Tech and UNT for the 7/2005-6/2006 period.

Tech - $10,075,316

UNT - $13,878,077

LINK

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/search.asp

Edited June 5, 2007 by MeanGreen61

greenminer · June 5, 2007

Never trust any numbers relating to SMUt athletics

except for attendance!

wait

June 5, 2007

Well, this is what got UTEP in, it was posted by a UTEP fan on the CUSA board.
UTEP Men's Basketball Tradition
NCAA men's basketball tournament appearances:1963(Lost to Texas 47-65), 1964(Defeated Texas A&M 68-62 & Creighton 63-52, lost to Kansas State 60-64), 1966(Defeated Oklahoma City 89-74, Cincinnati 78-76, Kansas 81-80, Utah 85-78, & Kentucky 72-65), 1967(Defeated Seattle 62-54 & Wyoming 69-67, lost to Pacific 63-72), 1970(Lost to Utah State 81-91), 1975(Lost to Indiana 53-78), 1984(Lost to UNLV 60-73), 1985(Defeated Tulsa 79-75, lost to North Carolina State 73-86), 1986(Lost to Bradley 65-83), 1987(Defeated Arizona 98-91, lost to Iowa 82-84), 1988(Lost to Seton Hall 64-80), 1989(Defeated LSU 85-74, lost to Indiana 69-92), 1990(Lost to Minnesota 61-64), 1992(Defeated Evansville 55-50 & Kansas 66-60, lost to Cincinnati 67-69), 2004(Lost to Maryland 83-86), 2005(Lost to Utah 54-60)
Men's basketball post-season NIT appearances:1965(Lost to Manhattan 53-71), 1972(Lost to Niagara 57-76), 1980(Defeated Wichita State 58-56, lost to Michigan 65-74), 1981(Defeated San Jose State 57-53, lost to Tulsa 67-72), 1983(Lost to Fresno State 64-71), 1993(Defeated Houston 67-61, lost to Georgetown 44-71), 1995(Defeated Montana 90-60, lost to New Mexico State 89-92), 2001(Defeated McNeese State 84-74, lost to Memphis 65-90), 2006(Defeated Lipscomb 85-66, lost to Michigan 67-82)
UTEP Football Tradition
Football bowl appearances
Sun Bowl(El Paso, Texas):1937(Lost to Hardin-Simmons 6-34), 1949(Lost to West Virginia 12-21), 1950(Defeated Georgetown 33-20), 1954(Defeated Southern Miss 37-14), 1955(Defeated Florida State 47-20), 1957(Lost to George Washington 0-13), 1965(Defeated TCU 13-12), 1967(Defeated Ole' Miss 14-7)
Independence Bowl(Shreveport, Louisiana):1988(Lost to Southern Miss 18-38)
Humanitarian Bowl(Boise, Idaho):2000(Lost to Boise State 23-38)
Houston Bowl(Houston, Texas):2004(Lost to Colorado 28-33)
GMAC Bowl(Mobile, Alabama):2005(Lost to Toledo 13-45)
UTEP's Fan Base
Seasons when UTEP has averaged at least 30,000 fans per home game in football:1987(42,086), 1988(35,975), 1992(30,131), 1999(36,455), 2000(44,715), 2004(41,209), 2005(47,899), 2006(42,444)
Seasons when UTEP has averaged at least 8,000 fans per home game in men's basketball:1976-77(10,879), 1977-78(8,124), 1978-79(9,104), 1979-80(9,293), 1980-81(9,346), 1981-82(8,758), 1982-83(8,885), 1983-84(11,568), 1984-85(10,732) 1985-86(11,001), 1986-87(11,106), 1987-88(10,198), 1988-89(10,263), 1989-90(10,927), 1990-91(8,707), 1992-93(8,416), 1993-94(8,738), 1994-95(10,362), 1995-96(8,448), 1999-00(8,534), 2000-01(9,657), 2003-04(10,282), 2004-05(10,405), 2005-06(9,695), 2006-07(8,707)
Main UTEP Football & Basketball Facilities
Football: Sun Bowl Stadium(On campus), seating capacity 51,500
Basketball: Don Haskins Center(On campus), seating capacity 12,000
I found it on the thread where they talk about the Murfreesboro article saying that MTSU is too good for the 'Belt. Anyway, it gives you an idea of the kind of resume it might take to get into CUSA. This is of course assuming CUSA ever has an opening. That may be the most important "if" in all of this. If there is no opening then we're all gonna be staying where we are for a long time. At least in the Sun Belt's case we are now up to 9 football teams and if CUSA stays at its present membership then we don't have to worry about a raid. The WAC, on the other hand, is highly unstable and apparently quite undesirable given its difficulty in luring in teams from the Sun Belt or 1-AA and the fact that everybody there wants to be in the MWC or CUSA.

