(06-03-2016 12:07 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 10:28 AM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  Tulsa had four 10+ win seasons from 2007 to 2012. When do we get our call up?

I think Tulsa has a lot of potential if it was a public school. Instead it is the smallest school in FBS or second I can not remember who wins that if it is Wake Forest or you guys. The point is you have no one show up hardly for football or basketball games even with a good product. The on thing I can not figure out is how back in the day you could put over 40,000 in the stands for football and now it less then 30,000 even playing Big 12 schools.

I don't think being a private school is a setback in itself. Look at Notre Dame, TCU, Baylor, etc. But being small does put us at a disadvantage. I think it's been stated on this board before that all our living alumni put together couldn't fill our 30,000 seat stadium. Then throw in the fact that OU and OSU are by far the most followed schools in the state among the public and the media. And when you consider we haven't beaten either of them since the '90's it makes TU games a tough sell and packing the stadium fairly difficult.

(06-03-2016 02:21 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 12:07 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 10:28 AM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  Tulsa had four 10+ win seasons from 2007 to 2012. When do we get our call up?

I think Tulsa has a lot of potential if it was a public school. Instead it is the smallest school in FBS or second I can not remember who wins that if it is Wake Forest or you guys. The point is you have no one show up hardly for football or basketball games even with a good product. The on thing I can not figure out is how back in the day you could put over 40,000 in the stands for football and now it less then 30,000 even playing Big 12 schools.

I don't think being a private school is a setback in itself. Look at Notre Dame, TCU, Baylor, etc. But being small does put us at a disadvantage. I think it's been stated on this board before that all our living alumni put together couldn't fill our 30,000 seat stadium. Then throw in the fact that OU and OSU are by far the most followed schools in the state among the public and the media. And when you consider we haven't beaten either of them since the '90's it makes TU games a tough sell and packing the stadium fairly difficult.

You guys haven't even beaten us since the 90s (low blow I know) even though we play each other every year it seems like. Maybe that has something to do with it as well.

(06-03-2016 02:26 PM)B easy Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 02:21 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 12:07 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 10:28 AM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  Tulsa had four 10+ win seasons from 2007 to 2012. When do we get our call up?

I think Tulsa has a lot of potential if it was a public school. Instead it is the smallest school in FBS or second I can not remember who wins that if it is Wake Forest or you guys. The point is you have no one show up hardly for football or basketball games even with a good product. The on thing I can not figure out is how back in the day you could put over 40,000 in the stands for football and now it less then 30,000 even playing Big 12 schools.

I don't think being a private school is a setback in itself. Look at Notre Dame, TCU, Baylor, etc. But being small does put us at a disadvantage. I think it's been stated on this board before that all our living alumni put together couldn't fill our 30,000 seat stadium. Then throw in the fact that OU and OSU are by far the most followed schools in the state among the public and the media. And when you consider we haven't beaten either of them since the '90's it makes TU games a tough sell and packing the stadium fairly difficult.

You guys haven't even beaten us since the 90s (low blow I know) even though we play each other every year it seems like. Maybe that has something to do with it as well.

Actually we beat you in two blow-outs in 2005 and 2006.

(06-03-2016 03:31 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 02:26 PM)B easy Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 02:21 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 12:07 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 10:28 AM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  Tulsa had four 10+ win seasons from 2007 to 2012. When do we get our call up?

I think Tulsa has a lot of potential if it was a public school. Instead it is the smallest school in FBS or second I can not remember who wins that if it is Wake Forest or you guys. The point is you have no one show up hardly for football or basketball games even with a good product. The on thing I can not figure out is how back in the day you could put over 40,000 in the stands for football and now it less then 30,000 even playing Big 12 schools.

I don't think being a private school is a setback in itself. Look at Notre Dame, TCU, Baylor, etc. But being small does put us at a disadvantage. I think it's been stated on this board before that all our living alumni put together couldn't fill our 30,000 seat stadium. Then throw in the fact that OU and OSU are by far the most followed schools in the state among the public and the media. And when you consider we haven't beaten either of them since the '90's it makes TU games a tough sell and packing the stadium fairly difficult.

You guys haven't even beaten us since the 90s (low blow I know) even though we play each other every year it seems like. Maybe that has something to do with it as well.

Actually we beat you in two blow-outs in 2005 and 2006.

It was a joke but go ahead and enjoy your decade old victory.

