House Bill 971 was introduced yesterday by Rep. Stephen Carter. According to the abstract of the bill on the Legislature’s website, the bill would prohibit “athletic programs at public postsecondary institutions that receive state general fund monies from traveling more than 375 miles for athletic competitions.” The bill does provide exemptions for all football programs, basketball programs, and all LSU institutions.

Link to House Bill 971: http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocume...x?d=990100

In layman’s terms, House Bill 971 would require the Southern University System Board, the University of Louisiana System Board, and the Louisiana Community and Technical College Board to prohibit its institutions from traveling more than 375 miles from the institution to participate in athletic competitions. Exemptions are made for football and basketball programs, playoff/championship competitions, and any athletic competitions where the opposing team pays for travel and associated costs on behalf of the Louisiana school (i.e. money games or guaranteed games). The LSU System Board is not mentioned in the bill; therefore, LSU, LSU Shreveport, LSU Alexandria, and LSU Eunice would be exempt from the new rules in House Bill 971.

Continued at: http://latechreport.com/2016/04/05/house...named-lsu/

That is some crooked crap right there. Wow!

LSU should also be included in that ban. But omit conference travel since that can not be fixed but force it for non-conference games and events.

I actually don't disagree with the spirit of the law, as athletic budgets are so big. You should play teams in your area, and then go on to more national competition for the playoffs. This would be great coming from the NCAA, but for the LA legislature to do this and pick and choose sports and schools is BS.

For reference, here is a 375 mile radius around Ruston. You could definitely assemble a schedule: http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?R=375mi%40RSN

Conference USA and the AAC would be screwed. Almost everyone is more than 300 miles from each other.

(04-05-2016 03:56 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  I actually don't disagree with the spirit of the law, as athletic budgets are so big. You should play teams in your area, and then go on to more national competition for the playoffs. This would be great coming from the NCAA, but for the LA legislature to do this and pick and choose sports and schools is BS.

For reference, here is a 375 mile radius around Ruston. You could definitely assemble a schedule: http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?R=375mi%40RSN

+1

And most conferences before TV $ changed everything would fit this description.

IMO if these legislators wanted to work in college athletics they should have gone in that direction with their careers. If you're going to limit how much taxpayer money goes to college athletics, fine. But don't micromanage the AD's in how to spend those limited funds. Let them, the presidents and Directors figure out what's best for the schools.

(04-05-2016 04:02 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  IMO if these legislators wanted to work in college athletics they should have gone in that direction with their careers. If you're going to limit how much taxpayer money goes to college athletics, fine. But don't micromanage the AD's in how to spend those limited funds. Let them, the presidents and Directors figure out what's best for the schools.

Yeah, but that wouldn't put the little guys at even more competitive disadvantage against the holy SEC, which is likely the main point of all of this. If you cant travel to get a good RPI game or build your brand you can't improve your program. And unless you're a P5 school you shouldn't even think about trying to improve a program. Who do those little guys think they are!

(04-05-2016 04:06 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(04-05-2016 04:02 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  IMO if these legislators wanted to work in college athletics they should have gone in that direction with their careers. If you're going to limit how much taxpayer money goes to college athletics, fine. But don't micromanage the AD's in how to spend those limited funds. Let them, the presidents and Directors figure out what's best for the schools.

Yeah, but that wouldn't put the little guys at even more competitive disadvantage against the holy SEC, which is likely the main point of all of this. If you cant travel to get a good RPI game or build your brand you can't improve your program. And unless you're a P5 school you shouldn't even think about trying to improve a program. Who do those little guys think they are!

No, no. The real purpose is to make it look like they're doing something. (Just so long as that something doesn't hurt LSU athletics). All in favor say aye.

This legislator is a real corksucker!

So let me understand this. Lets take the lady techsters. They can go play uconn ooc because they would get a guarantee. But not ODU in a conference game because you dont have guarantees on home and homes?
I wish the wifes family would have some sort of a reunion soon. I cant wait to hear her cousin the senator explain this one.

While this makes perfect sense to follow for non revenue sports it should be the schools decision. UNLESS the state wants to force LSU to play all of its ooc football games vs these teams so they will have $$$$. If the state government is gonna get involved with athletics then it needs to go all the way or stay out.

the worst omen is that bad ideas spread from dummy to dummy

(04-05-2016 04:39 PM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  So let me understand this. Lets take the lady techsters. They can go play uconn ooc because they would get a guarantee. But not ODU in a conference game because you dont have guarantees on home and homes?
I wish the wifes family would have some sort of a reunion soon. I cant wait to hear her cousin the senator explain this one.

While this makes perfect sense to follow for non revenue sports it should be the schools decision. UNLESS the state wants to force LSU to play all of its ooc football games vs these teams so they will have $$$$. If the state government is gonna get involved with athletics then it needs to go all the way or stay out.

From the summary, basketball is exempt and that might be both men's and women's.

But if passed, it would mean we'd be down to 13 programs in the Olympic Sports when Louisiana Tech is forced by C-USA to withdraw.

I think it will be mentioned, a woman in the legislature will mention that it disproportionately targets women's teams, and it will be ripped to shreds.

Would all folks that find this offensive please let Steven Carter of Baton Rouge know how big a scumbag he is. carters@legis.la.gov

(04-05-2016 05:06 PM)zharkins Wrote:  I think it will be mentioned, a woman in the legislature will mention that it disproportionately targets women's teams, and it will be ripped to shreds.

That's one of the points I raised in the article...Title IX issues and disproportionate effect on women compared to men.

(04-05-2016 04:39 PM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  So let me understand this. Lets take the lady techsters. They can go play uconn ooc because they would get a guarantee. But not ODU in a conference game because you dont have guarantees on home and homes?
I wish the wifes family would have some sort of a reunion soon. I cant wait to hear her cousin the senator explain this one.

While this makes perfect sense to follow for non revenue sports it should be the schools decision. UNLESS the state wants to force LSU to play all of its ooc football games vs these teams so they will have $$$$. If the state government is gonna get involved with athletics then it needs to go all the way or stay out.

The Lady Techsters basketball program would be fine since basketball programs are exempt in the bill. However, your example would apply to baseball and softball (Tech baseball could go to Oregon for a money game, but couldn't go to San Antonio for a conference game if this crap passes).

What schools in Louisiana would this be targeting then? I agree the Title IX issue would kill it passing. I also don't think they should apply conference games to the ban. But I could see a modified ban, prohibiting non-conference travel unless the school raises the money itself to go.

(04-05-2016 05:40 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  What schools in Louisiana would this be targeting then? I agree the Title IX issue would kill it passing. I also don't think they should apply conference games to the ban. But I could see a modified ban, prohibiting non-conference travel unless the school raises the money itself to go.

Every public school not named LSU.

Louisiana Tech, UL Lafayette, UL Monroe, Grambling, Southern, Northwestern State, McNeese, Nicholls, etc.

I just looked at the numbers from the last audit of Louisiana Tech athletics from FY 2015.

The total travel budget for Tech athletics in FY 2015 was $2,157,649. However, if football and basketball are taken out, the travel budget for all other sports (which are subject to this bill) would be $779,325, or 3.57% of total expenses for FY 2015.

You're looking at reducing some (but not all) of $779,325 from the budget, but blowing up Tech's relationship with Conference USA if the bill passes.