(03-28-2014 03:08 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  You've been fun to argue with, datwave.

The sad part is that if the new Tulane president doesn't run RD out of town, none of this will matter. Tulane can't become ANYTHING until a more progressive mind takes charge. The new facilities are a good plus, but the people aren't who we need to take the program forward.

What are your thoughts on hoops? I've always felt that Tulane could be a perennial tournament team since most of the SEC schools are rather indifferent to basketball.

I remember the year when Tulane beat Auburn, LSU, and Georgia in the same season....

...then Conroy took over and we don't play ANY of those schools. Basketball is a sport where we NEED to play SEC schools as they typically are at least decent in RPI.

Thanks. Back at you.

As for basketball the gym holds us back. It's why we can't attract good coaches or players in sufficient numbers. It only seats 3,200 after the last renovation. We needed a new arena before a practice facility in this sport.

I enjoyed beating those teams that year but the fact is they were all down that year. Now I certainly agree EC's scheduling has been the absolute worst. It will pick in this conference so he'll be gone after next year. With a new arena seating 6,000 to 7,500 the program could flourish.

(03-28-2014 03:28 PM)Savacool Wrote:  In my lifetime I would like to see Tulane in men's basketball,baseball and ladies basketball in the NCAA tournament every year. Give the coaches the resources and if they do not deliver fire them. Tulane baseball should host a super regional every year and get to Omaha at least every other year. I want our basketball programs to at least get to the sweet 16 and elite eight every year. Football wise top 10 every year as Tommy Bowden did for us. Am I asking for to much?

Rick Dickson has serious problems. He should fire any coaches that do not bring us to the above levels and if he does not he should be fired by the Tulane president immediately!

In football and MBB we should be seeking to be in top 25 in both. Baseball should be looking to be top 10 and host at least a regional every year.

(03-28-2014 04:40 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-28-2014 03:01 PM)datwave Wrote:  

(03-28-2014 02:38 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-28-2014 01:06 PM)datwave Wrote:  

(03-28-2014 11:37 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Love it. "My inside sources that I'm too afraid to name agree with my unfounded opinion of 22k seats". Freakin joke.

So where are your sources to refute that. Oh that's right you're too afraid to mention the well known liars Cowen and Dickson. You clearly have no life based on your number of post. You obviously read the Tulane forums and you know what I said above is true. So grow up and deal w/it.

You attack me and say I have no life and then say to grow up in the same paragraph. L O FREAKIN L. 4 posts a day avg sure screams no

Looking at your post numbers on all Tulane sites. But of course your reply is made to deflect the fact that you have no info. to refute the above.

3 forums and I avg 10 posts a day total. Man I must be so lonely. No life. Im half your age. Lay off the personal attacks. Only warning. This isnt gotula

Ooh I'm so scared. You have to resort to threats b/c you can't refute what I said.

You're right it's not gotula. Fans of other schools are watching so please quit embarrassing us.

Big man here guys. Watch out for the new poster hes a tough guy

(03-28-2014 05:48 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  Big man here guys. Watch out for the new poster hes a tough guy

LOL. You're the one making the threats from behind the computer tough guy. Like I said before please quit embarrassing Tulane.

Datwave. You are embarrassing us with the type of language you are using to fellow Tulane fans and alumni. You must be civil and develop your argument with hard facts. Do not attack people for their amount of posts on the board as you probably have more posts! Then attack me! J D Tulane is working on his PHD at Tulane and loves Tulane athletics as all Tulane fans do. We all have the same thing in common for a better Tulane athletic program. He is a moderator on this board,could ban you for personally attacking him, but he is to considerate to do that.

(03-29-2014 08:59 PM)Savacool Wrote:  Datwave. You are embarrassing us with the type of language you are using to fellow Tulane fans and alumni. You must be civil and develop your argument with hard facts. Do not attack people for their amount of posts on the board as you probably have more posts! Then attack me! J D Tulane is working on his PHD at Tulane and loves Tulane athletics as all Tulane fans do. We all have the same thing in common for a better Tulane athletic program. He is a moderator on this board,could ban you for personally attacking him, but he is to considerate to do that.

You don't need any help embarrassing yourselves. My arguments are well developed. ONB even applauded my arguments. I just believe the truth needs to be out there about our program. Trying to shut people out is the yogwf way. Maybe you and JD favor that. As long as that is the Tulane way Tulane will continue to be a failure.

