(01-23-2012 10:02 PM)LR Eagle Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 01:17 PM)nastybunch Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 11:58 AM)LR Eagle Wrote:  They haven't earned anything yet. They have one good year people think they're a powerhouse. They bring nothing to C-USA and all they do is hurt USM's recruiting. If you want a school with one good year and no market, why not take Arky State or FIU?

Obviously you are a youngster. Please go back and check the history of tech's athletic program before you look like a fool. Thanks

Since 1990 La Tech is 126-130-2 (.492 winning percentage) ranked 67th in FbS in that span. Since 2000 they're 65-81 (.445 winning percentage) ranked 79th in FBS in that time span. Since 2000 they've had three winning seasons and a .500 one. They have no budget, they have no market, they have a small stadium that they can't fill, and their other sports offer behind to make up for thes failings.

I'm all for keeping the series alive in OOC play, but they are no better than a Sunbelt program. The glory days of Terry Beadshaw don't change a thing.

Take that youngster crap somewhere else.

La Tech will be ranked higher at the end of next season than USM

(01-23-2012 10:02 PM)LR Eagle Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 01:17 PM)nastybunch Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 11:58 AM)LR Eagle Wrote:  They haven't earned anything yet. They have one good year people think they're a powerhouse. They bring nothing to C-USA and all they do is hurt USM's recruiting. If you want a school with one good year and no market, why not take Arky State or FIU?

Obviously you are a youngster. Please go back and check the history of tech's athletic program before you look like a fool. Thanks

Since 1990 La Tech is 126-130-2 (.492 winning percentage) ranked 67th in FbS in that span. Since 2000 they're 65-81 (.445 winning percentage) ranked 79th in FBS in that time span. Since 2000 they've had three winning seasons and a .500 one. They have no budget, they have no market, they have a small stadium that they can't fill, and their other sports offer behind to make up for thes failings.

I'm all for keeping the series alive in OOC play, but they are no better than a Sunbelt program. The glory days of Terry Beadshaw don't change a thing.

Take that youngster crap somewhere else.

I could not think of a worse choice for conference expansion than La Tech. No market, no money, no fan support, no winning tradition, no nothing.

So now we're basing new conference members on random message board poster's predictions? I'll be glad when this realignment is over so you Techphiles will shut up.

(01-23-2012 10:02 PM)LR Eagle Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 01:17 PM)nastybunch Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 11:58 AM)LR Eagle Wrote:  They haven't earned anything yet. They have one good year people think they're a powerhouse. They bring nothing to C-USA and all they do is hurt USM's recruiting. If you want a school with one good year and no market, why not take Arky State or FIU?

Obviously you are a youngster. Please go back and check the history of tech's athletic program before you look like a fool. Thanks

Since 1990 La Tech is 126-130-2 (.492 winning percentage) ranked 67th in FbS in that span. Since 2000 they're 65-81 (.445 winning percentage) ranked 79th in FBS in that time span. Since 2000 they've had three winning seasons and a .500 one. They have no budget, they have no market, they have a small stadium that they can't fill, and their other sports offer behind to make up for thes failings.

I'm all for keeping the series alive in OOC play, but they are no better than a Sunbelt program. The glory days of Terry Beadshaw don't change a thing.

Take that youngster crap somewhere else.

Since 1990:

Marshall (.609)
Southern Miss (.604)
ECU (.520)
UCF (.502)
La Tech (.492)
Houston (.461)
Tulsa (.458)
Rice (.422)
UAB (.405)
Memphis (.398)
UTEP (.339)
Tulane (.337)
SMU (.331)

Since 2000:
Southern Miss (.614)
Marshall (.533)
Tulsa (.526)
Houston (.520)
UCF (.496)
ECU (.469)
La Tech (.445)
UTEP (.406)
UAB (.397)
Memphis (.386)
Rice (.380)
SMU (.337)
Tulane (.335)

(01-23-2012 10:16 PM)LR Eagle Wrote:  So now we're basing new conference members on random message board poster's predictions? I'll be glad when this realignment is over so you Techphiles will shut up.