With all due respect to UNT, MTSU, Troy, etc...., I think Tech is the one that comes closest to matching UTEP's resume. Plus, unlike the schools in the Sun Belt, we actually have a good relationship with some CUSA schools and they will support us for admission next time there is an opening.

MeanGreen61 · June 5, 2007

With all due respect to UNT, MTSU, Troy, etc...., I think Tech is the one that comes closest to matching UTEP's resume. Plus, unlike the schools in the Sun Belt, we actually have a good relationship with some CUSA schools and they will support us for admission next time there is an opening.

With all due respect.............that's just YOUR opinion..............

June 5, 2007

With all due respect.............that's just YOUR opinion..............

In terms of bowl appearances, NCAA & NIT appearances, and postseason victories in football and men's basketball we are right there with UTEP and ahead of anyone in the Sun Belt. As far as averaging 30K in football and 8K in basketball I'm sure we've done it more than any other CUSA candidates as well. The facilities we currently have are not adequate but we are working on them and they will get better. I'll grant you we won't be getting a stadium that seats 51K or an arena that seats 12K but we will be spiffing up the ones we currently have.

greenminer · June 5, 2007

In terms of bowl appearances, NCAA & NIT appearances, and postseason victories in football and men's basketball we are right there with UTEP and ahead of anyone in the Sun Belt. As far as averaging 30K in football and 8K in basketball I'm sure we've done it more than any other CUSA candidates as well. The facilities we currently have are not adequate but we are working on them and they will get better. I'll grant you we won't be getting a stadium that seats 51K or an arena that seats 12K but we will be spiffing up the ones we currently have.

:blink:

MeanGreen61 · June 5, 2007

In terms of bowl appearances, NCAA & NIT appearances, and postseason victories in football and men's basketball we are right there with UTEP and ahead of anyone in the Sun Belt. As far as averaging 30K in football and 8K in basketball I'm sure we've done it more than any other CUSA candidates as well. The facilities we currently have are not adequate but we are working on them and they will get better. I'll grant you we won't be getting a stadium that seats 51K or an arena that seats 12K but we will be spiffing up the ones we currently have.

It ain't where ya been, but where your goin'. You can't come close to matching the overall athletic facilities of UNT. New state of the art 45,000 sq ft athletic center that many say rivals some of the best around, new tennis facility, new softball facility, new soccer facility, new volleyball facility. Excellent 10,000 seat Super Pit for basketball. Even old Fouts should be replaced in the near future. So you spiff up and we'll just continue to build for the future.

GreenEddieNT · June 6, 2007

In terms of bowl appearances, NCAA & NIT appearances, and postseason victories in football and men's basketball we are right there with UTEP and ahead of anyone in the Sun Belt. As far as averaging 30K in football and 8K in basketball I'm sure we've done it more than any other CUSA candidates as well. The facilities we currently have are not adequate but we are working on them and they will get better. I'll grant you we won't be getting a stadium that seats 51K or an arena that seats 12K but we will be spiffing up the ones we currently have.

What????????????????

Somebody check TechDawg's blood alcohol content. I think he's way over the legal limit!

UNTflyer · June 6, 2007

Our basketball facilities are just fine. The chairs are a bit small, but didn't we host an NCAA Tournament game? It can hold 10,000, convenient parking, the food isn't bad, and the restrooms actually have urinals!

The Super Pit would be a great atmosphere if we could just fill it up!

GreenEddieNT · June 6, 2007

With all due respect to UNT, MTSU, Troy, etc...., I think Tech is the one that comes closest to matching UTEP's resume. Plus, unlike the schools in the Sun Belt, we actually have a good relationship with some CUSA schools and they will support us for admission next time there is an opening.

Did you ever see the movie "Free Willly"? In it a boy(the one who rescues Willy) is abandoned by his mother as a baby and left to be raised by social workers and foster parents. Everytime he gets placed in a foster home he refuses to accept his new parents and insists that his mother will be coming back for him at any moment. Towards the end of the movie he finally decides to stop running away from his adoptive parents after realizing they are the only ones that love him.