Thanks sava. Wavedat, your "insider" knowledge is no more factual than mine. So until we can physically count the eeats, no ine but rd and sc know. So stop spouting off with "facts" and putting down those who call you out in such a disrespectful manner. It's tacky.

(03-30-2014 12:15 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Thanks sava. Wavedat, your "insider" knowledge is no more factual than mine. So until we can physically count the eeats, no ine but rd and sc know. So stop spouting off with "facts" and putting down those who call you out in such a disrespectful manner. It's tacky.

Don't be a hypocrite. You were the first to hurl insults. Then your threat of banning was hypocritical too after your temporary banning on yogwf. You have no insider knowledge so don't imply you do. You are going off public comments made by RD and SC that are both well know liars and who everyone wants gone. You read all the sites and you know that others have posted that employees have told them the real number is 22,000. You also know that on the yogwf site a poster said a year ago that his company works on the stadium and the number was going to be 22,000. You also know that the numbers from the company doing the seating indicates 22,000. So don't try to trample on the first amendment b/c you are embarrassed by the number.

I believe honesty is the best policy. Fans of our new league should not be misled. They should know there is great unrest in our fan base b/c of this colossal mistake. Our basketball and baseball programs are in the dumpster. Our fans have a legitimate concern that we will get Templed by this conference in a couple of years. CJ is our only hope to overcome all this and he has his work cut out for him.

It doesn't matter to me that the stadium is small. The important part will be whether we are willing the expand the stadium once we outgrow it. Temple were kicked for a few political reasons as well. Tulane doesn't have the kind of enemies in the AAC that Temple did in the old Big East.

(03-30-2014 11:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  It doesn't matter to me that the stadium is small. The important part will be whether we are willing the expand the stadium once we outgrow it. Temple were kicked for a few political reasons as well. Tulane doesn't have the kind of enemies in the AAC that Temple did in the old Big East.

The stadium is small b/c of the lack of space. So the same applies to expansion. Plus all expansions of Tulane Stadium were paid for by the Sugar Bowl. We no longer have that advantage. We set a very low dollar goal and still fell $20 million short. So finding funds for expansion are pretty much nil. The argument that if we win more will donate doesn't ring true. Many claimed all we had to do was announce a stadium and the money would roll in. It didn't. Bottom line is we don't have the space nor the funds for a legit D-1 stadium.

(03-30-2014 11:27 AM)datwave Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 11:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  It doesn't matter to me that the stadium is small. The important part will be whether we are willing the expand the stadium once we outgrow it. Temple were kicked for a few political reasons as well. Tulane doesn't have the kind of enemies in the AAC that Temple did in the old Big East.

The stadium is small b/c of the lack of space. So the same applies to expansion. Plus all expansions of Tulane Stadium were paid for by the Sugar Bowl. We no longer have that advantage. We set a very low dollar goal and still fell $20 million short. So finding funds for expansion are pretty much nil. The argument that if we win more will donate doesn't ring true. Many claimed all we had to do was announce a stadium and the money would roll in. It didn't. Bottom line is we don't have the space nor the funds for a legit D-1 stadium.

It was initially supposed to be about 50M, but the project expanded to ~75M. It hasn't been that difficult to get money for the project. Most of it is ALREADY paid for as-is.

Now, we're not talking about P5 money here - this is a very good stadium by G5 standards. It will need to be upgraded to P5 standards in the next 10 years.

Tulane will make more money on this stadium than they did on the Dome. Let's see the effects of that and revisit this in 10 years.

(03-28-2014 11:37 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  What I don't want to see are SBC and FCS schools on the schedule.

Why not? As datwave said:

(03-28-2014 01:03 PM)datwave Wrote:  There were over 50,000 for Tulane V. ULL in the dome in December.

And I'm betting your game with FCS Southland Conference-based Southeastern Louisiana this fall will sell out or come close to it. Of course, I'm thinking that team may give the Wave all they can handle on the field which might be why you'd rather not see FCS teams on the schedule.

(03-30-2014 02:15 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(03-28-2014 11:37 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  What I don't want to see are SBC and FCS schools on the schedule.

Why not? As datwave said:

(03-28-2014 01:03 PM)datwave Wrote:  There were over 50,000 for Tulane V. ULL in the dome in December.

And I'm betting your game with FCS Southland Conference-based Southeastern Louisiana this fall will sell out or come close to it. Of course, I'm thinking that team may give the Wave all they can handle on the field which might be why you'd rather not see FCS teams on the schedule.