It's better than basing it off of you rambling about a topic you don't know much about... (This is not the time to go to wikipedia and copy and paste a bunch of trash)

The strange thing about CUSA is the schools with the biggest budgets have the worst football teams. The smallest budget team seems to dominate this conference.

The LaTech hate is ridiculous, I don't understand it.

gonna put this info on a more appropriate thread i just saw :) sorry about that.

Since 1990:
67. La Tech (.492)
109. Florida market (.336)
110. Dallas market (.331)
115. Temple (.289)
DNQ. San Antonio market

Since 2000:
79. La Tech (.445)
102. Temple (.359)
105. Dallas market (.347)
107. Florida market (.336)
DNQ. San Antonio market

(01-23-2012 10:13 PM)Observer1 Wrote:  La Tech will be ranked higher at the end of next season than USM

(01-23-2012 10:38 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  Since 1990:
67. La Tech (.492)
109. Florida market (.336)
110. Dallas market (.331)
115. Temple (.289)
DNQ. San Antonio market

Since 2000:
79. La Tech (.445)
102. Temple (.359)
105. Dallas market (.347)
107. Florida market (.336)
DNQ. San Antonio market

Yet in the last 27 years you have won your conference two times...Being marginally bad is still bad.

Without trying to seem like I'm stirring anything up here, La Tech is in a league that many who might know are soon to either not have football or not have a league period, at least at the FBS level.

LaTech with some of their more realistic posters on their BBB message board have even said their school has burned their bridge with the Sun Belt Conference which is a league that many of their message board posters and alums have somewhat isolated and demonized as the end of their program if they were members of the SBC and with some of their fans/alums even preferring to go down an NCAA level if the 'Belt were their only choice.

So in a nutshell, they are almost in a desperate situation and have put it all on the table using one very successful football season as their bargoning chip, but like the rest of us, they also have a past which has not always been as successful. We can all extol our success stories over a period of time, but no one can hide their weaknesses or deficiencies of which my alma mater has its share.

The NCAA has allowed a terrible environment to exists among many of us in the FBS by allowing all but a class warfare and that by not addressing this AQ and non AQ matter much sooner than later. A few of the NCAA powerbrokers (including Chuck Neinas) have seen the error of all this and there is now talk of dropping the non AQ status, but the NCAA sometimes moves at a snail's pace and I'm sure they will still find yet another way of keeping their 40-60 elite separated from the rest. It may lead to a situation where gone are the days when a school can raise itself from total oblivion to finding its place among those 40 to 60 schools and that will be a sad day for all of us who want better for our respective schools. .02

(01-23-2012 10:40 PM)PATiger Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 10:13 PM)Observer1 Wrote:  La Tech will be ranked higher at the end of next season than USM

He's not alone.

25. Louisiana Tech Bulldogs. You're supposed to get a little wacky with your final pick (like Millen and Smith with Clemson), right? I like Louisville, I think Virginia Tech should always be in the Top 25, I think Kevin Sumlin has more to work with in College Station than we probably think, and Nebraska, Oklahoma State and Georgia Tech should certainly be considered here as well. But if we're going for an off-the-wall pick, consider that virtually every interesting piece from an underrated Louisiana Tech squad -- one that went 12 rounds with an improved TCU squad in their bowl game -- returns, including a coaching staff that wasn't picked apart by the big boys (yet). Tech returns quarterback Colby Cameron, receiver Quinton Patton, four starting offensive linemen, underrated defensive tackles Justin Ellis and Shakeil Lucas, and most of their secondary. They should be one of the country's best mid-major squads, so they get the Courtesy No. 25 here.