(06-03-2016 01:59 PM)GreenWave16 Wrote:  You people are wasting your time with this nonsense, winning means absolutely nothing. It is all about markets and academics, nothing else. If wins mattered then Boise would be in the Big 12 years ago. Winning games are meaningless, schools should work on getting their academics in order and hope they are in a major city then the rest will take care of itself.

Well if you cant believe a guy who thinks he is winning by losing (to the tune of negative 300( who can you believe?

(06-03-2016 03:56 PM)B easy Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 03:31 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 02:26 PM)B easy Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 02:21 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 12:07 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  I think Tulsa has a lot of potential if it was a public school. Instead it is the smallest school in FBS or second I can not remember who wins that if it is Wake Forest or you guys. The point is you have no one show up hardly for football or basketball games even with a good product. The on thing I can not figure out is how back in the day you could put over 40,000 in the stands for football and now it less then 30,000 even playing Big 12 schools.

I don't think being a private school is a setback in itself. Look at Notre Dame, TCU, Baylor, etc. But being small does put us at a disadvantage. I think it's been stated on this board before that all our living alumni put together couldn't fill our 30,000 seat stadium. Then throw in the fact that OU and OSU are by far the most followed schools in the state among the public and the media. And when you consider we haven't beaten either of them since the '90's it makes TU games a tough sell and packing the stadium fairly difficult.

You guys haven't even beaten us since the 90s (low blow I know) even though we play each other every year it seems like. Maybe that has something to do with it as well.

Actually we beat you in two blow-outs in 2005 and 2006.

It was a joke but go ahead and enjoy your decade old victory.

Dang. Ok.

Winning is good as far as immediate perception is concerned, but market size, ownership of territory, brand strength, and academics are all more important.

Even though ECU has a nice-sized base, we don't own any large territory where we are truly the favorite school. I think all of us besides UConn have this problem, but ECU is the only one I can speak to. How many places in even the Eastern part of the state (but outside of Greenville) can you find more ECU apparel than UNC, Duke, and State? We are already in a small market with no true ownership of that market and we can just add a particularly weak brand to that.

Unless we can create demand for ECU somehow, we won't be getting invited anywhere any time soon.

(06-03-2016 09:21 AM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 08:54 AM)PT_american Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 08:37 AM)MechaKnight Wrote:  If football success had anything to do with it Rutgers would be in the AAC and Boise State would be in the Big 12. TCU is the only school that won their way into the club on the field.

Maryland spent a decade losing money and being terrible at everything before the B1G bailed them out. Because Maryland has a great market, academics, and history. Things the Presidents that vote Yes or No care about way more than who won last weekend.

This is why I think Tulane actually has a chance even though most find it laughable. They have a market that fits perfectly into the geographical footprint of the Big12, academics and history. I am certainly not advocating they will be the school selected but I wouldn't be shocked either. They are certainly investing in the program which won't hurt.

At the end of the day I don't know if the Big 12 will expand or not and if they do who they would actually select. There are certainly a lot of similar candidates with the majority residing in the American which bodes well for the conference either well. Means the conference is loaded with teams perceived to be on the cusp. Even though in reality there are plenty of institutions in the American that are more deserving than teams already in P5 conferences. Such is life I guess.

Tulane's facilities and athletic department look more like James Madison's than Baylor's.

Use that as perspective

Maybe in football...when JMU recently built one of the largest Div I-AA Stadiums in the country (same seating capacity as Tulane...actually maybe slightly larger)





However, unlike Tulane, who's 2 story gym was built during the Great Depression, JMU already had a nice 6,500 seat basketball arena that opened in the 1980's....JMU is now going to build a $100 Million Arena/Basketball facility that will be state of the art with 8,600 seating capacity with all the bells & whistles & amenities to help bring in new revenue...plus the attached basketball practice facility and learning center will be second to none.





http://jmuconvo.com/

Is JMU the 11th team?

(06-03-2016 10:47 AM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  New Orleans is New Orleans just like Orlando is Orlando -- again, does that really matter? Probably not. It's just an extra added luxury that would be added on top of all of the other things that should be advertised.

Everything matters...hence why in Dec 2011, UCF (Orlando), Houston and SMU (Dallas) were the first wave of CUSA teams to be invited to join the Big East at that time.

Before Memphis, ECU, Tulane and Tulsa.

