Oh, to be in the position of VCU or St. Louis... or the several other former conference mates that are consistently enjoying greater basketball success than UAB. Not to mention LaSalle, Butler, and Temple.
A-10 takes basketball seriously. Demonstrating focused commitment to the round ball. Good academic schools too.
If's and but's, candy and nuts.... sigh. It's hard to let it go.
I agree. Instead, we are playing by someone else's rules in trying to make football our marquee sport.
My problem isn't that I don't think we should have football, I just think our potential is so much better in basketball. If we never got a championship trophy for any other sport, it would be worth it to me to have them hanging in Bartow. But I realize, I'm in the minority here.
A-10 is dead soon. Once Xavier, Butler, St. Louis, VCU move on, you'll be pining away for a basketball corpse.
Yep. The A-10 is losing Xavier, Butler, St. Louis, VCU and Charlotte. That's the creme of the crop out of that league. We will be just fine where we are for now. Even Charlotte is bailing out of that league to join C-USA. Why would we want to go jump into that soon to be mess?
(03-23-2013 10:02 AM)iam4uab Wrote: [ -> ]I agree. Instead, we are playing by someone else's rules in trying to make football our marquee sport.
My problem isn't that I don't think we should have football, I just think our potential is so much better in basketball. If we never got a championship trophy for any other sport, it would be worth it to me to have them hanging in Bartow. But I realize, I'm in the minority here.
With the inception of a brand new on campus football stadium, UABs success in recruiting would skyrocket. No question about it. Great recruiting leads to championship trophies, and Bowl Invitations.
(03-23-2013 12:06 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote: [ -> ]Yep. The A-10 is losing Xavier, Butler, St. Louis, VCU and Charlotte. That's the creme of the crop out of that league. We will be just fine where we are for now. Even Charlotte is bailing out of that league to join C-USA. Why would we want to go jump into that soon to be mess?
Charlotte is bailing for football.
(03-23-2013 10:31 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]A-10 is dead soon. Once Xavier, Butler, St. Louis, VCU move on, you'll be pining away for a basketball corpse.
...but we might have been one of those moving on if we'd played our cards differently.
(03-23-2013 12:24 PM)TheGORILLA Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2013 10:02 AM)iam4uab Wrote: [ -> ]I agree. Instead, we are playing by someone else's rules in trying to make football our marquee sport.
My problem isn't that I don't think we should have football, I just think our potential is so much better in basketball. If we never got a championship trophy for any other sport, it would be worth it to me to have them hanging in Bartow. But I realize, I'm in the minority here.
With the inception of a brand new on campus football stadium, UABs success in recruiting would skyrocket. No question about it. Great recruiting leads to championship trophies, and Bowl Invitations.
I agree with that statement. However, once UAB started chasing down football prominence, basketball dropped off. Outside of a Sweet 16 run when CMA was here, I can't think of any truly great seasons we've had since football started at UAB.
The only reason I think that is the case is that we've decided to play by the $EC country's rules in that we aren't relevant unless football is our bread and butter. Where the other teams nearby are okay with having basketball and an occasional tourney run as long as football is competitive every year, I'm exactly the opposite. Basketball is was put UAB on the map and I feel like we've abandoned that somewhat over the years.
Forget conferences, forget recruiting, all of that will come if we focus on making our product a winner. We can do that with basketball because there isn't anyone to compete with locally. There's no reason that we can't regionally be THE PROGRAM when it comes to basketball...taking that road in football is nearly impossible.
I'm just saying, I'd much rather be travelling to a tourney site and cheer my team towards a shot at a title this weekend than a meaningless bowl game with no shot at a national title in the winter...maybe that's just me.
Gonzaga is #1 in the nation...anyone know how their football program is doing? Do they even have one? Does anyone care?
Even if UAB didn't have football, it's fans and students prefer football first. If UAB didn't have a team, then a larger majority than it is now would have been Alabama fans.
Unless you have a time machine, it does no good to cry about what have been. Focus on football. Build the program. Win some damn games. That's what will lead to a better conference for basketball.
(03-23-2013 01:39 PM)iam4uab Wrote: [ -> ]The only reason I think that is the case is that we've decided to play by the $EC country's rules in that we aren't relevant unless football is our bread and butter. Where the other teams nearby are okay with having basketball and an occasional tourney run as long as football is competitive every year, I'm exactly the opposite. Basketball is was put UAB on the map and I feel like we've abandoned that somewhat over the years.
