(08-27-2010 01:56 PM)Green Menace Wrote: [ -> ]TheAOLDawg wrote:
"If TSU and UTSA thrive in a new WAC, especially one where Tech stays, You will see UNT taking a better look at the Wac again."
Don't hold your breath. UNT wants no part of the WAC.
BTW, can someone tell me why Louisiana Tech hates ULM so much, and vice versa? Other than recruiting.
Don't worry they hate us just as much. And of course you want nothing to do with the WAC now but if those other two schools start to do well and the conference stabilizes(which I doubt), I wouldnt be surprised to see UNT taking another look. You would have four conference mates practically in your back yard. I really wish someone would have the balls to just scratch the WAC all together and put together a SW conference with the three texas schools, nmx st, ark st ULL and Tech. Throw is USU for fun. Let the rest of the belt move more East and we all move more west. Thats really what these presidents need to be talking about. There will be so many more up and coming East programs ready to move up soon to fill out the Sun Belt, if these schools form their own conference. Unless ULM gets some help or funding, which I doubt the state will do, or the economy suddenly changes, I don't see how they can remain solvent. It is bleeding them dry and probably at the expense of some of their academic programs. I suspect Tulane is going through the same crises. I am not Anti belt as Techdawg but I do think it is in our best interest to wait.
(08-27-2010 02:08 PM)techdawg88 Wrote: [ -> ]You're damn right I don't want Tech back in the Sun Belch. I'll tear the facilities down before I ever see them in this conference
Tearing them down would be a good start, then you could rebuild them up to Sun Belt standards.
(08-27-2010 01:56 PM)Green Menace Wrote: [ -> ]TheAOLDawg wrote:
"If TSU and UTSA thrive in a new WAC, especially one where Tech stays, You will see UNT taking a better look at the Wac again."
Don't hold your breath. UNT wants no part of the WAC.
BTW, can someone tell me why Louisiana Tech hates ULM so much, and vice versa? Other than recruiting.
Take a gander at the ULM-Tech series record in football when they were both in Southland. That might help.
(08-27-2010 01:54 PM)theATLDawg Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 01:44 PM)MeanGreen1980 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 01:21 PM)theATLDawg Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 01:16 PM)UofMemphis Wrote: [ -> ]you're talking about an endzone building...they're building a BRAND NEW STADIUM...their investing 70 million dollars into their football program...while tech is redoing an old facility.
we didnt need a whole new stadium. UNT had no choice. good for them. but you putting up old pics of our stadium is not accurate. I still don't think that our renovated stadium will be as nice as theirs but I don't think the difference will be all that great either. And when the research campus is complete, our campus, which already is nicer than theirs will blow them and you i might add away. And our Endzone building will be followed by a new press box. This Endzone building will accomodate suites and training facilities and club rooms. That is all the same stuff that UNT will have in their new stadium. Other than that its just bleachers. We already have a kick arse jumbotron. and I might also add that your stadium which you don't even own is a rat hole. Bigger yes but still a rat hole. I went to the Liberty bowl and couldn't believe what a dump the place is. UNT's new stadium will be a hell of alot nicer than what you play in, does this mean they should go to the Big East instead of you. Hell FAU's new stadium is a hell of alot nicer than what you play in, maybe they should be considered before you. After all they are actually in the East. I don't think its vital that we be the best, just important that we keep up, and Tech has upgraded every last one of it's facilities. You guys havent had to do anything to facilities because you rent everything from the city. You own nothing. And when you go to a football game in Ruston you don't have to worry about getting shot.
Your stadium will not be anywhere near what UNT's new stadium will be. UNT has all new facilites that frankly, blow anything LT has out of the water. UNT is a huge metro area and Denton is 6 times the size of Rusting, I mean Ruston.
