ULM's Berry 'shocked and surprised' at AD resignation

Harry · April 19, 2013

"I'm shocked and I'm surprised, Berry said. I've been doing this for a while. I've worked with 15 different athletic directors, and youre not going to find a better athletic director than Bobby. I think that when you look at the program, this is the toughest athletic director job in the country in terms of finances and facilities and to have some of the success is a great tribute to him and he will leave a legacy along those lines."

Read more: http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/20130416/BREAKING_NEWS/130416030/ULM-s-Berry-shocked-surprised-Staub-resignation?odyssey=mod|breaking|text|FRONTPAGE&nclick_check=1

Harry · April 19, 2013

http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/20130418/SPORTS/304180322/ULM-fans-buzzing-about-resignation-Staub

Arkstfan · April 19, 2013

I'd say ULM, Eastern Michigan, Idaho and San Jose State are the toughest AD gigs in the country.

ULM's leadership has been committed to working on the cheap in an area with not a lot of resources. Unless they have a president who knows, understands, and embraces a big vision for athletics they are an uphill climb.

Eastern Michigan is so close to Michigan that it will always be battle.

San Jose State has two Pac-12 teams, 2 NFL teams, 2 MLB teams, 1 NBA, 1 NHL, and 1 MLS in their market.

Idaho isn't easily accessible for most the state's population, they've got a Pac-12 team 8 miles away (and they don't have an easy time drawing crowds either), and they are hamstrung by their facilities.

untjim1995 · April 22, 2013

I'd say ULM, Eastern Michigan, Idaho and San Jose State are the toughest AD gigs in the country.

ULM's leadership has been committed to working on the cheap in an area with not a lot of resources. Unless they have a president who knows, understands, and embraces a big vision for athletics they are an uphill climb.

Eastern Michigan is so close to Michigan that it will always be battle.

San Jose State has two Pac-12 teams, 2 NFL teams, 2 MLB teams, 1 NBA, 1 NHL, and 1 MLS in their market.

Idaho isn't easily accessible for most the state's population, they've got a Pac-12 team 8 miles away (and they don't have an easy time drawing crowds either), and they are hamstrung by their facilities.

San Jose State is in the best non AQ league, though. Actually, I've always felt that SJSU is who UNT resembles the most when comparing FBS schools. But I'd give them the nod over us. San Jose is a big town, with SF and Oakland not far away. Denton is a middle sized town, close to DFW, but the city itself basically loathes UNT athletics. Even if San Jose feels the same way, at least you have a much bigger population to pull someone from to attend your games. We have 36k in enrollment, 100k in Denton, and are close to DFWs millions of citizens--and we are thrilled to get over 20k for a game. That screams out "difficult AD gig" to me, but maybe I'm just alone on this one.

Arkstfan · April 23, 2013

San Jose State is in the best non AQ league, though. Actually, I've always felt that SJSU is who UNT resembles the most when comparing FBS schools. But I'd give them the nod over us. San Jose is a big town, with SF and Oakland not far away. Denton is a middle sized town, close to DFW, but the city itself basically loathes UNT athletics. Even if San Jose feels the same way, at least you have a much bigger population to pull someone from to attend your games. We have 36k in enrollment, 100k in Denton, and are close to DFWs millions of citizens--and we are thrilled to get over 20k for a game. That screams out "difficult AD gig" to me, but maybe I'm just alone on this one.

I don't recall UNT erecting a fence around the entire stadium perimeter and hosting a carnival and festival and counting everyone who comes to it as attending the football game or closing the school cafeteria on game Saturday's and relocating it to the stadium to force students to enter the stadium just to eat on their meal plan and count as attendance.

San Jose only got in MWC because they were below the minimum number of teams and the other options were NMSU and Idaho.

untjim1995 · April 23, 2013

I don't recall UNT erecting a fence around the entire stadium perimeter and hosting a carnival and festival and counting everyone who comes to it as attending the football game or closing the school cafeteria on game Saturday's and relocating it to the stadium to force students to enter the stadium just to eat on their meal plan and count as attendance.

San Jose only got in MWC because they were below the minimum number of teams and the other options were NMSU and Idaho.

