Typical La. Tech Arrogance

Green Mean · June 23, 2008

I tend to agree with LA Tech...They need to focus more on their conference and schools that will make their program better. Other than maybe playing Troy and NT, theres no reason to play ULM and ULL. That does not say anything about LA Tech's arrogance. They are doing whats best for them so I give them props for that. And yes the WAC is a better conference than the Sunbelt.

greenminer · June 23, 2008

I tend to agree with LA Tech...They need to focus more on their conference and schools that will make their program better. Other than maybe playing Troy and NT, theres no reason to play ULM and ULL. That does not say anything about LA Tech's arrogance. They are doing whats best for them so I give them props for that. And yes the WAC is a better conference than the Sunbelt.

Why shouldn't La Tech play LaMo or LaLa?

Do you think TCU and SMU should ignore us?

Green Mean · June 23, 2008

Why shouldn't La Tech play LaMo or LaLa?
Do you think TCU and SMU should ignore us?

Its all about self interest...frankly speaking we want to have SMU/TCU on our schedule because it will benefit us a lot. If LA Tech feels they dont want to play ULM or ULL then let it be, its frankly no big deal. Just because they are in the same state/region does not mean they are obligated to play them.

Mean Green 93-98 · June 23, 2008

I tend to agree with LA Tech...They need to focus more on their conference and schools that will make their program better. Other than maybe playing Troy and NT, theres no reason to play ULM and ULL. That does not say anything about LA Tech's arrogance. They are doing whats best for them so I give them props for that. And yes the WAC is a better conference than the Sunbelt.

La Tech has the right to schedule whomever they feel is in their best interest. The arrogance is not reflected in their scheduling, but in the comments made in this column, and in comments recently made by Dooley. Yes, the WAC is a generally more respected conference than the Belt, but La Tech is hardly head and shoulders above ULM and ULL like they make themselves out to be. The columnist says the proof is in the pudding--how much pudding have you tasted from La Tech?

Green Mean · June 23, 2008

La Tech has the right to schedule whomever they feel is in their best interest. The arrogance is not reflected in their scheduling, but in the comments made in this column, and in comments recently made by Dooley. Yes, the WAC is a generally more respected conference than the Belt, but La Tech is hardly head and shoulders above ULM and ULL like they make themselves out to be. The columnist says the proof is in the pudding--how much pudding have you tasted from La Tech?

Not tasted any LA Tech pudding...there are only so many OOC conference games you can schedule...if you schedul ULM and ULL yearly you only have a couple of games left...one of them which will be a body bag game probably if not two. So you have maybe 1 game to schedule an OOC that will benefit you and the program? LA Tech did not say they will refuse to play ULM or ULL at all...they simply said they dont want to play them every year and they will play them once in a while. There is no arrogance here...LA Tech is doing what they feel is best for the program...I dont blame them saying what they are saying because the Sunbelt does stink.

Edited June 23, 2008 by Green Mean

UNTLifer · June 23, 2008

La Tech saw what ULM did to Alabama last year and knows a defeat at the hands of the Warhawks will kill their perceived recruiting advantage.

foutsrouts · June 23, 2008

Not tasted any LA Tech pudding...there are only so many OOC conference games you can schedule...if you schedul ULM and ULL yearly you only have a couple of games left...one of them which will be a body bag game probably if not two. So you have maybe 1 game to schedule an OOC that will benefit you and the program? LA Tech did not say they will refuse to play ULM or ULL at all...they simply said they dont want to play them every year and they will play them once in a while. There is no arrogance here...LA Tech is doing what they feel is best for the program...I dont blame them saying what they are saying because the Sunbelt does stink.

The top half of the WAC ain't bad, but La Tech is nowhere near that top half. Their superiority complex about being in the WAC is kind of like a 300 pounder bragging about her sorority being full of beautiful women. Just doesn't mean much.

DeepGreen · June 23, 2008

So La Tech will schedule Tulane and LSU but not ULL and ULM? That's just not right. In state schools should try and help one another by playing every so often. I'm pissed that UNT can't get more games with Baylor, TCU, SMU, Houston, and UTEP. Scheduling Rice was a nice surprise for me.