Tulane has never lost to an FCS school. With that said, SELA will cause some problems early for Tulane. Tulane doesn't score a whole lot per game.

SBC and FCS schools don't help the perception of Tulane athletics.

(03-30-2014 03:18 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 02:15 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(03-28-2014 11:37 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  What I don't want to see are SBC and FCS schools on the schedule.

Why not? As datwave said:

(03-28-2014 01:03 PM)datwave Wrote:  There were over 50,000 for Tulane V. ULL in the dome in December.

And I'm betting your game with FCS Southland Conference-based Southeastern Louisiana this fall will sell out or come close to it. Of course, I'm thinking that team may give the Wave all they can handle on the field which might be why you'd rather not see FCS teams on the schedule.

Tulane has never lost to an FCS school. With that said, SELA will cause some problems early for Tulane. Tulane doesn't score a whole lot per game.

SBC and FCS schools don't help the perception of Tulane athletics.

Tulane athletics or Tulane footballl?

(03-30-2014 03:27 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 03:18 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 02:15 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(03-28-2014 11:37 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  What I don't want to see are SBC and FCS schools on the schedule.

Why not? As datwave said:

(03-28-2014 01:03 PM)datwave Wrote:  There were over 50,000 for Tulane V. ULL in the dome in December.

And I'm betting your game with FCS Southland Conference-based Southeastern Louisiana this fall will sell out or come close to it. Of course, I'm thinking that team may give the Wave all they can handle on the field which might be why you'd rather not see FCS teams on the schedule.

Tulane has never lost to an FCS school. With that said, SELA will cause some problems early for Tulane. Tulane doesn't score a whole lot per game.

SBC and FCS schools don't help the perception of Tulane athletics.

Tulane athletics or Tulane footballl?

They are one in the same.

The only SBC/FCS school that does much of anything for Tulane is UL-Lafayette. That's mostly an attendance thing - and both schools are going to be playing on/off for the next decade. It's not a disastrous agreement in terms of LOCAL press, either.

I would love to see Tulane play a few Big 10 programs here and there (obviously not on a full-time basis). I don't think it will happen based on the current scheduling behavior of our AD.

(03-30-2014 08:34 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 03:27 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 03:18 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 02:15 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(03-28-2014 11:37 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  What I don't want to see are SBC and FCS schools on the schedule.

Why not? As datwave said:

(03-28-2014 01:03 PM)datwave Wrote:  There were over 50,000 for Tulane V. ULL in the dome in December.

And I'm betting your game with FCS Southland Conference-based Southeastern Louisiana this fall will sell out or come close to it. Of course, I'm thinking that team may give the Wave all they can handle on the field which might be why you'd rather not see FCS teams on the schedule.

Tulane has never lost to an FCS school. With that said, SELA will cause some problems early for Tulane. Tulane doesn't score a whole lot per game.

SBC and FCS schools don't help the perception of Tulane athletics.

Tulane athletics or Tulane footballl?

They are one in the same.

The only SBC/FCS school that does much of anything for Tulane is UL-Lafayette. That's mostly an attendance thing - and both schools are going to be playing on/off for the next decade. It's not a disastrous agreement in terms of LOCAL press, either.

Man, saying that must have been like swallowing a bad oyster.

Isn't that attendance thing one of the biggest obstacles there is right now in Tulane's path? Aside from poor performance on the field, it's the one complaint that seems to get the most coverage. I'd have to think that the average Cajun-Tulane matchup at Yulman would produce a sell-out crowd for you guys and would think that most Tulane fans would welcome that.

The Cajuns and Wave match up this week at the Cajun baseball field and I suspect that there will be between 3-4000 fans present. Tulane shoud welcome the opportunity to play at Top 10 baseball program even if they are from the lowly Sun Belt.

Playing Tulane is good for the Cajun program and I believe the opposite holds true as well.

(03-30-2014 12:26 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 11:27 AM)datwave Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 11:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  It doesn't matter to me that the stadium is small. The important part will be whether we are willing the expand the stadium once we outgrow it. Temple were kicked for a few political reasons as well. Tulane doesn't have the kind of enemies in the AAC that Temple did in the old Big East.

The stadium is small b/c of the lack of space. So the same applies to expansion. Plus all expansions of Tulane Stadium were paid for by the Sugar Bowl. We no longer have that advantage. We set a very low dollar goal and still fell $20 million short. So finding funds for expansion are pretty much nil. The argument that if we win more will donate doesn't ring true. Many claimed all we had to do was announce a stadium and the money would roll in. It didn't. Bottom line is we don't have the space nor the funds for a legit D-1 stadium.