The moral of this story is that Louisiana Tech is everybody's bastard as well. SMU, Rice, Tulsa, and UTEP are not going to be rescuing you from the WAC. They left you behind and didn't even give a backwards glance to see how you were doing. At this point they don't even know you exist. Likewise, the western WAC schools don't want you around either. Sure, they tolerate you because no one else wants to be in the WAC but they'd rather see you take a walk as soon as they find a western replacement or as soon the period expires when they would lose NCAA BB units if Tech leaves.

The only schools in a 1-A league that PROBABLY wouldn't mind being in the same league with Tech are the ones in the Sun Belt. They are the only ones who have ever wanted you. Stop pining for mommy to come back cause she went to CUSA and you ain't never gonna see her again. Your stepfathers in the WAC ended up stuck with custody of you and they ain't too happy with it. Heck, the moment a MWC invite comes they won't hesitate to leave you to your fate along with the other Sun Belt runaways NMSU, Utah State, and Idaho. You better hope that by the time that happens the Sun Belt is still wanting to adopt you.

GreenEddieNT · June 6, 2007

The Super Pit would be a great atmosphere if we could just fill it up!

As Shakespeare would say..."ay, there's the rub".

johnnylightnin · June 6, 2007

The moral of this story is that Louisiana Tech is everybody's bastard as well. SMU, Rice, Tulsa, and UTEP are not going to be rescuing you from the WAC. They left you behind and didn't even give a backwards glance to see how you were doing. At this point they don't even know you exist. Likewise, the western WAC schools don't want you around either. Sure, they tolerate you because no one else wants to be in the WAC but they'd rather see you take a walk as soon as they find a western replacement or as soon the period expires when they would lose NCAA BB units if Tech leaves.
The only schools in a 1-A league that PROBABLY wouldn't mind being in the same league with Tech are the ones in the Sun Belt. They are the only ones who have ever wanted you. Stop pining for mommy to come back cause she went to CUSA and you ain't never gonna see her again. Your stepfathers in the WAC ended up stuck with custody of you and they ain't too happy with it. Heck, the moment a MWC invite comes they won't hesitate to leave you to your fate along with the other Sun Belt runaways NMSU, Utah State, and Idaho. You better hope that by the time that happens the Sun Belt is still wanting to adopt you.

The bolded section is where you are totally off-base. The e-WAC voted UTEP in, they didn't fail to vote for Tech (and, the reports we got from our administration were that the vote for UTEP was very close...6-5). Louisiana Tech would be voted on if UTEP had not gotten in. It's as simple as that. At least 5 schools wanted Tech in. UTEP would make #6. Plus, Louisiana Tech is a lot further along than they were when the last vacancy came up. We've made many facility improvements with many more planned. Our season ticket sales are up and our there's a campaign to raise our CHAMPS funds.

Listen, I think UNT has a fine athletic program. I've already expressed my lament that they didn't join the WAC. That said, the e-WAC schools will vote for Tech over UNT. Our administration has maintained good relationships with the e-WAC schools. Further, our president has a great relationship with their presidents (remember, the presidents do the voting, not the ADs). Whether UNT "deserves" the votes from the e-WAC schools is a separate issue (which I'll be glad to discuss if you'd like...I'm a bigger fan of UNT than you probably realize).

stebo · June 6, 2007

I am just curious... I really have no idea... but how many non-conference games has Tech scheduled with those former Wacters since they went to CUSA. Because in the last three years. we have scheduled a home and home with SMU, Tulsa, and now Rice. When you are a lower budget, regional team like NT and Tech - our departments thrive on low travel regional games that will draw a good crowd (much like these three games)... how has Tech done in keeping up that relationship and keeping those teams on your schedule? Again, I have no idea and I am at work - no time or energy to look up Tech's last few years of scheduling. It just seems that Tulsa, SMU, and Rice have taken an interest in playing NT... not sure why... but we are really happy about it.

On the whole Presidents thing... School Presidents change about every 5 years. We have a new Prez already. I wouldn't count on those relationships to get you in. The further that you go from playing those schools, the more that you will be judged on your overall program and not the friendships that you used to have. And our budget numbers are well ahead of yours and you know it. The Dept of Ed proved it with their website (thanks 61). Actually, you have improved... you were at $9.7 or so the last time expansion happened... you have added about a million to your budget, good going. We have added about $4 million. Sorry, like I said - the numbers don't lie.