Forget conferences, forget recruiting, all of that will come if we focus on making our product a winner. We can do that with basketball because there isn't anyone to compete with locally. There's no reason that we can't regionally be THE PROGRAM when it comes to basketball...taking that road in football is nearly impossible.
I'm just saying, I'd much rather be travelling to a tourney site and cheer my team towards a shot at a title this weekend than a meaningless bowl game with no shot at a national title in the winter...maybe that's just me.
That's right, UAB should always be Blazing its own trail regionally, and should never fall into the trap of trying to be the SEC Lite. I'd rather UAB be the best BB program in the deep south, and the best academically as well. Leave the corrupt money chase of college football to the Gumps and other neanderthal schools.
I too would trade regular March tourney runs to nonexistent or rinky-dink bowls.
and it doesn't make me happy to say this....
(03-23-2013 01:48 PM)DragonClaw Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2013 01:39 PM)iam4uab Wrote: [ -> ]The only reason I think that is the case is that we've decided to play by the $EC country's rules in that we aren't relevant unless football is our bread and butter. Where the other teams nearby are okay with having basketball and an occasional tourney run as long as football is competitive every year, I'm exactly the opposite. Basketball is was put UAB on the map and I feel like we've abandoned that somewhat over the years.
Forget conferences, forget recruiting, all of that will come if we focus on making our product a winner. We can do that with basketball because there isn't anyone to compete with locally. There's no reason that we can't regionally be THE PROGRAM when it comes to basketball...taking that road in football is nearly impossible.
I'm just saying, I'd much rather be travelling to a tourney site and cheer my team towards a shot at a title this weekend than a meaningless bowl game with no shot at a national title in the winter...maybe that's just me.
That's right, UAB should always be Blazing its own trail regionally, and should never fall into the trap of trying to be the SEC Lite. I'd rather UAB be the best BB program in the deep south, and the best academically as well. Leave the corrupt money chase of college football to the Gumps and other neanderthal schools.
I too would trade regular March tourney runs to nonexistent or rinky-dink bowls.
and it doesn't make me happy to say this....
I agree!
good god. Trying to have a successful football program does not mean you are trying to be like the SEC. The damn sport is played elsewhere.
I am the biggest basketball fan there is and really do not care for football as a sport, but I have enough sense to know what is going on. Stop living in the past. Basketball will only carry us so far and if we had the greatest basketball program in the country, it still would not bring us the amount of money football can bring us.
Revenue is not in NCAA tournaments or bowl games. It is in TV contracts and football will always get you a better contract than basketball in this country.
(03-23-2013 02:04 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]good god. Trying to have a successful football program does not mean you are trying to be like the SEC. The damn sport is played elsewhere.
I am the biggest basketball fan there is and really do not care for football as a sport, but I have enough sense to know what is going on. Stop living in the past. Basketball will only carry us so far and if we had the greatest basketball program in the country, it still would not bring us the amount of money football can bring us.
Revenue is not in NCAA tournaments or bowl games. It is in TV contracts and football will always get you a better contract than basketball in this country.
I mean, I get what you are saying. I like football, it consumes my Saturdays in the fall, no doubt. But I'm not so much concerned with revenue. I'm not in the business of college athletics, I'm a fan, I want to compete for championships. I feel like basketball has the best shot at doing that.
And, if we want to take a business approach, if the market is saturated, as our market is with football, then wouldn't it be more detrimental to our brand to try and compete in that market with a lesser product than to develop an overlooked product in our region that we could easily take the lead in?
I just don't buy that we can't have a successful athletic business model unless we put football first.
To this point, football hasn't done UAB any favors. UAB doesn't even have the football facilities to be competitive.
(03-23-2013 02:04 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]good god. Trying to have a successful football program does not mean you are trying to be like the SEC. The damn sport is played elsewhere.
I am the biggest basketball fan there is and really do not care for football as a sport, but I have enough sense to know what is going on. Stop living in the past. Basketball will only carry us so far and if we had the greatest basketball program in the country, it still would not bring us the amount of money football can bring us.
Revenue is not in NCAA tournaments or bowl games. It is in TV contracts and football will always get you a better contract than basketball in this country.
...but you don't need as much revenue to compete in basketball.
Some schools make the deliberate choice to not play the football money game. It's a paradigm shift in thought, especially in the South. Football might (or might not) make more money, but maybe there are other values that BB only schools would rather emphasize. Are the Catholic schools an example? Maybe they figure football brings a different psychology, and one they don't necessarily find healthy in the long run for a school whose primary mission is supposed to be something higher. Maybe the central mission should be held higher than what amounts to semi-pro sports.