If you want to look at our facilties below is a link...
http://www.meangreensports.com/ViewArtic...CLID=67236
Please I was just at your campus this weekend. While our sports facilities sit in rolling hills and lush pines, your so called village sits on a dry plain, that frankly looks a little depressing. When all the final touches are put on the new soccer field, softball field, new tennis courts and new track, not to mention our finished product football stadium. Our Athletic village will make yours look like sad. Other than the beautiful football field, which lets face it, you guys really didn't have a choice but to invest in it because Fouts had to go, the rest of your facilities all sit on an interstate and built in the middle of a white trash neighborhood in the back and dry barren land. It's down right depressing. It's the same with this so called beautiful campus you guys keep talking about. NOOOOO. It is surrounded by strip malls and run down shops. There is barely a tree to be found and other than the clock tower, most of your buildings need to be remodeled. and it all sits in the beautiful confines of I35 plowing right through it. TWU actually sits in a better location than UNT. Like someone said earlier, everybody is investing in facility upgrades these days. Conferences don't come calling on facilities alone. You have to have branding recognition, and I think that is something we have succeeded at much better than you. And do you really think that being the number 7 product in a major metroplex means any more than being the number two product in all of N. Louisiana. We brought 41k out to the Indy bowl. Did you guys ever bring that to any of the bowls you went to. 2k of those people were there for N. Illinois. No denying that your new stadium is going to be impressive and I am more than happy for you.
You keep your lush pines and rolling hills, and we will keep out new 78 million dollar stadium and I hope you enjoy being FCS when you don't get into the Sun Belt or CUSA and are passed over for UNT or a number of other schools. Your town has 20k people in it. You don't have all of N. Louisiana. You don't have all of Rusting. You don't sit in a media market. You are in the middle of nowhere and nobody cares about your awful school, in your awful town.....
(08-27-2010 01:56 PM)Green Menace Wrote: [ -> ]TheAOLDawg wrote:
"If TSU and UTSA thrive in a new WAC, especially one where Tech stays, You will see UNT taking a better look at the Wac again."
Don't hold your breath. UNT wants no part of the WAC.
BTW, can someone tell me why Louisiana Tech hates ULM so much, and vice versa? Other than recruiting.
I really wish I could tell you why Tech has this animosity to ULM. I've followed these two schools since 1969 when there was a healthy rivalry between the two universities. In the 1980's we beat them 7 of 10 times (including five in a row) and the whole discourse with them changed. Suddenly they stopped renewing the football contracts with weak excuses that we didn't understand....playing us was beneath them (we heard this ALL the time) yet schools like Tulsa, Cincinnati, Tulane, Wyoming, Central Florida, and Memphis didn't seem to have a problem with it. And that's without counting all the BCS teams we played anyway. The logic has never been there and we get irritated with how high they think their nose is up in the clouds, when it's easy to see it is around their kneecaps. In common opponents in the same years (not many but it's happened) we have been more than comparable to the Techies in results...shall we say, mirror-images?
ULM has always wanted to keep the series going with Tech. We don't
need to play them but we see the benefits of such games. If anyone from Ruston tells you different about how we view this, they are lying. It is no plainer than that.
I can't figure out what happened the last 15-20 years to give them that attitude and I've been paying attention!
(08-27-2010 01:44 PM)theATLDawg Wrote: [ -> ]yes but what you don't understand is why move to one conference now when in two years you have to move all over again. I could understand if we didn't have a schedule already made but we are locked in for the next two years anyway. Why say yes to the belt now. No reason. It would actually be stupid. I would be like you guys saying yes to the WAC NOW when you know their is a distinct possibility that CUSA might want you. Would you do it? of course not.
You understand that moving conferences isn't like moving to a new house where you have to pack furniture and stuff. It's a matter of some paperwork and when 2 years down the road entry time arrives, you change some logos and patches. If a CUSA spot hasn't opened and been accepted prior to that time you make the changes. If one has opened and been accepted you change to CUSA and never do anything about the Sun Belt logo.
I wouldn't say yes to the WAC now because there is a significant risk it will have neither bowl ties nor NCAA automatic bids in any sports in 2012. Not much point joining that.
CUSA on the other hand by all reasonable accounts may not have an opening. If they do have an opening, it may no longer be a conference worth going to depending on who goes and what happens.