Southern Miss, who finished 12-2 and won the CUSA Title in 2011...is still in CUSA.

(06-03-2016 05:49 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 10:47 AM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  New Orleans is New Orleans just like Orlando is Orlando -- again, does that really matter? Probably not. It's just an extra added luxury that would be added on top of all of the other things that should be advertised.

Everything matters...hence why in Dec 2011, UCF (Orlando), Houston and SMU (Dallas) were the first wave of CUSA teams to be invited to join the Big East at that time.

Before Memphis, ECU, Tulane and Tulsa.

Southern Miss, who finished 12-2 and won the CUSA Title in 2011...is still in CUSA.

I agree. USM had issues that were much harder to overcome than any team in this conference which is why they are still on the outside looking in. Not to mention they stunk it up to epic proportions for years right after that season which didn't help either (not winning).

Not to mention I'm not so sure the Big 12 is quite so stuck on markets & metro areas as the Big East/AAC has been in selecting new membership. The Big 12 seems to be more interested in keeping their culture in tact. $$$

(06-03-2016 10:42 AM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 07:33 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 01:55 AM)B easy Wrote:  ECU was voted by coaches as the no. 1 most deserving G5 school to join a P5 conference in the below linked ESPN poll less than 2 years ago after defeating back-to-back top 25 teams & rising up the polls. The flavor of the month or year gets the headlines but it also represents a strong indication that there's a direct and significant correlation between winning and perceived value.

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_...or128-poll

Luckily the best thing about the AAC is the parity. Virtually all of the programs have the ability to rise up and gain national notoriety from year to year and usually a few schools will do so every year. That's what may end up saving this conference. So much parity that a clear candidate won't ever emerge. We all have our bright spots and we all have our warts. That's why it works. That's why we are all together in the 1st place. A group of schools that don't fit into the P5 mold per se but also don't fit in w/t other conferences either. The best hope IMO is to continue to collectively rise and stay as unified as possible given the unstable climate we all operate in. Let's embrace our outcast status and just hustle harder than everyone else!

Lol you go with that. The reason we are together is because some of us haven't taken advantage of time they have been in the big team, others have been screwed by politics, and some are young schools. All of them are the top of the outside looking in. Look at folks trajectory and let that be your guide and that's why ECU is not in the p5.

To be fair, notwithstanding the tittle of the thread, the argument was more that winning correlates more w/ 'perceived value' and I don't doubt that at all. That's why you see so many touting Boise St & Memphis as viable candidates despite not being ranked in the USNWR and other reputable academic ranking outlets. I don't even think BSU is even categorized as a 'national university.' Now are they really viable candidates or is it more a media creation. We know Memphis is trying hard and I believe they've been mentioned by some Big 12 sources as well so maybe their recent winning on the football field may actually have real and substantial influence and appeal.

Moreover, the ESPN poll linked above does show how winning can put you in the news & it show's how winning can influence perception not only in the media but with coaches as well. Much of the banter and belief of value on this board obviously stems from reports and news stories. So if the media is swayed by winning then so are many that follow the media. I think it's fairly telling that just 19 months ago ECU was looked at as 'most deserving' of P5 inclusion by a poll of both G5 and P5 coaches because after one 5-6 season and losing a coach ECU is barely mentioned as a viable candidate at this point (likely 6th or 7th on the list at best). UCF was perhaps 2nd on the list last year and then after one awful season ostensibly they fall back to the pack with USF and perhaps even behind schools like UH & Memphis. Accordingly, winning certainly affects perceived value and given the influence media has on our society, perceived value creates actual value to some extent. Everyone loves a winner.

Now winning isn't dispositive (the only factor) but it certainly matters more than some admit around here.

I don't disagree with perception. My argument is winning is a given to be in the conversation. The presidents then look at the athletic program and academic opportunities that the school provides. For example research partnerships etc. they want folks who can help them in this category. If your team is always at the bottom of the heap you probably won't be at the table to get a look when the time comes. I look at winning as more of a constant that ties more directly to branding as opposed to the final decision.

(06-03-2016 08:46 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 10:42 AM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 07:33 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 01:55 AM)B easy Wrote:  ECU was voted by coaches as the no. 1 most deserving G5 school to join a P5 conference in the below linked ESPN poll less than 2 years ago after defeating back-to-back top 25 teams & rising up the polls. The flavor of the month or year gets the headlines but it also represents a strong indication that there's a direct and significant correlation between winning and perceived value.

