CSNbbs

Good article. And hats off to al.com for showing a pic of a crowd at Legion Field and for mentioning the OCS again.

This: "I can tell you 15 ways to market tickets but the bottom line is you have to win," Lansden said. "You have to win and what we have to control is the game day atmosphere. When these new people come Saturday, we want them to walk away saying, 'I had a really good time and tickets were only $15 and I'm going to come back.'"

Hopefully we can keep up demand after the A&M game. The conference didn't do us any favors by sending us on the road to our 3 closest conference foes (WKU, MT, and USM).

It would be a good idea to have a LOT of comments on this article. ;-)

(09-11-2014 07:19 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]Good article. And hats off to al.com for showing a pic of a crowd at Legion Field and for mentioning the OCS again.

Crenshaw does not seem to be scared of bringing up the OCS. This is not the first time he's taken a small shot at the UATBOT. He's got the spin machine working overtime. lol

(09-11-2014 07:43 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]Hopefully we can keep up demand after the A&M game. The conference didn't do us any favors by sending us on the road to our 3 closest conference foes (WKU, MT, and USM).

Was C-USA trying to do those schools "a favor" by giving them those home games? Two of the three are new conference members, and UAB has not in the recent past been seen as a power deserving of "favors" from the league. Maybe next year C-USA perception may change.

Um, we played two of those three at home last year. It's not the conference office's fault we sucked.

MT & USM played here last year, so it was their turn to have the home game.

It's called a home and home. We have to return the games.

(09-11-2014 10:14 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 07:43 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]Hopefully we can keep up demand after the A&M game. The conference didn't do us any favors by sending us on the road to our 3 closest conference foes (WKU, MT, and USM).

Was C-USA trying to do those schools "a favor" by giving them those home games? Two of the three are new conference members, and UAB has not in the recent past been seen as a power deserving of "favors" from the league. Maybe next year C-USA perception may change.

We're in the East division this year because we can demand favors from the conference as a founding member. Don't be shocked to see us still in the East next season for the same reason (though that is likely 50/50 as geography may just dictate the decision...no one knows yet).

Articles like these create even more demand for tickets, in my opinion. People see this article and then think about going to the game themselves do to the positivity... "let's see what the buzz is about". So fresh seeing a positive article that could help UAB rather than a negative article that downs UAB and hurts attendance.

(09-11-2014 10:37 AM)blazr Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 10:14 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 07:43 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]Hopefully we can keep up demand after the A&M game. The conference didn't do us any favors by sending us on the road to our 3 closest conference foes (WKU, MT, and USM).

Was C-USA trying to do those schools "a favor" by giving them those home games? Two of the three are new conference members, and UAB has not in the recent past been seen as a power deserving of "favors" from the league. Maybe next year C-USA perception may change.

We're in the East division this year because we can demand favors from the conference as a founding member. Don't be shocked to see us still in the East next season for the same reason (though that is likely 50/50 as geography may just dictate the decision...no one knows yet).

The SEC threw Missouri in the SEC East, so CUSA should be able to do the same for us.

(09-11-2014 11:23 AM)Bham Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 10:37 AM)blazr Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 10:14 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 07:43 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]Hopefully we can keep up demand after the A&M game. The conference didn't do us any favors by sending us on the road to our 3 closest conference foes (WKU, MT, and USM).

Was C-USA trying to do those schools "a favor" by giving them those home games? Two of the three are new conference members, and UAB has not in the recent past been seen as a power deserving of "favors" from the league. Maybe next year C-USA perception may change.

We're in the East division this year because we can demand favors from the conference as a founding member. Don't be shocked to see us still in the East next season for the same reason (though that is likely 50/50 as geography may just dictate the decision...no one knows yet).

The SEC threw Missouri in the SEC East, so CUSA should be able to do the same for us.

The issue will be the addition of Charlotte. Next season, without a change in CUSA membership...by addition or subtraction, someone HAS to go west. We don't want to be that school, but we may have to so as to avoid strife. WKU and MTSU have the same reasons to want to avoid going west as UAB.