It was initially supposed to be about 50M, but the project expanded to ~75M. It hasn't been that difficult to get money for the project. Most of it is ALREADY paid for as-is.

Now, we're not talking about P5 money here - this is a very good stadium by G5 standards. It will need to be upgraded to P5 standards in the next 10 years.

Tulane will make more money on this stadium than they did on the Dome. Let's see the effects of that and revisit this in 10 years.

The $75 million is not all being spent on the stadium nor is it all raised. At the announcement Cowen threw in another $10 million on top of the $50 he wanted just as a fund. Then there is the fact that a portion of the money was allocated towards tearing down and removing things that were in place. We were $20 million short when the figure was at $50. Now it's supposedly $75 so we are $45 million short. But for arguments sake say all $75 million was on the stadium. That's still a cheap D-1 stadium. A lot of schools are spending more than that to renovate and add seats.

As to making more money that's very questionable. You never hear anyone discuss the added expenses we'll now have such as insurance,maintenance,staffing and so on. There are no guarantees of sell outs. There will be initially b/c of novelty in all likelihood. But sticker shock is already setting in. Then there is the parking issue. Throw in Dickson lining up Rice and Army on the home schedule and there won't be many sell outs. Instead you'll have 2-3,000 plus all the expenses.

So in 10 years there may be nothing to talk about.

(03-30-2014 10:12 PM)datwave Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 12:26 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 11:27 AM)datwave Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 11:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  It doesn't matter to me that the stadium is small. The important part will be whether we are willing the expand the stadium once we outgrow it. Temple were kicked for a few political reasons as well. Tulane doesn't have the kind of enemies in the AAC that Temple did in the old Big East.

The stadium is small b/c of the lack of space. So the same applies to expansion. Plus all expansions of Tulane Stadium were paid for by the Sugar Bowl. We no longer have that advantage. We set a very low dollar goal and still fell $20 million short. So finding funds for expansion are pretty much nil. The argument that if we win more will donate doesn't ring true. Many claimed all we had to do was announce a stadium and the money would roll in. It didn't. Bottom line is we don't have the space nor the funds for a legit D-1 stadium.

It was initially supposed to be about 50M, but the project expanded to ~75M. It hasn't been that difficult to get money for the project. Most of it is ALREADY paid for as-is.

Now, we're not talking about P5 money here - this is a very good stadium by G5 standards. It will need to be upgraded to P5 standards in the next 10 years.

Tulane will make more money on this stadium than they did on the Dome. Let's see the effects of that and revisit this in 10 years.

The $75 million is not all being spent on the stadium nor is it all raised. At the announcement Cowen threw in another $10 million on top of the $50 he wanted just as a fund. Then there is the fact that a portion of the money was allocated towards tearing down and removing things that were in place. We were $20 million short when the figure was at $50. Now it's supposedly $75 so we are $45 million short. But for arguments sake say all $75 million was on the stadium. That's still a cheap D-1 stadium. A lot of schools are spending more than that to renovate and add seats.

As to making more money that's very questionable. You never hear anyone discuss the added expenses we'll now have such as insurance,maintenance,staffing and so on. There are no guarantees of sell outs. There will be initially b/c of novelty in all likelihood. But sticker shock is already setting in. Then there is the parking issue. Throw in Dickson lining up Rice and Army on the home schedule and there won't be many sell outs. Instead you'll have 2-3,000 plus all the expenses.

So in 10 years there may be nothing to talk about.

That sounds really pessimistic. Could it be true? Maybe - I don't trust RD.

Tulane complaining about costs = LOL. Who are they kidding? If Tulane wanted to, it could put major money down now and create an empire...

It's all about motivation... ...and honesty.

The new president at Tulane is going to set a precedent very early on when it comes to the AD decision.

Army will be a decent draw (if it happens). Rice will be a good game, but it will also be a poor draw as Rice brings even less than Tulane on away days.

Things have been getting better for Tulane over the last few years. Thing is this: Was this Dickson, or was this Tulane just FINALLY cashing in on inherent advantages it had all along?

...I think it could be the latter.

If our terrible Tulane AD Rick Dickson extended one of the worst men's basketball coaches in the nation Conroy (he cannot recruit blue chip players or coach; all his best players left his team last year) we are in more serious trouble than I thought. With a new Tulane president coming in July,he should make no contract extensions until then particularly for losers.