Green Mean · June 23, 2008

So La Tech will schedule Tulane and LSU but not ULL and ULM? That's just not right. In state schools should try and help one another by playing every so often. I'm pissed that UNT can't get more games with Baylor, TCU, SMU, Houston, and UTEP. Scheduling Rice was a nice surprise for me.

Its good to help other schools but only if you see it as a benefit to you. LA Tech does not see it as benefiting them so they should not schedule those teams if they dont want too. There is no helping here...this is all a race and competition that everyone needs to worry about in sports.

emmitt01 · June 23, 2008

The top half of the WAC ain't bad, but La Tech is nowhere near that top half. Their superiority complex about being in the WAC is kind of like a 300 pounder bragging about her sorority being full of beautiful women. Just doesn't mean much.

To reiterate:

They had zero wins against a team with a winning record last season. (Of course it's hard to find a team with a winning record in the all-mighty WAC, only 3 had one last season)

Green Mean · June 23, 2008

The top half of the WAC ain't bad, but La Tech is nowhere near that top half. Their superiority complex about being in the WAC is kind of like a 300 pounder bragging about her sorority being full of beautiful women. Just doesn't mean much.

You have somewhat of a point but the fact that they are in a better conference automatically makes them in a better position than ULM and ULL. Because they are in the WAC, they already have a different perception which is better than just about all the belt schools.

KAjunRaider · June 23, 2008

I have been to both campuses many times, and LaTech has nothing on ULM, except for tradition. Ruston is a real dump. Good luck finding a place to eat in that town.

We'll see how that head football coach/Director of Athletics thing goes for Dooley. He is out of town as soon as another offer comes (his daddy'll get him an AD job somewhere).

When is the last time Tech has built a new athletics facility? Is grass still growing on their tennis courts? Love that huge tarp covering empty football seats.

Denton and Murfreesboro are far ahead of Ruston, and if a conference change looms, market and "upside" is what higher profile conferences will be looking at.

Ruston Tech is on a downward spiral. Cannot get much worse than it has been there the last couple of years, so they are bound to show some improvement. However, travel expenses for their women's volleyball team to Hawaii, etc, will keep sucking them dry.

Let them rot in the WAC. Coosa ain't a'calling Ruston anytime soon.

Terry Bradshow and Karl Malone are looong gone.

Ruston does have some fine peaches, though. Let them dream of greener pastures.

Edited June 23, 2008 by KAjunRaider

Arkstfan · June 23, 2008

Tech did the right thing when they joined the WAC.

Conventional wisdom said the MWC would expand (it did but not as much as many pundits expected) but they went after CUSA rather than WAC schools. The ACC expanded and conventional wisdom said that Duke and North Carolina would find a school to join them in blocking expansion (they did to a degree as UVA blocked any plan not involving Va.Tech). If conventional wisdom had been correct the five eastern members of the WAC would have controlled expansion after the expected MWC raid. Instead the ACC domino fell, the Big East domino fell and CUSA got raided and thanks to Tulane's insistence CUSA dipped into the eastern WAC.

Likewise I think a strong argument can be made that Tech was on track as the WAC tried to recover from losing 4 out of 10 members. Tech pushed to add USU to be part of a six team western division and wanted NMSU to join them in an eastern division that would take four Sun Belt schools (UNT, ULL, ASU and a pick 'em of MTSU or Troy). If that offer had been on the table it would have had a good chance of being accepted. Idaho, ULM, FIU, FAU, and most likely Troy would have been left to die even though there was supposedly an "all or none" pact.

The WAC though wasn't willing to have more than two central time zone programs.

As it stands today, I don't know that Sun Belt membership is a great deal for Tech. Historically playing in the same league with ULM has meant ULM matching or bettering Tech in a variety of sports. Choosing between two schools so close together with such similar facilities gives ULM the edge because of the larger community.

Financially as awful as the WAC is for Tech, especially if they aren't getting BCS bonus money, the truth is that it is cheaper to starve slowly. Without a waiver Tech would have to play a year in the WAC without any revenue sharing. For a program that is coming up short financially as it is, it is unlikely they could make up the financial difference. Even after the year of WAC membership without revenue the question becomes can they save enough in expenses to make up the difference in conference revenue? That answer may well be... No.