(09-11-2014 11:39 AM)blazr Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 11:23 AM)Bham Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 10:37 AM)blazr Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 10:14 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 07:43 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]Hopefully we can keep up demand after the A&M game. The conference didn't do us any favors by sending us on the road to our 3 closest conference foes (WKU, MT, and USM).

Was C-USA trying to do those schools "a favor" by giving them those home games? Two of the three are new conference members, and UAB has not in the recent past been seen as a power deserving of "favors" from the league. Maybe next year C-USA perception may change.

We're in the East division this year because we can demand favors from the conference as a founding member. Don't be shocked to see us still in the East next season for the same reason (though that is likely 50/50 as geography may just dictate the decision...no one knows yet).

The SEC threw Missouri in the SEC East, so CUSA should be able to do the same for us.

The issue will be the addition of Charlotte. Next season, without a change in CUSA membership...by addition or subtraction, someone HAS to go west. We don't want to be that school, but we may have to so as to avoid strife. WKU and MTSU have the same reasons to want to avoid going west as UAB.

But, as a founding member, we should take precedence over them when it comes to this.

Yep. I also don't think it's the worst idea in the world to put one of the Florida schools west. They aren't a drive able game for anybody, so just make then a permanent crossover game, and be done with it.

(09-11-2014 11:44 AM)demiveeman Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 11:39 AM)blazr Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 11:23 AM)Bham Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 10:37 AM)blazr Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 10:14 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]Was C-USA trying to do those schools "a favor" by giving them those home games? Two of the three are new conference members, and UAB has not in the recent past been seen as a power deserving of "favors" from the league. Maybe next year C-USA perception may change.

We're in the East division this year because we can demand favors from the conference as a founding member. Don't be shocked to see us still in the East next season for the same reason (though that is likely 50/50 as geography may just dictate the decision...no one knows yet).

The SEC threw Missouri in the SEC East, so CUSA should be able to do the same for us.

The issue will be the addition of Charlotte. Next season, without a change in CUSA membership...by addition or subtraction, someone HAS to go west. We don't want to be that school, but we may have to so as to avoid strife. WKU and MTSU have the same reasons to want to avoid going west as UAB.

But, as a founding member, we should take precedence over them when it comes to this.

This! Send one of those Johnny-come-lately's over there!

The non-revenue producing sports travel is a major concern(along with fans' travel for football and basketball). Traveling all the way to Texas 5-6 times per sport gets expensive and cost a lot of class time. Perhaps there will be different conference configurations to make this easier...

(09-11-2014 11:58 AM)WesternBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]The non-revenue producing sports travel is a major concern(along with fans' travel for football and basketball). Traveling all the way to Texas 5-6 times per sport gets expensive and cost a lot of class time. Perhaps there will be different conference configurations to make this easier...

That's really a moot point since divisions only apply to football (just like basketball hasn't and won't have divisions). But even so, travel for the non-revenue sports is not as much of a concern due to how the conference works the schedules and travel for them. They give schools travel partners and arrange Texas swings or Florida swings or Eastern swings so non-revenue teams only make one trip to the farthest stops.

(09-11-2014 11:44 AM)demiveeman Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 11:39 AM)blazr Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 11:23 AM)Bham Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 10:37 AM)blazr Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2014 10:14 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]Was C-USA trying to do those schools "a favor" by giving them those home games? Two of the three are new conference members, and UAB has not in the recent past been seen as a power deserving of "favors" from the league. Maybe next year C-USA perception may change.

We're in the East division this year because we can demand favors from the conference as a founding member. Don't be shocked to see us still in the East next season for the same reason (though that is likely 50/50 as geography may just dictate the decision...no one knows yet).

The SEC threw Missouri in the SEC East, so CUSA should be able to do the same for us.

The issue will be the addition of Charlotte. Next season, without a change in CUSA membership...by addition or subtraction, someone HAS to go west. We don't want to be that school, but we may have to so as to avoid strife. WKU and MTSU have the same reasons to want to avoid going west as UAB.

But, as a founding member, we should take precedence over them when it comes to this.

Sure. But the question is if Mackin wants to pull a Tom Jurich-like move - telling one of those schools to STFU and deal with it, when UAB really is the most logical choice to go west geographically AND financially speaking.