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_...or128-poll

Luckily the best thing about the AAC is the parity. Virtually all of the programs have the ability to rise up and gain national notoriety from year to year and usually a few schools will do so every year. That's what may end up saving this conference. So much parity that a clear candidate won't ever emerge. We all have our bright spots and we all have our warts. That's why it works. That's why we are all together in the 1st place. A group of schools that don't fit into the P5 mold per se but also don't fit in w/t other conferences either. The best hope IMO is to continue to collectively rise and stay as unified as possible given the unstable climate we all operate in. Let's embrace our outcast status and just hustle harder than everyone else!

Lol you go with that. The reason we are together is because some of us haven't taken advantage of time they have been in the big team, others have been screwed by politics, and some are young schools. All of them are the top of the outside looking in. Look at folks trajectory and let that be your guide and that's why ECU is not in the p5.

To be fair, notwithstanding the tittle of the thread, the argument was more that winning correlates more w/ 'perceived value' and I don't doubt that at all. That's why you see so many touting Boise St & Memphis as viable candidates despite not being ranked in the USNWR and other reputable academic ranking outlets. I don't even think BSU is even categorized as a 'national university.' Now are they really viable candidates or is it more a media creation. We know Memphis is trying hard and I believe they've been mentioned by some Big 12 sources as well so maybe their recent winning on the football field may actually have real and substantial influence and appeal.

Moreover, the ESPN poll linked above does show how winning can put you in the news & it show's how winning can influence perception not only in the media but with coaches as well. Much of the banter and belief of value on this board obviously stems from reports and news stories. So if the media is swayed by winning then so are many that follow the media. I think it's fairly telling that just 19 months ago ECU was looked at as 'most deserving' of P5 inclusion by a poll of both G5 and P5 coaches because after one 5-6 season and losing a coach ECU is barely mentioned as a viable candidate at this point (likely 6th or 7th on the list at best). UCF was perhaps 2nd on the list last year and then after one awful season ostensibly they fall back to the pack with USF and perhaps even behind schools like UH & Memphis. Accordingly, winning certainly affects perceived value and given the influence media has on our society, perceived value creates actual value to some extent. Everyone loves a winner.

Now winning isn't dispositive (the only factor) but it certainly matters more than some admit around here.

I don't disagree with perception. My argument is winning is a given to be in the conversation. The presidents then look at the athletic program and academic opportunities that the school provides. For example research partnerships etc. they want folks who can help them in this category. If your team is always at the bottom of the heap you probably won't be at the table to get a look when the time comes. I look at winning as more of a constant that ties more directly to branding as opposed to the final decision.

History says you have it backwards .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/uc...olumn.html

"Yes, the Big 12 has been nothing more than a big tease for UCF.

But maybe, too, this will help the Knights see the bigger picture:

If you want to make yourself a viable expansion candidate, winning is still the most captivating quality a program can have."

(06-03-2016 05:00 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 09:21 AM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 08:54 AM)PT_american Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 08:37 AM)MechaKnight Wrote:  If football success had anything to do with it Rutgers would be in the AAC and Boise State would be in the Big 12. TCU is the only school that won their way into the club on the field.

Maryland spent a decade losing money and being terrible at everything before the B1G bailed them out. Because Maryland has a great market, academics, and history. Things the Presidents that vote Yes or No care about way more than who won last weekend.

This is why I think Tulane actually has a chance even though most find it laughable. They have a market that fits perfectly into the geographical footprint of the Big12, academics and history. I am certainly not advocating they will be the school selected but I wouldn't be shocked either. They are certainly investing in the program which won't hurt.

At the end of the day I don't know if the Big 12 will expand or not and if they do who they would actually select. There are certainly a lot of similar candidates with the majority residing in the American which bodes well for the conference either well. Means the conference is loaded with teams perceived to be on the cusp. Even though in reality there are plenty of institutions in the American that are more deserving than teams already in P5 conferences. Such is life I guess.

Tulane's facilities and athletic department look more like James Madison's than Baylor's.