Football is fun, but it ain't necessarily healthy for children, or flowers, or higher thought.
:cowbell:
:hellokitty::
(03-23-2013 02:18 PM)DragonClaw Wrote: [ -> ]...but you don't need as much revenue to compete in basketball.
I disagree to a point. Yes football costs more, but to be competitive nationally, it takes the revenue that a successful football program would bring in. It takes revenue provided by a successful football program to hire a top notch coach instead of getting bargains on coaches starting out and moving on or coaches on their way to the SWAC. It takes revenue created from successful football program to keep that up and coming coach at your school.
While our last two seasons have resulted because of having to recruit with higher academic standards, a big part of it has also been a reduction in a recruiting budget.
There is a reason we are focusing on recruiting locally. The main reason is we can't afford to send coaches out to recruit like other schools are doing.
What you guys want is a return to the 80's. It ain't happening. Look to the dismantling of the A10 as proof.
(03-23-2013 02:32 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2013 02:18 PM)DragonClaw Wrote: [ -> ]...but you don't need as much revenue to compete in basketball.
I disagree to a point. Yes football costs more, but to be competitive nationally, it takes the revenue that a successful football program would bring in. It takes revenue provided by a successful football program to hire a top notch coach instead of getting bargains on coaches starting out and moving on or coaches on their way to the SWAC. It takes revenue created from successful football program to keep that up and coming coach at your school.
While our last two seasons have resulted because of having to recruit with higher academic standards, a big part of it has also been a reduction in a recruiting budget.
There is a reason we are focusing on recruiting locally. The main reason is we can't afford to send coaches out to recruit like other schools are doing.
What you guys want is a return to the 80's. It ain't happening. Look to the dismantling of the A10 as proof.
I don't know how I feel about that statement...there are several coaches out there making 7 figures and their schools either don't have football or it's not the marquee sport.
(03-23-2013 02:40 PM)iam4uab Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2013 02:32 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2013 02:18 PM)DragonClaw Wrote: [ -> ]...but you don't need as much revenue to compete in basketball.
I disagree to a point. Yes football costs more, but to be competitive nationally, it takes the revenue that a successful football program would bring in. It takes revenue provided by a successful football program to hire a top notch coach instead of getting bargains on coaches starting out and moving on or coaches on their way to the SWAC. It takes revenue created from successful football program to keep that up and coming coach at your school.
While our last two seasons have resulted because of having to recruit with higher academic standards, a big part of it has also been a reduction in a recruiting budget.
There is a reason we are focusing on recruiting locally. The main reason is we can't afford to send coaches out to recruit like other schools are doing.
What you guys want is a return to the 80's. It ain't happening. Look to the dismantling of the A10 as proof.
I don't know how I feel about that statement...there are several coaches out there making 7 figures and their schools either don't have football or it's not the marquee sport.
Then they have a corporate sugar daddy. (Memphis and Fed Ex for example)
(03-23-2013 02:43 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2013 02:40 PM)iam4uab Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2013 02:32 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2013 02:18 PM)DragonClaw Wrote: [ -> ]...but you don't need as much revenue to compete in basketball.
I disagree to a point. Yes football costs more, but to be competitive nationally, it takes the revenue that a successful football program would bring in. It takes revenue provided by a successful football program to hire a top notch coach instead of getting bargains on coaches starting out and moving on or coaches on their way to the SWAC. It takes revenue created from successful football program to keep that up and coming coach at your school.
While our last two seasons have resulted because of having to recruit with higher academic standards, a big part of it has also been a reduction in a recruiting budget.
There is a reason we are focusing on recruiting locally. The main reason is we can't afford to send coaches out to recruit like other schools are doing.
What you guys want is a return to the 80's. It ain't happening. Look to the dismantling of the A10 as proof.
I don't know how I feel about that statement...there are several coaches out there making 7 figures and their schools either don't have football or it's not the marquee sport.
Then they have a corporate sugar daddy. (Memphis and Fed Ex for example)
I'm thinking of schools like Gonzaga, Butler, VCU and Marquette (I know they are in a major conference, but they didn't get there with football money). All of those coaches are making 7 figure salaries and have successful programs without football money.
Of course, you may know about corporate money for them that I don't know about. I don't have research on my side, this is just off the top of my head.
One thing they do all have in common is that they aren't trying to play the "football is king" game.
UAB isn't playing the football is king game either. And football has nothing to do with the state basketball is in now.
And I can assure you those coaches salary are being paid by donors.