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/20...-preseason

20. (30) Auburn (8-5, 4-4)
New quarterback and new defense will make a world of difference.
21. (33) Notre Dame (8-5, 0-0)
It’s Kelly’s third year, so it’s now or never for the Irish.
22. (29) B.Y.U. (10-3, 0-0)
A tougher schedule, but Nelson-led Cougars are deeper.
23. (40) N.C. State (8-5, 4-4)
Loved the way the Wolfpack finished; let’s see if it carries over.
24. (54) Ohio State (6-7, 3-5)
Pieces are in place for immediate success, bowl or no.
25. (34) Louisiana Tech (8-5, 6-1)
Double-digit wins shouldn’t be a problem in the depleted WAC.

http://www.presnapread.com/three-days-la...-for-2012/

Three other sleepers who could make noise in the BCS (although I'm just saying could make a BCS bowl, not be a national title contender): BYU - 15 starters back, plus both specialists; FIU - 17 starters back, including 10 on D, lots of speed on offense and winnable non-conference games against Big East and ACC teams; and La. Tech, 14 starters back from a good team; they play in a weakened league and their toughest non-conference games are against a rebuilding Houston team and Virginia.

http://bruce-feldman.blogs.cbssports.com...w/31626208

(01-23-2012 10:54 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 10:38 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  Since 1990:
67. La Tech (.492)
109. Florida market (.336)
110. Dallas market (.331)
115. Temple (.289)
DNQ. San Antonio market

Since 2000:
79. La Tech (.445)
102. Temple (.359)
105. Dallas market (.347)
107. Florida market (.336)
DNQ. San Antonio market

Yet in the last 27 years you have won your conference two times...Being marginally bad is still bad.

We've only been in the WAC for 11 years. UTEP was in the WAC for 38 years and never won an outright championship.

(01-23-2012 10:56 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 10:54 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 10:38 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  Since 1990:
67. La Tech (.492)
109. Florida market (.336)
110. Dallas market (.331)
115. Temple (.289)
DNQ. San Antonio market

Since 2000:
79. La Tech (.445)
102. Temple (.359)
105. Dallas market (.347)
107. Florida market (.336)
DNQ. San Antonio market

Yet in the last 27 years you have won your conference two times...Being marginally bad is still bad.

We've only been in the WAC for 11 years. UTEP was in the WAC for 38 years and never won an outright championship.

Most everybody knows that UTEP is mainly a basketball school, LA Tech is a idontknowwhat school, trying to make everyone think they are a football school. UTEP also outraws LA Tech by about 100%.

(01-23-2012 10:59 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 10:56 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 10:54 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 10:38 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  Since 1990:
67. La Tech (.492)
109. Florida market (.336)
110. Dallas market (.331)
115. Temple (.289)
DNQ. San Antonio market

Since 2000:
79. La Tech (.445)
102. Temple (.359)
105. Dallas market (.347)
107. Florida market (.336)
DNQ. San Antonio market

Yet in the last 27 years you have won your conference two times...Being marginally bad is still bad.

We've only been in the WAC for 11 years. UTEP was in the WAC for 38 years and never won an outright championship.

Most everybody knows that UTEP is mainly a basketball school, LA Tech is a idontknowwhat school, trying to make everyone think they are a football school. UTEP also outraws LA Tech by about 100%.

UTEP, Memphis, UAB, and Tulane need to form a basketball league.

(01-23-2012 10:20 PM)Observer1 Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 10:16 PM)LR Eagle Wrote:  So now we're basing new conference members on random message board poster's predictions? I'll be glad when this realignment is over so you Techphiles will shut up.

It's better than basing it off of you rambling about a topic you don't know much about... (This is not the time to go to wikipedia and copy and paste a bunch of trash)

They're called facts. Just because they don't fit your delusion that La Tech is relevant doesn't mean you can just ignore them. I've posted my reasons why La Tech is a poor expansion choice, either refute them or STFU.

La Tech is a women's basketball school, and even they stink these days.

LR Eagle must be blind. I agree that Tech is not very relevant, but it's CUSA for Pete's sake. Who in this conference is relevant?

(01-23-2012 11:08 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  LR Eagle must be blind. I agree that Tech is not very relevant, but it's CUSA for Pete's sake. Who in this conference is relevant?

You offer nothing to our conference whatsoever. Why is that so hard for grads of a Tier 1 school to grasp? No market, limited fan support, terrible basketball, limited facilities. La Tech's ONLY selling point is location and ULL and Arky State have that too.