P.S. - I also have an affection for La Tech. I believe that the schools are very close. I do not believe that Tech has the financial resources to be a big player on the IA scene long term if you stay in the WAC. It is suicide. If you are really against the Belt, that is fine.. maybe go back to Indy. Tech's best years were when they were Indy. Your best conference year ever was your first year of the WAC when you were coming out of Indy land. The WAC has hurt your recruiting and your team has suffered. Your women's basketball used to be a National Powerhouse - like Purdue and Tennessee and it is now in shambles. You can blame it on whatever you want, I blame it on the WAC. You were better off Indy. The Belt might bring you even lower. So Indy might be your answer... but the WAC is destroying your budget and your programs. When North Texas turned the WAC down, it was because we were thinking with our wallets and not our egos. We will have fun inthe Belt, build up our facilities, strengthen our budget, and then eventually move onto bigger things. Tech will get to keep their Ego in check but will continue to "dogpaddle" in a WAC that does not even want them.

MeanGreen61 · June 6, 2007

I am just curious... I really have no idea... but how many non-conference games has Tech scheduled with those former Wacters since they went to CUSA. Because in the last three years. we have scheduled a home and home with SMU, Tulsa, and now Rice. When you are a lower budget, regional team like NT and Tech - our departments thrive on low travel regional games that will draw a good crowd (much like these three games)... how has Tech done in keeping up that relationship and keeping those teams on your schedule? Again, I have no idea and I am at work - no time or energy to look up Tech's last few years of scheduling. It just seems that Tulsa, SMU, and Rice have taken an interest in playing NT... not sure why... but we are really happy about it.

Football games vs former WACsters.

Louisiana Tech - 0

UNT - Tulsa 2, SMU 2 (including this season)

Basketball games vs former WACsters

Louisiana Tech -0

UNT - Tulsa 2, Rice, Houston

johnnylightnin · June 6, 2007

I don't have a ton of time right now Stebo, so I can't address everything you've posted.

Our not playing the e-WAC teams is because our AD (soon to be former AD) wouldn't shell out to get good deals with similar teams. He lived and died by the body-bag games...and, in the end, I believe that strategy has cost him his job.

You said that our recruiting has suffered...nothing could be further from the truth. Even under bicknell, we pulled down the second best class in Louisiana every year...far better than the UL-Twins.

stebo · June 6, 2007

Here's the link. It works on my computer...
http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/
These figures are from 2005 I believe and they show that Tech's athletic budget is larger than UNTs. So, you must've done quite a bit of work in the last year. As far as the by-law, I call BS on it. By your own admission, it's based on a second hand account and it is contridictory to the fact that three CUSA members have budgets lower than what you claim.
Further, those are only the public schools...the link doesn't have the numbers for Tulsa, Rice, Tulane, or SMU.

Thanks for the link... that is for the 04-05 year (61 posted the next year for you as well).. For 04-05 (according to your link) - your operating budget was:

Total Operating $10,996,389

Ours was:

Total Operating $13,749,794

So, looking at the newer numbers posted by 61, it looks like your budget has actually dropped about $700-$800K between 04/05 and 06/06 and ours has increased ever so slightly. We ran a deficit for 04/05 (and a large deficit at that) - but that is before our student fees are added in and we are also required to actually pay for the tuition of our athletes. You guys ran an even budget (actually, the report says that you make $13K bucks that year)... but unlike Texas, you are allowed to waive tuition. Still, it looks like for 04/05 - we ran about even as far as revenue, we just spent more then you and had a higher operating budget (again, according to your link). We have been able to keep the budget at our new high range and we have a balanced budget now. I imagine that our deficit was due to the facilities that we built that year. Since you are a closet NT fan then you know about how much we spent over the last two years in facilities. $3 million bucks is a much smaller deficit than I ever thought it would be considering how much we freaking spent that year.

MCMLXXX · June 6, 2007

Louisiana Tech would be voted on if UTEP had not gotten in. It's as simple as that.

I believe that UNT was in fact considered as the next option and Tech was a distant third. I am not asking you to change your opinion about the matter, I am simply telling you that your statement is incorrect.

CajunNation · June 6, 2007

This is the way I heard it went down.

The voting came down to these options:

1)Add UTEP

2)Add nobody

johnnylightnin · June 6, 2007

I believe that UNT was in fact considered as the next option and Tech was a distant third. I am not asking you to change your opinion about the matter, I am simply telling you that your statement is incorrect.

You're wrong.