Use that as perspective

Maybe in football...when JMU recently built one of the largest Div I-AA Stadiums in the country (same seating capacity as Tulane...actually maybe slightly larger)





However, unlike Tulane, who's 2 story gym was built during the Great Depression, JMU already had a nice 6,500 seat basketball arena that opened in the 1980's....JMU is now going to build a $100 Million Arena/Basketball facility that will be state of the art with 8,600 seating capacity with all the bells & whistles & amenities to help bring in new revenue...plus the attached basketball practice facility and learning center will be second to none.





http://jmuconvo.com/

I hope that stadium decides what it wants to be when it grows up....college on one side, high school on the other... You've got plenty of time to make up your mind, young feller!

(06-05-2016 05:13 PM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 05:00 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 09:21 AM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 08:54 AM)PT_american Wrote:  

(06-03-2016 08:37 AM)MechaKnight Wrote:  If football success had anything to do with it Rutgers would be in the AAC and Boise State would be in the Big 12. TCU is the only school that won their way into the club on the field.

Maryland spent a decade losing money and being terrible at everything before the B1G bailed them out. Because Maryland has a great market, academics, and history. Things the Presidents that vote Yes or No care about way more than who won last weekend.

This is why I think Tulane actually has a chance even though most find it laughable. They have a market that fits perfectly into the geographical footprint of the Big12, academics and history. I am certainly not advocating they will be the school selected but I wouldn't be shocked either. They are certainly investing in the program which won't hurt.

At the end of the day I don't know if the Big 12 will expand or not and if they do who they would actually select. There are certainly a lot of similar candidates with the majority residing in the American which bodes well for the conference either well. Means the conference is loaded with teams perceived to be on the cusp. Even though in reality there are plenty of institutions in the American that are more deserving than teams already in P5 conferences. Such is life I guess.

Tulane's facilities and athletic department look more like James Madison's than Baylor's.

Use that as perspective

Maybe in football...when JMU recently built one of the largest Div I-AA Stadiums in the country (same seating capacity as Tulane...actually maybe slightly larger)





However, unlike Tulane, who's 2 story gym was built during the Great Depression, JMU already had a nice 6,500 seat basketball arena that opened in the 1980's....JMU is now going to build a $100 Million Arena/Basketball facility that will be state of the art with 8,600 seating capacity with all the bells & whistles & amenities to help bring in new revenue...plus the attached basketball practice facility and learning center will be second to none.





http://jmuconvo.com/

I hope that stadium decides what it wants to be when it grows up....college on one side, high school on the other... You've got plenty of time to make up your mind, young feller!

That's not too unusual...especially when one can't build/expand on one side do to existing buildings and/or property lines (ala, Tulane's new stadium where one side sits right behind a neighborhood).

Rutgers wasn't winning very much of anything, even in the AAC, and now makes $30+M for one reason and one reason only. Market.

(06-06-2016 06:39 AM)Carolina Stang Wrote:  Rutgers wasn't winning very much of anything, even in the AAC, and now makes $30+M for one reason and one reason only. Market.

I'm not surprised someone picked up this Gator Troll piece...as the dude was just upset he had to spend a week in Dallas, even though everyone told him "don't go, nothing will happen."

Maryland has 1 conf football title in 30 years...yet they were invited to join the Big Ten with Rutgers (futility of a historic football program), all because of their TV MArkets and had nothing to do with "winning".

Troll writer is/was just clueless...upset that he had to eat at McDonald's for 5 straight days.

Heck, the troll should just look at his own school...that didn't win a conf title for 70 years...yet that was good enough to be "given" the gift of a BCS/P5 membership.

The trend to cord cut is changing the dynamics of markets and what makes sense to expand. Actual fans that will pay for your programming will be more valuable than just getting on the basic cable package in a city or state and prying $5 a month from everyone that lives there.

(06-06-2016 06:58 AM)Pirate1 Wrote:  The trend to cord cut is changing the dynamics of markets and what makes sense to expand. Actual fans that will pay for your programming will be more valuable than just getting on the basic cable package in a city or state and prying $5 a month from everyone that lives there.

Fans are probably more engaged today (due to social media, online options, etc...) than ever before...as its just the historical delivery of programming (use to be just cable, then the addition of satellite), where its gone from those 2 services to dozens of various options and devices where anyone in the world can get instant highlights, live games, etc...

Conf (and TV Networks) have to learn how best to capitalize this changing marketplace as interest is growing and fans are more engaged today than ever before...but how can that interest be track and more importantly, how can revenue be generated from all of those new platforms, devices, etc....