Stay at home
WAC, not Sun Belt, is where La. Tech wants to be
Scott Beder

May 23, 2004

Despite Louisiana Tech's failed bid to get into Conference USA, the school remains committed to its affiliation with the Western Athletic Conference.

When C-USA decided to take UTEP instead of Tech last month, rumors and published stories suggested that Tech might be headed back to the Sun Belt Conference - the league it left in July of 2001.

Tech athletics director Jim Oakes, however, has been emphatic: Tech has no intentions of returning to the Sun Belt, despite the fact that Tech remains the lone WAC school in the Central Time Zone.

"There has been some misinformation about which league we will participate in," Oakes said. "We have made it clear at every turn our plan is to remain a member of the WAC and not rejoin the Sun Belt. We have an investment in the WAC that's not only financial, but as a program."

Many have accused Tech of letting its ego get in the way of making a common-sense move - and that may be a small part of the equation. A move to the Sun Belt could feel like a step backward after leaving the league.

There were also some hard feelings when Tech bolted. Exhibit A was the Sun Belt's decision to pull the 2001 men's and women's basketball tournament from Tech after it had been awarded the bid.

But more than any lingering animosity, Oakes says Tech's decision to remain in the WAC comes down to hard, cold numbers.

According to Oakes, the WAC's revenue sharing payouts, national exposure and strength of programs outweigh - for the short term anyway - the geographic advantages afforded by the Sun Belt.

"We feel at this time because of the revenue sharing, television possibilities and bowl opportunities, we are better suited to be a member of the WAC rather than rejoin the Sun Belt," Oakes said.

COMPARE AND CONTRAST

A comparison between the two leagues - compiled by the WAC - supports Oakes assertions: When the 2004 fiscal year ends, the WAC will pay out $754,415 per school. In 2003, the Sun Belt paid out $57,000 per school.

"We have enjoyed the benefits of revenue sharing from a conference that has had a history of success in the NCAA basketball tournament, which is a large source of the conference revenue share," Oakes said.

In the 2000-01 season - Tech's last in the Sun Belt - it received $65,670 in revenue from the Sun Belt. In the 2002-03 season Tech received $633,684 from the WAC.



<a href='http://www.thenewsstar.com/sports/html/A32A8B32-A149-4F80-BA25-7614996DDE65.shtml' target='_blank'>The full story</a>

Dog Breath Wrote:Stay at home
WAC, not Sun Belt, is where La. Tech wants to be
Scott Beder

May 23, 2004

Despite Louisiana Tech's failed bid to get into Conference USA, the school remains committed to its affiliation with the Western Athletic Conference.

When C-USA decided to take UTEP instead of Tech last month, rumors and published stories suggested that Tech might be headed back to the Sun Belt Conference - the league it left in July of 2001.

Tech athletics director Jim Oakes, however, has been emphatic: Tech has no intentions of returning to the Sun Belt, despite the fact that Tech remains the lone WAC school in the Central Time Zone.

"There has been some misinformation about which league we will participate in," Oakes said. "We have made it clear at every turn our plan is to remain a member of the WAC and not rejoin the Sun Belt. We have an investment in the WAC that's not only financial, but as a program."

Many have accused Tech of letting its ego get in the way of making a common-sense move - and that may be a small part of the equation. A move to the Sun Belt could feel like a step backward after leaving the league.

There were also some hard feelings when Tech bolted. Exhibit A was the Sun Belt's decision to pull the 2001 men's and women's basketball tournament from Tech after it had been awarded the bid.

But more than any lingering animosity, Oakes says Tech's decision to remain in the WAC comes down to hard, cold numbers.

According to Oakes, the WAC's revenue sharing payouts, national exposure and strength of programs outweigh - for the short term anyway - the geographic advantages afforded by the Sun Belt.

"We feel at this time because of the revenue sharing, television possibilities and bowl opportunities, we are better suited to be a member of the WAC rather than rejoin the Sun Belt," Oakes said.

COMPARE AND CONTRAST

A comparison between the two leagues - compiled by the WAC - supports Oakes assertions: When the 2004 fiscal year ends, the WAC will pay out $754,415 per school. In 2003, the Sun Belt paid out $57,000 per school.

"We have enjoyed the benefits of revenue sharing from a conference that has had a history of success in the NCAA basketball tournament, which is a large source of the conference revenue share," Oakes said.