If Houston goes MWC and BYU's dream of B12 comes through, UTEP probably also goes MWC. If Big East expands they take the meat of the league and you are left with Sun Belt with different patches.
Remember CUSA of 2004 ain't the CUSA of 2010. They aren't making near the basketball money they made before and many of the units earned since were earned under an NCAA cloud. ESPN slashed their money for 2005 and their exposures and rumor-mill indicates they will be very lucky if they just hold on to the TV dollars they have now, but if they lose a team or two, they will lose dollars in the next contract.
Their premier bowl is the Liberty and their newest contract provides for a method for the Liberty to send the champ to Birmingham and pit Big East vs SEC in the Liberty.
(08-27-2010 02:36 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 01:56 PM)Green Menace Wrote: [ -> ]TheAOLDawg wrote:
"If TSU and UTSA thrive in a new WAC, especially one where Tech stays, You will see UNT taking a better look at the Wac again."
Don't hold your breath. UNT wants no part of the WAC.
BTW, can someone tell me why Louisiana Tech hates ULM so much, and vice versa? Other than recruiting.
Take a gander at the ULM-Tech series record in football when they were both in Southland. That might help.
Bingo! ULM was 5-1 against Tech in the six years the two schools were in the Southland at the same time.
(08-27-2010 02:46 PM)SOT1977 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 02:36 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 01:56 PM)Green Menace Wrote: [ -> ]TheAOLDawg wrote:
"If TSU and UTSA thrive in a new WAC, especially one where Tech stays, You will see UNT taking a better look at the Wac again."
Don't hold your breath. UNT wants no part of the WAC.
BTW, can someone tell me why Louisiana Tech hates ULM so much, and vice versa? Other than recruiting.
Take a gander at the ULM-Tech series record in football when they were both in Southland. That might help.
Bingo! ULM was 5-1 against Tech in the six years the two schools were in the Southland at the same time.
thats because you had a great coach and recruiting at the same level. Niether of that is still the same.
(08-27-2010 02:42 PM)SOT1977 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 01:56 PM)Green Menace Wrote: [ -> ]TheAOLDawg wrote:
"If TSU and UTSA thrive in a new WAC, especially one where Tech stays, You will see UNT taking a better look at the Wac again."
Don't hold your breath. UNT wants no part of the WAC.
BTW, can someone tell me why Louisiana Tech hates ULM so much, and vice versa? Other than recruiting.
I really wish I could tell you why Tech has this animosity to ULM. I've followed these two schools since 1969 when there was a healthy rivalry between the two universities. In the 1980's we beat them 7 of 10 times (including five in a row) and the whole discourse with them changed. Suddenly they stopped renewing the football contracts with weak excuses that we didn't understand....playing us was beneath them (we heard this ALL the time) yet schools like Tulsa, Cincinnati, Tulane, Wyoming, Central Florida, and Memphis didn't seem to have a problem with it. And that's without counting all the BCS teams we played anyway. The logic has never been there and we get irritated with how high they think their nose is up in the clouds, when it's easy to see it is around their kneecaps. In common opponents in the same years (not many but it's happened) we have been more than comparable to the Techies in results...shall we say, mirror-images?
ULM has always wanted to keep the series going with Tech. We don't need to play them but we see the benefits of such games. If anyone from Ruston tells you different about how we view this, they are lying. It is no plainer than that.
I can't figure out what happened the last 15-20 years to give them that attitude and I've been paying attention!
we stopped renewing the contract with you guys when we were whipping your arse and your fans stopped coming to the game. We didnt canceling it when ya'll were whipping ours.
I just looked at LT's facilities online and if you can say they are anywhere near where UNT's are then you are a liar and a moron...They have one of the worst softball fields I have ever seen and the tennis facilty is awful, as is the soccer field and the football stadium. UNT's athletic facilities are light years ahead, just like I said....
