(09-15-2017 10:07 PM)TechAlum05 Wrote:  

(09-14-2017 07:15 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  We are never going FCS.

Correct. The state of ULM athletic finances would never allow a move to FCS to be made. ULM athletics depends on the $2 million or so in money games from the football team to help the rest of the athletic department stay afloat. Moving to FCS would reduce the amount of guarantee money from bodybag games with only a slight reduction in scholarships to show for it. The loss in revenue would far outweigh any meager cost savings from a move from FBS to FCS.

ULM would probably end the football program before they move down to the FCS ranks.

Which is what people tend to ignore when asking "why won't Tech play ULM?" Scheduling is the problem. BOTH schools need money games, want to play a non return game at home, and have conference games to play. I, personally, would like to see us play ULM but don't think it is affordable for either school to play every year.

Also, the nonsense about Tech refusing to play ULM in a bowl game was propagated by the ULXs and not based in fact. Tech's stance was consistent in telling the I Bowl that Tech wanted to see how the games turned out before committing. All the I Bowl folks had to do was wait a couple hours and then extended an invitation to Tech and Tech would have accepted. Ohio wasn't going anywhere so the I Bowl would not have been risking anything. It was unfortunate how things worked out, but to blame Tech was irrational. Same goes for years earlier when @ Lafayette claimed Tech kept them out of the I Bowl. @ Lafayette is nobodys friend, especially ULMs. @ Lafayette is corrupt.