In the 2000-01 season - Tech's last in the Sun Belt - it received $65,670 in revenue from the Sun Belt. In the 2002-03 season Tech received $633,684 from the WAC.



<a href='http://www.thenewsstar.com/sports/html/A32A8B32-A149-4F80-BA25-7614996DDE65.shtml' target='_blank'>The full story</a>

I don't think Tech can survive forever as the WAC's only Central time zone team, but they should be able to survive a couple of more years until all the conference jumping slows down.....or maybe it never will slow down.

Who really knows!

But I like keeping La Tech in the WAC. The football games with Tech have been real interesting!!!! At least those in Ruston!

Tech and Boise have had some "interesting" football games outside of Ruston, as well.

Guess it is a little before your time, but the Division II semi-finals played in Wichita Falls, Texas, in 1973 was a real barn burner. It basically came down to who had the ball last. Guess I'm prejudiced, but I also thought our victory in Boise in 1997 was pretty interesting.

Obviously it's not a long rivalry, but it's been a good one. Of the six football games between Boise and Tech, four have been decided by less than a touchdown.

Buddy1972 Wrote:Tech and Boise have had some "interesting" football games outside of Ruston, as well.

Guess it is a little before your time, but the Division II semi-finals played in Wichita Falls, Texas, in 1973 was a real barn burner. It basically came down to who had the ball last. Guess I'm prejudiced, but I also thought our victory in Boise in 1997 was pretty interesting.

Obviously it's not a long rivalry, but it's been a good one. Of the six football games between Boise and Tech, four have been decided by less than a touchdown.

Actually, the Pioneer bowl was not befor my time. I was a student at Boise State in 1973 and some of my friends played in that game. What a game! The Boise State quarterback was from my high school. Boise State jumped out to a 17 point lead and led most of the game. La Tech scored on a long touchdown pass to Roger Carr with 12 seconds left in the game and Boise State did not have enough time to come back. Remember Roger Carr?

Both our teams have had a history of great offenses. Hope the rivalry can continue.

Wow!

Talk about spin!

Quote:The WAC just completed a six-year, $1 million-per-year deal with ESPN and is in the process of finalizing a new contract. The conference also re-upped deals with Sports West and CSTV.

The WAC's old deal with ESPN guaranteed the league less than $400,000 in fees per year per the El Paso Times not $1 million. The NEW deal was for $1 million and all media reports indicate that ESPN voided that contract when UTEP left so we don't know the new numbers.

Quote:Tech spent $834,825 on travel in its last season in the Sun Belt and $982,432 during the 2002-03 season in the WAC, a difference of $147,607. The WAC also pays travel expenses to the men's and women's basketball tournaments, while the Sun Belt does not.

The final year in the Belt, Tech was a football independent. Their football travel included a trip to Hawaii and only four home games. Playing an 8 game Sun Belt schedule instead of going to Kansas State, Penn State, Miami, and Hawaii means their travel that season was probably about $230,000 more than it would be as a Sun Belt member.

The 2002 season used in the article for WAC travel featured conference trips to Dallas and Houston that are going away and another road trip to Texas to play TAMU. That means 2002 travel is under-stated compared to future WAC membership.

Even if replacing SMU and Rice with NMSU and USU raises travel only $5,000 per trip over the WAC in football in conjunction with the inflated travel for the final SBC year, the difference in WAC bottomline vs. Sun Belt is $140,000 to the postive being in the Belt vs. the reported $100,000 to the postive being in the WAC reported in the article.

Quote:The WAC has bowl tie-ins with the Silicon Valley Football Classic, the MPC Computers Bowl (formerly the Humanitarian Bowl) and the Sheraton Hawaii Bowl. There is also the possibility of a tie-in with the Mobile Bowl.

Mobile has never exercised its right to take a WAC team (Tulsa is the only eastern team to ever be bowl eligible since it was signed). Odds are slim that the Mobile Bowl will extend the deal since the MAC is doing well and has always sold its ticket allotment.

Hawaii is only a factor if the Warriors win fewer than 7.

The SVFC has consistently failed to meet the deadline to file its letter of credit. The NCAA said earlier this year that if the letter is not timely filed there will be no extensions granted and the bowl de-certified. After their stunt in 2001 of taking Fresno before Tech had been placed, and their threat to pull the plug in 2003 if they weren't allowed to take Fresno, the health of that bowl remains questionable until proven otherwise. Boise has proven that they will support their game and it remains one the WAC's brightest spots.