But they got in. The MWC easily could have gone after UTEP or any other Texas school instead, just to replace TCU in its league. They didn't. Maybe for the reasons you mentioned, but the point is they got in. Its kind of like getting invited up to CUSA from the SBC. North Texas got to move up, even though they don't have the pedigree that Arkansas State has had in football in the last 8 years. Should we have gotten in there over y'all? Market wise, yes, but performance wise, no. But we got in, even it is just SBC 2.0. It will be better for us, even if it doesn't include some of the teams we thought would be there. The problem though, for UNT, is that this move isn't telling the local fans, recruits, or media that we are in great shape for the near future of FBS football. All its told them is that it is better than the Sun Belt, which is still considered the worst league in the country. With Boise State and SDSU staying in the MWC, SJSU actually got an even better deal than they could have imagined when they originally sigend up with the MWC, which was looking like WAC 2.0, especially if AFA had also gone east. Instead, they got a huge lift. Sure, they got lucky. BUt SJSU and Utah State joining the league didn't scare off anyone from being in the league. There is not one person who can claim the same thing about UNT joining CUSA--since we got in with the other teams in that first realignment, we have seen ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa leave, only to be replaced by FAU, MUTS, and WKU.

SJSU had a great year last year for them and they are able to tell recruits and fans that they will play in a league that is just a shade below AQ. Their league will never be in fear of being knocked down to a new i-aa anytime soon. The other non-AQ conferences, except for the AAC, maybe, cannot say that. Time will tell, but I'm gonna bet that SJSU will benefit from playing in a very stable conference with very close regional schools that have both decent followings and histories in both money sports. They may have played in the WAC with Boise State, Fresno State, Nevada, Utah State, and Hawaii before, and some of those schools were very good during that time, but keeping those teams and also gaining Air Force, Colorado State, San Diego State, Wyoming, UNLV and New Mexico will help them in both football and basketball, from both a recruiting standpoint and in attendance. SJSU has told everyone that they belong by getting included in the MWC. It should help them, if their leadership wants to be serious about athletics. If California's funding issues become a problem, that's a different story, but that will affect SDSU and FSU, too.

Harry · April 23, 2013

But they got in. The MWC easily could have gone after UTEP or any other Texas school instead, just to replace TCU in its league. They didn't. Maybe for the reasons you mentioned, but the point is they got in. Its kind of like getting invited up to CUSA from the SBC. North Texas got to move up, even though they don't have the pedigree that Arkansas State has had in football in the last 8 years. Should we have gotten in there over y'all? Market wise, yes, but performance wise, no. But we got in, even it is just SBC 2.0. It will be better for us, even if it doesn't include some of the teams we thought would be there. The problem though, for UNT, is that this move isn't telling the local fans, recruits, or media that we are in great shape for the near future of FBS football. All its told them is that it is better than the Sun Belt, which is still considered the worst league in the country. With Boise State and SDSU staying in the MWC, SJSU actually got an even better deal than they could have imagined when they originally sigend up with the MWC, which was looking like WAC 2.0, especially if AFA had also gone east. Instead, they got a huge lift. Sure, they got lucky. BUt SJSU and Utah State joining the league didn't scare off anyone from being in the league. There is not one person who can claim the same thing about UNT joining CUSA--since we got in with the other teams in that first realignment, we have seen ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa leave, only to be replaced by FAU, MUTS, and WKU.

SJSU had a great year last year for them and they are able to tell recruits and fans that they will play in a league that is just a shade below AQ. Their league will never be in fear of being knocked down to a new i-aa anytime soon. The other non-AQ conferences, except for the AAC, maybe, cannot say that. Time will tell, but I'm gonna bet that SJSU will benefit from playing in a very stable conference with very close regional schools that have both decent followings and histories in both money sports. They may have played in the WAC with Boise State, Fresno State, Nevada, Utah State, and Hawaii before, and some of those schools were very good during that time, but keeping those teams and also gaining Air Force, Colorado State, San Diego State, Wyoming, UNLV and New Mexico will help them in both football and basketball, from both a recruiting standpoint and in attendance. SJSU has told everyone that they belong by getting included in the MWC. It should help them, if their leadership wants to be serious about athletics. If California's funding issues become a problem, that's a different story, but that will affect SDSU and FSU, too.

Your post has some merit and I agree with your prior commentary about the similarities between us and SJSU. You are ignoring the fact however that the Mountain West is locked out of Texas for the foreseeable future and that is a big problem for me and a lot of the Texas recruits we tend to migrate towards.

I think many people tend to put too much stock in a couple of year upswing at the mid major level. In SJSU's case, as recently as 2009 finished 2-10 with wins over Cal Poly and New Mexico State and ended up firing their coach. It is difficult for a mid major to consistently win and the Mountain West has its share of those types of programs.

