(05-17-2016 08:12 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 02:59 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 02:49 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 02:26 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 07:31 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Surprised it warranted addressing.

Just my two cents but I feel like ULM's AD only addressed the issue when asked by the reporter. And we all know reporter ask the dumbest questions at different times.

it'll probably be asked again. ULM with only a $12 - 14 million budget isn't screaming to want to be competitive at the FBS level. With that budget you might as well be FCS where you can be more competitive.

Yes ULM needs better support to be completive at the FBS level but they would take an even bigger hit to there competiveness to all there sports programs if they moved down to FCS.

Quote:ULM is set to receive a total of $2.6 million in revenue from guarantee games and Sun Belt membership in 2016. The payouts ULM generates from playing at Oklahoma and Auburn next fall total $1.2 million, while the athletic department will receive $400,000 for playing at New Mexico.

The $2.6 million in 2016 revenue accounts for more than 20 percent of ULM’s 2015 athletic budget and made it possible for the Warhawks to schedule a rare home season opener with FCS Southern University next fall.

Along with the rest of the Sun Belt, ULM receives $1 million from conference membership annually — a $750,000 cut from the College Football Playoff, $150,000 from the NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament and $100,000 in football television revenue.

“When you look at the financials of it, you give a lot when you drop down. It outweighs the savings, and that’s why it’s not an option.”

Current NCAA rules allows only one FCS win per season to count toward an FBS team’s bowl eligibility, which creates limited demand — and payouts — for FCS opponents.

Wickstrom said dropping from the FBS’s 85 football scholarships to 63 in FCS would cut some costs, but only net a total of $330,000 in savings.

“That’s the reason you don’t drop down. That $1.2 million drops to about $400,000, and you’re not playing New Mexico at all,” Wickstrom said.

http://www.thenewsstar.com/story/sports/.../84333026/

Wait, what?? They are receiving a TOTAL of 1.2M for both those P5 games? That is already FCS pay. Something is wrong with that quote. Or their A.D. needs to be fired. GS is getting 1.2 (if we sell our allotment of tickets) from Clemson alone.

The quote states that 2.6M is the total for the money games AND conference payouts (CFP money mostly). That's just sad.

Quote is incorrect it's 1.2m per game

Money doesn't make you competitive.
Money allows you to recover from your mistakes quickly.

(05-17-2016 12:17 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Money doesn't make you competitive.
Money allows you to recover from your mistakes quickly.

Money is part of the equation. How much is dependent on how well the athletic department is ran. You need money to hire and retain good coaches including assistants. The lower you can pay limits the pool of candidates you can pull from and less likely you keep assistants from not bolting at the drop of a hat. You need money to build facilities comparable to your biggest rivals in recruiting or you lose recruits.

The worry for all Louisiana schools is the legislature coming up with another large hit to the state support allowed to athletics. If that comes around, it will all come to how much donors are willing to put into the pot as I don't think you can reasonably keep adding additional P5 (pay) foes pre-conference to foot the bill.

The move down for Idaho is temporary. No other team is better suited to jump when needed. Like any business you cut expenses and maintain production and make the necessary changes to improve the product. Win at the FCS level and begin the process of getting a new stadium and more importantly get the right folks in leadership at the state level as well as the university level. Total head scratcher how Idaho is neglecting their flagship U.

While I hate it for Idaho, it is easy to see that if any team were going to move to the FCS .. They are in the location and a situation to do it better than any body else.

The amount of really good FCS programs and access to a nearby respected conference with likewise state named university's who are in fact the flagship programs of their States..is a plus.

If rules change, it is conceivable that a group of those programs like Montana, Montana state, north Dakota state, Idaho, etc could form a new FBS conference.

Good luck vandals we'll be pulling for you.

(05-17-2016 01:08 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  The worry for all Louisiana schools is the legislature coming up with another large hit to the state support allowed to athletics. If that comes around, it will all come to how much donors are willing to put into the pot as I don't think you can reasonably keep adding additional P5 (pay) foes pre-conference to foot the bill.

Or can we? Couldn't we leave that door of opportunity open for any of our our member in case they need it our others who wish to use it to develop facilities?

We don't have the restraints of a conference with 14 or even 12 members. I think we should be allowed to use oat advantage while we have it.

How so?
By splitting into 5/5 and only REQUIRING 7 conference games. The four from your side, a traditional rival from the other side and two to rotate every other year.

This would give us each the chance to play 5 OOC games per year. And as always, the trick is to win as many of those as possible, especially against g5 teams.

Otherwise, we beat up on each other, if we play an additional ooc g5, we get the chance to raise our conference power rankings by winning those. And we could all have better win loss records.

We have more flexibility to do a 2 for 1 if that is what it takes to get a P5 @ our places.

Scheduling an extra money game every year or every other year would be an option. This isn't all bad. Consider that if every team in the conference played 3 SEC games per year, what that would do for recruiting and exposure. Those are big stages that kids want to be on. I think the more we are in them, the better we will get. We could almost establish a mini forged SEC affiliation as people get used to seeing our teams playing against them. I can see that leading to more recognition of our brand. It would bring immediate cash, and get more attention than playing Idaho or most of us playing another team from our own conference.