Quote:There were also some hard feelings when Tech bolted. Exhibit A was the Sun Belt's decision to pull the 2001 men's and women's basketball tournament from Tech after it had been awarded the bid.

This is such a tired whine.

The Sun Belt bylaws and constitution provide that a team that has announced its intent to withdraw cannot host a conference championship event. Tech voted for the rule, there's no hard feelings involved in following the rules.

broncobob Wrote:

Buddy1972 Wrote:Tech and Boise have had some "interesting" football games outside of Ruston, as well.

Guess it is a little before your time, but the Division II semi-finals played in Wichita Falls, Texas, in 1973 was a real barn burner.&nbsp; It basically came down to who had the ball last.&nbsp; Guess I'm prejudiced, but I also thought our victory in Boise in 1997 was pretty interesting.

Obviously it's not a long rivalry, but it's been a good one.&nbsp; Of the six football games between Boise and Tech, four have been decided by less than a touchdown.

Actually, the Pioneer bowl was not befor my time. I was a student at Boise State in 1973 and some of my friends played in that game. What a game! The Boise State quarterback was from my high school. Boise State jumped out to a 17 point lead and led most of the game. La Tech scored on a long touchdown pass to Roger Carr with 12 seconds left in the game and Boise State did not have enough time to come back. Remember Roger Carr?

Both our teams have had a history of great offenses. Hope the rivalry can continue.

Your profile birthday fooled me into thinking your were a "youngster."

I remember Roger Carr very well. He's the new Head Football Coach/AD at East Mississippi CC.

And I'm looking forward to continuing the rivalry, as well. I attended the Humanitarian Bowl in 2001 and really enjoyed my visit to Boise.

no, bob really is only 24. he just happens to have access to a certain hand-crafted time machine which enabled him to attend school in 1973 and experience the "free love" society.

why he chose BSU over berkeley i have no idea.

anyway, i'd hate to see La Tech go, too. the games over the last three years have been tough for me to watch; very close and a lot of action, just like the WAC should be.

besides, it sure doesn't hurt to have a WAC presence in the south, IMO.

Buddy1972 Wrote:

broncobob Wrote:

Buddy1972 Wrote:Tech and Boise have had some "interesting" football games outside of Ruston, as well.

Guess it is a little before your time, but the Division II semi-finals played in Wichita Falls, Texas, in 1973 was a real barn burner.  It basically came down to who had the ball last.  Guess I'm prejudiced, but I also thought our victory in Boise in 1997 was pretty interesting.

Obviously it's not a long rivalry, but it's been a good one.  Of the six football games between Boise and Tech, four have been decided by less than a touchdown.

Actually, the Pioneer bowl was not befor my time. I was a student at Boise State in 1973 and some of my friends played in that game. What a game! The Boise State quarterback was from my high school. Boise State jumped out to a 17 point lead and led most of the game. La Tech scored on a long touchdown pass to Roger Carr with 12 seconds left in the game and Boise State did not have enough time to come back. Remember Roger Carr?

Both our teams have had a history of great offenses. Hope the rivalry can continue.

Your profile birthday fooled me into thinking your were a "youngster."

I remember Roger Carr very well. He's the new Head Football Coach/AD at East Mississippi CC.

And I'm looking forward to continuing the rivalry, as well. I attended the Humanitarian Bowl in 2001 and really enjoyed my visit to Boise.

I hadn't noticed the birthday deal. Add 30 years to my age. should have been 1950!

1boisebro Wrote:no, bob really is only 24. he just happens to have access to a certain hand-crafted time machine which enabled him to attend school in 1973 and experience the "free love" society.

why he chose BSU over berkeley i have no idea.

anyway, i'd hate to see La Tech go, too. the games over the last three years have been tough for me to watch; very close and a lot of action, just like the WAC should be.

besides, it sure doesn't hurt to have a WAC presence in the south, IMO.

Yes....I am an old hippie sans the drugs. Still love 50's and 60's Rock N Roll. Still like hearing people telling me to "get a haircut"! Some people never grow up!

cut your hair.

(just kidding. i hope i never grow up...!)
:D


(btw: i define "mature" differently than "grow up"...just fyi...)
:pooh:


(beer time...)