(08-27-2010 03:22 PM)MeanGreen1980 Wrote: [ -> ]I just looked at LT's facilities online and if you can say they are anywhere near where UNT's are then you are a liar and a moron...They have one of the worst softball fields I have ever seen and the tennis facilty is awful, as is the soccer field and the football stadium. UNT's athletic facilities are light years ahead, just like I said....
Then what's the excuse for UNT?
(08-27-2010 03:24 PM)T_Won1 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 03:22 PM)MeanGreen1980 Wrote: [ -> ]I just looked at LT's facilities online and if you can say they are anywhere near where UNT's are then you are a liar and a moron...They have one of the worst softball fields I have ever seen and the tennis facilty is awful, as is the soccer field and the football stadium. UNT's athletic facilities are light years ahead, just like I said....
Then what's the excuse for UNT?
their football stadium will one-up Tech in every way...they also actually make NCAA tourneys.
Johnny Jones is a great guy, and a good coach.
(08-27-2010 03:01 PM)theATLDawg Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 02:42 PM)SOT1977 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 01:56 PM)Green Menace Wrote: [ -> ]TheAOLDawg wrote:
"If TSU and UTSA thrive in a new WAC, especially one where Tech stays, You will see UNT taking a better look at the Wac again."
Don't hold your breath. UNT wants no part of the WAC.
BTW, can someone tell me why Louisiana Tech hates ULM so much, and vice versa? Other than recruiting.
I really wish I could tell you why Tech has this animosity to ULM. I've followed these two schools since 1969 when there was a healthy rivalry between the two universities. In the 1980's we beat them 7 of 10 times (including five in a row) and the whole discourse with them changed. Suddenly they stopped renewing the football contracts with weak excuses that we didn't understand....playing us was beneath them (we heard this ALL the time) yet schools like Tulsa, Cincinnati, Tulane, Wyoming, Central Florida, and Memphis didn't seem to have a problem with it. And that's without counting all the BCS teams we played anyway. The logic has never been there and we get irritated with how high they think their nose is up in the clouds, when it's easy to see it is around their kneecaps. In common opponents in the same years (not many but it's happened) we have been more than comparable to the Techies in results...shall we say, mirror-images?
ULM has always wanted to keep the series going with Tech. We don't need to play them but we see the benefits of such games. If anyone from Ruston tells you different about how we view this, they are lying. It is no plainer than that.
I can't figure out what happened the last 15-20 years to give them that attitude and I've been paying attention!
we stopped renewing the contract with you guys when we were whipping your arse and your fans stopped coming to the game. We didnt canceling it when ya'll were whipping ours.
How do you think the Tech fans would feel to joining a 12 team SunBelt conf. (east and west) with Tech in the West and ULM in the east.. They only way they would play is if both make the championship game?? Game could be played in Shreveport to accomadate the fans...
Just asking???
Odd you're going after Tech's stadium when Memphis Tigers don't even own the Liberty Bowl or FedEx Forum
(08-27-2010 03:35 PM)techdawg88 Wrote: [ -> ]Odd you're going after Tech's stadium when Memphis Tigers don't even own the Liberty Bowl or FedEx Forum
you're saying "HA! i OWN my Ford Fiesta, while you only lease your Cadillac"
at the end of the day, i drive off in a Caddy, and you still only have a Ford...
(08-27-2010 03:24 PM)T_Won1 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2010 03:22 PM)MeanGreen1980 Wrote: [ -> ]I just looked at LT's facilities online and if you can say they are anywhere near where UNT's are then you are a liar and a moron...They have one of the worst softball fields I have ever seen and the tennis facilty is awful, as is the soccer field and the football stadium. UNT's athletic facilities are light years ahead, just like I said....
Then what's the excuse for UNT?
Excuse for what? Having better facilities than LT?
![[Image: Tarp1.jpg]](http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u39/CajunT/Tarp1.jpg)
![[Image: aerial-_Joe_Aillet_Stadium.jpg]](http://www.stateuniversity.com/assets/logo/image/944/large/aerial-_Joe_Aillet_Stadium.jpg){kind=logo}