While the Mountain West's ability to hold on to Boise State and San Diego State strengthened their league, as others have pointed out they added Utah State and Fresno because there really weren't many other options and they came dangerously close to going below the limit. Also, the changes that came about in regards to the BCS revenue distribution amongst the Gang of Five really take the argument of being a "hair" under the BCS out of the equation. The Mountain West still does not have a great TV contract and would offer similar revenue to C-USA maybe less when you factor in the travel.

Call me crazy but being able to travel to games in San Antonio, Houston, Louisiana and watch games on the east coast with REASONABLE start times is a lot more attractive to me. I also think it plays better with recruits.

Now if we were to lose these Texas teams to the Mountain West it would be a different story.

untjim1995 · April 23, 2013

Your post has some merit and I agree with your prior commentary about the similarities between us and SJSU. You are ignoring the fact however that the Mountain West is locked out of Texas for the foreseeable future and that is a big problem for me and a lot of the Texas recruits we tend to migrate towards.

I think many people tend to put too much stock in a couple of year upswing at the mid major level. In SJSU's case, as recently as 2009 finished 2-10 with wins over Cal Poly and New Mexico State and ended up firing their coach. It is difficult for a mid major to consistently win and the Mountain West has its share of those types of programs.

While the Mountain West's ability to hold on to Boise State and San Diego State strengthened their league, as others have pointed out they added Utah State and Fresno because there really weren't many other options and they came dangerously close to going below the limit. Also, the changes that came about in regards to the BCS revenue distribution amongst the Gang of Five really take the argument of being a "hair" under the BCS out of the equation. The Mountain West still does not have a great TV contract and would offer similar revenue to C-USA maybe less when you factor in the travel.

Call me crazy but being able to travel to games in San Antonio, Houston, Louisiana and watch games on the east coast with REASONABLE start times is a lot more attractive to me. I also think it plays better with recruits.

Now if we were to lose these Texas teams to the Mountain West it would be a different story.

I totally agree about having local start times, for sure. But I don't believe that the MWC is locked out of Texas at all. That league did wonders for TCU. I believe it would still for anyone in Texas who joins again. Texas HS recruits are just too good, even at 2-3 star levels, when compared to what most of the other western schools in that league can get, even California recruits. The MWC will get back here in Texas--its just a matter of when. They will survey the lay of the land and figure out which schools would fit best with their league. If I were in their leadership, I would be looking at the increased TV numbers that the four major Texas markets would add, which would vastly improve their TV contracts. I have always maintained that UTEP will be included out west when they can get another Texas school to join them, which the MWC will watch and see who they can grab. But, its not out of the question, at all, to see the MWC add more than two Texas teams if necessary. These are the possible scenarios that see playing out for that league:

1.) BYU joins the MWC again and they add another team, UH would be their prime target, but UTEP would be very acceptable to their former conference mates.

2.) BYU joins the MWC again and they add three Texas schools to the league (some combo of UTEP, UH, SMU, UTSA, or UNT)

3.) BYU doesn't join and stays independent, but the MWC adds UTEP and one of those other Texas four to get to 14

4.) The MWC comes in and grabs UTEP, UH, UTSA, and SMU or UNT to get all the TV sets of the 4 big markets in Texas, that also all have bowl games in their cities.

BYU is who they would take back in a heartbeat. I think BYU is either in the MWC again or part of the Big XII within the next 3 years. As a matter of fact, if the Big XII doesn't crumble, they would be very smart to go after BYU and South Florida, just for the added TV pull.

The merry-go-round appears to have finally slowed for now. But it will pick up steam again. In the meantime, I am very willing to put my belief in the MWC being the league that will send its champion to a BCS game more often than any of the other leagues. Just from a scheduling standpoint, those teams have a bigger advantage, especially Boise State. Their teams schedule OOC games against Pac schools for the most part. If you beat them, then you are in decent shape to get into the top ten at the end of the year. The Pac actually schedules home-and-away games against non-AQs out west. The SEC, BIg XII, Big Ten, and ACC arent as open to those type of series. The SBC will never send anyone there, nor do I believe that CUSA will. The AAC has some teams that could get there if they catch fire in the right season. But I suspect that the MWC or MAC, which schedules Big Ten normally for OOC, will parlay that advantage into being the annual entry into the BCS slot. The SEC and BIg XII will continue to feast on SBC and CUSA teams in bodybag games, which really hurts your chances of making any waves at being in the BCS game.