Tech's athletic budget is similar to ASU's but Tech generates $2 million of it in game guarantees and conference revenue sharing that ASU doesn't get. Maybe they keep their scheduling practices in place and the dip is ONLY about one million but can they save enough and sell enough tickets and get enough donations to make up that million? I doubt it. They have taken such a negative stance toward the Sun Belt that it will be all but impossible to un-ring that bell.

If the WAC can keep sliding into the BCS and can start performing in the NCAA Tournament to offset non-BCS years then Tech can continue on indefinitely even if they don't improve donations, sponsorships and ticket sales. If Tech doesn't right its own house then a lack of BCS performances and a lack of NCAA Tournament success will start strangling them and a shift to the Sun Belt won't reverse that course. The bottom line is their future is wagered on CUSA adding them within three to four years. If that pony don't finish the race I don't know what they are left with.

65eagle · June 24, 2008

Tech did the right thing when they joined the WAC.
Conventional wisdom said the MWC would expand (it did but not as much as many pundits expected) but they went after CUSA rather than WAC schools. The ACC expanded and conventional wisdom said that Duke and North Carolina would find a school to join them in blocking expansion (they did to a degree as UVA blocked any plan not involving Va.Tech). If conventional wisdom had been correct the five eastern members of the WAC would have controlled expansion after the expected MWC raid. Instead the ACC domino fell, the Big East domino fell and CUSA got raided and thanks to Tulane's insistence CUSA dipped into the eastern WAC.
Likewise I think a strong argument can be made that Tech was on track as the WAC tried to recover from losing 4 out of 10 members. Tech pushed to add USU to be part of a six team western division and wanted NMSU to join them in an eastern division that would take four Sun Belt schools (UNT, ULL, ASU and a pick 'em of MTSU or Troy). If that offer had been on the table it would have had a good chance of being accepted. Idaho, ULM, FIU, FAU, and most likely Troy would have been left to die even though there was supposedly an "all or none" pact.
The WAC though wasn't willing to have more than two central time zone programs.
As it stands today, I don't know that Sun Belt membership is a great deal for Tech. Historically playing in the same league with ULM has meant ULM matching or bettering Tech in a variety of sports. Choosing between two schools so close together with such similar facilities gives ULM the edge because of the larger community.
Financially as awful as the WAC is for Tech, especially if they aren't getting BCS bonus money, the truth is that it is cheaper to starve slowly. Without a waiver Tech would have to play a year in the WAC without any revenue sharing. For a program that is coming up short financially as it is, it is unlikely they could make up the financial difference. Even after the year of WAC membership without revenue the question becomes can they save enough in expenses to make up the difference in conference revenue? That answer may well be... No.
Tech's athletic budget is similar to ASU's but Tech generates $2 million of it in game guarantees and conference revenue sharing that ASU doesn't get. Maybe they keep their scheduling practices in place and the dip is ONLY about one million but can they save enough and sell enough tickets and get enough donations to make up that million? I doubt it. They have taken such a negative stance toward the Sun Belt that it will be all but impossible to un-ring that bell.
If the WAC can keep sliding into the BCS and can start performing in the NCAA Tournament to offset non-BCS years then Tech can continue on indefinitely even if they don't improve donations, sponsorships and ticket sales. If Tech doesn't right its own house then a lack of BCS performances and a lack of NCAA Tournament success will start strangling them and a shift to the Sun Belt won't reverse that course. The bottom line is their future is wagered on CUSA adding them within three to four years. If that pony don't finish the race I don't know what they are left with.

UNTLifer · June 24, 2008

You have somewhat of a point but the fact that they are in a better conference automatically makes them in a better position than ULM and ULL. Because they are in the WAC, they already have a different perception which is better than just about all the belt schools.

The WAC was a better conference, thus it does have a better historical reputation much like SMUt and their reputation of being in the SWC. Many people hang on to the past and are blind to the future.