Nothing would prevent out of rotation cross conference scheduling, if both teams needed to fill a spot. But I think we would be wise to leave that 8th conference game optional.

I wanted 12 members to be able to have a CCG. Now that we don't need 12, This is better! (Still want a CCG @highest ranked home stadium). We have all the advantages of being in a conference, with the near freedom of scheduling of an independent. We don't have a lot of advantages in the sun belt, but this could be one.

(05-16-2016 01:23 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Well, it has been discussed about all the financial issues that Louisiana is having, and affects on the universities.


If Idaho was located in the middle of the Sun Belt, they would be a full member of it, and no need to evaluate. Travel in another conference (like the Southland) wouldn't be to much different for them.

Idaho is stuck in one of the hardest to reach areas of the lower 48, with no similar schools that want to play FBS nearby.


I bet if the Idaho Legislature had required home and home series with Boise, and Wazoo had been willing to guarantee the same, Idaho would have stayed FBS. But Idaho couldn't get series with the two closest FBS schools to them.

It's hard to say we're hard to get to when you have 2 commercial airports within 30 miles and can fly to any major city in the country in 2 flights, and reach everywhere else in 3.

Also, WSU and BJC have nothing to do with it either. WSU pays 400k for a game when we can get 3 times that elsewhere and BJC doesn't want to come to Moscow when they'll complain in the next breath about no-one wanting to come to Boise. Our problem has NEVER been finding out of conference games, it's the conference part that has been a challenge. A perfect storm of terrible presidents, the worst AD in the country and a horrible conference commissioner who led to the WAC falling apart. Poor state oversight to allow presidents to leave while keeping a terrible AD in place didn't help either.

(05-18-2016 04:48 PM)nsavandal09 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 01:23 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Well, it has been discussed about all the financial issues that Louisiana is having, and affects on the universities.


If Idaho was located in the middle of the Sun Belt, they would be a full member of it, and no need to evaluate. Travel in another conference (like the Southland) wouldn't be to much different for them.

Idaho is stuck in one of the hardest to reach areas of the lower 48, with no similar schools that want to play FBS nearby.


I bet if the Idaho Legislature had required home and home series with Boise, and Wazoo had been willing to guarantee the same, Idaho would have stayed FBS. But Idaho couldn't get series with the two closest FBS schools to them.

It's hard to say we're hard to get to when you have 2 commercial airports within 30 miles and can fly to any major city in the country in 2 flights, and reach everywhere else in 3.

Also, WSU and BJC have nothing to do with it either. WSU pays 400k for a game when we can get 3 times that elsewhere and BJC doesn't want to come to Moscow when they'll complain in the next breath about no-one wanting to come to Boise. Our problem has NEVER been finding out of conference games, it's the conference part that has been a challenge. A perfect storm of terrible presidents, the worst AD in the country and a horrible conference commissioner who led to the WAC falling apart. Poor state oversight to allow presidents to leave while keeping a terrible AD in place didn't help either.

Idaho was my second choice school - and it is a pain to get to.

Lewiston - you are still looking at an expensive flight, with a commuter plane to Seattle or elsewhere, then getting off, and connecting Not ideal. By that measure, any place in the lower 48 is easy to get too.

And you are missing the point - if Idaho had the same game guarantee that NMSU did (home and home series with UNM (Boise) and UTEP (WSU) you would have one regional rival a year going to Moscow. Not a guarantee game, but a true home and home series.

Those two games makes it easier to build an independent schedule around. Then you know you could do home and home with NMSU, probably UMass, do an FCS buy game, do two money p5 games, as well as a couple home and home with MWC teams like you already had (SJSU, Wyoming, etc).

But since BSU and WSU refuse to come to Moscow, and the state doesn't require BSU to do so, like they should, you start off two games behind in scheduling.

How is this a bad question? Idaho is dropping down, NMSU, EMU, and UMass are barely hanging on. ULM has the smallest budget in the conference. Louisiana legislature is tightening its belt. I don't think it's unreasonable to bring up the subject. I don't think ULM is ever going to move down, but I can see why the question would be asked.

(05-18-2016 08:57 PM)Eagleditka Wrote:  How is this a bad question? Idaho is dropping down, NMSU, EMU, and UMass are barely hanging on. ULM has the smallest budget in the conference. Louisiana legislature is tightening its belt. I don't think it's unreasonable to bring up the subject. I don't think ULM is ever going to move down, but I can see why the question would be asked.

With all that knowledge, it isn't a bad discussion for in house.

But the vast majority doesn't know the Ulm budget comparisons or maybe even Louisiana issues with funding. Now, there are rumblings and a press release smells of blood in the water. Recruits hear rumblings, other team coaches smell blood on the recruiting trails. It can be used against you.

I thought it was issued because of rumors on the recruiting trail.

(05-21-2016 11:10 AM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  I thought it was issued because of rumors on the recruiting trail.

Ahh, now that makes sense!