CorinthEagle · June 24, 2008

I have been to both campuses many times, and LaTech has nothing on ULM, except for tradition. Ruston is a real dump. Good luck finding a place to eat in that town.
We'll see how that head football coach/Director of Athletics thing goes for Dooley. He is out of town as soon as another offer comes (his daddy'll get him an AD job somewhere).
When is the last time Tech has built a new athletics facility? Is grass still growing on their tennis courts? Love that huge tarp covering empty football seats.
Denton and Murfreesboro are far ahead of Ruston, and if a conference change looms, market and "upside" is what higher profile conferences will be looking at.
Ruston Tech is on a downward spiral. Cannot get much worse than it has been there the last couple of years, so they are bound to show some improvement. However, travel expenses for their women's volleyball team to Hawaii, etc, will keep sucking them dry.
Let them rot in the WAC. Coosa ain't a'calling Ruston anytime soon.
Terry Bradshow and Karl Malone are looong gone.
Ruston does have some fine peaches, though. Let them dream of greener pastures.
Ruston does have fine peaches, the peach festival is this weekend if you want to make the drive down. Couple of other points. The Ruston area is one of the faster growing areas in Northern Louisiana. You can't drive through there and not notice all the development going on. Houses everywhere, new restaurants, etc.... As far as facility improvements, the tennis courts you speak about are gone and a new tennis center is being built next to the football stadium. The tarps were taken down a couple of years ago too and improvements to the stadium have been made to improve the aesthetics. A large pavilion area is under construction for pre/post game tailgate activities. And for the last line, Karl Malone is the director of basketball operations I believe and Bradshaw has donated a large portion of stuff from his NFL days and is very active in raising money for the university.
All that being said, I don't get all the "we are better than them" stuff either, but let's at least be somewhat accurate in assessments here.

Edited June 24, 2008 by CorinthEagle

stebo · June 24, 2008

ArkStFan's write-up is pretty much right on the money. Tech is in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. They really cannot do much about conference affiliation and the Belt is simply not an option for them unless the Belt were to add a school or two of higher caliber. Now, there are schools like Troy and FAU that are raising their own caliber but Tech will not recognize those things because those schools are in the Belt. The only problem is that CUSA is their only realistic destination to help them out. CUSA gave Tech and North Texas a list of shortcomings when we were passed over last time. North Texas has spent the last 5 years working on these things and Tech hasn't been able to. As long as they stay the same - they will never be able to meet those CUSA requests. CUSA requests that all incoming schools have an Athletic Budget of $20 million or more. Tech's budget right around $10-$12 million. The only reason it is that high is because of the extra revenue from the WAC but that is a year to year thing and the WAC isn't going to keep landing BCS busters forever. Plus Tech uses most (if not all) of that extra money for travel. If they leave the WAAC, they do not get revenue sharing for their final year thus making it difficult for them to make it through that transition (to any conference). Tech is kind of like a guy working paycheck to paycheck... they need their income every year or else they will have to do without. What they have been doing is just limiting their facility improvements... I mean, they don't even have a Jumbotron and their fans have to have bake sales to send their tennis teams to places.

Basically - summed up - They can't afford to leave the WAC... they can barely afford to stay, but that is all that they really can do (financially and ego).. and since they are on such a tight budget, they cannot afford to make the improvments needed to become more attractive to CUSA for the future. Their best bet is for the MWC to raid the WAC. If that were to happen than they could pitch the idea of an East/West WAC with the East being Tech, NMSU, North Texas, ASU, MTSU, and Troy. But the problem there is that the Belt has made a pact to stick together. We would really have to see how that pact would stand up to a deal like that. I think that type of deal would be just enough to break the pact. FAU, FIU, ULM, UL, USA, WKU would be left and I am sure that they would add Georgia Southern, Texas State, and/or Appy State to stay in the football business.

Arkstfan · June 25, 2008

Stebo heard an economist on the radio arguing that the government had made a mistake pushing home ownership so hard. He mentioned several markets where there are a lot of jobs available and said that the problem in those markets is that they can't get workers. He said that the really poor can't afford the move period while there plenty of middle class people with in demand skills who can't afford to move because they are stuck with homes they can't sell for what is owed on them.

That's Tech's dilemma. They can't get out of their WAC membership for what they would owe to make the move.