(04-24-2017 11:46 AM)APPdiesel Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:16 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  My point was that all this concern over distance goes away depending on who the opponent is. A home-and-home with Boise is a coup, a home-and-home with Idaho is a travel cost. Which tells me that the travel cost argument is not in itself determinative. So we should stop trying to convince ourselves it is.

As for Jonesboro, relative isolation is not the issue. I'd still prefer a conference with App over UNT even if UNT were in Texarkana. Because one is football crazy...and the other is not and my school benefits from being with football crazies. Those benefits outweigh some travel savings IMO.

I get what you're saying, but you're not distinguishing between a 1 time trip to a far away big name opponent vs an opponent (not specifically Idaho) you have to ship a dozen sports to year round. That's where it gets expensive.

That's why I like the idea of a 4 pod 24 team league. You can maintain whatever rivalries you want through in-conference but out of pod scheduling. I proposed 5 pod games, 1 set out of pod anual rivalry game against whoever you want. Then you have 2 more league games to schedule through the league office.

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

How would you split the money? There have been quite a few league suggestions in this thread. If I remember correctly, I liked where you had Tech located in your proposal, which naturally is my primary concern. Not that anything we fans say has much bearing on what happens. Probably very few posters have much influence.

(04-24-2017 02:29 PM)APPdiesel Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 12:01 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:46 AM)APPdiesel Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 10:16 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  My point was that all this concern over distance goes away depending on who the opponent is. A home-and-home with Boise is a coup, a home-and-home with Idaho is a travel cost. Which tells me that the travel cost argument is not in itself determinative. So we should stop trying to convince ourselves it is.

As for Jonesboro, relative isolation is not the issue. I'd still prefer a conference with App over UNT even if UNT were in Texarkana. Because one is football crazy...and the other is not and my school benefits from being with football crazies. Those benefits outweigh some travel savings IMO.

I get what you're saying, but you're not distinguishing between a 1 time trip to a far away big name opponent vs an opponent (not specifically Idaho) you have to ship a dozen sports to year round. That's where it gets expensive.

That's why I like the idea of a 4 pod 24 team league. You can maintain whatever rivalries you want through in-conference but out of pod scheduling. I proposed 5 pod games, 1 set out of pod anual rivalry game against whoever you want. Then you have 2 more league games to schedule through the league office.

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

I'd ship our teams to Boise every other year, no problem.

Likewise I would ship all of our teams to a program that I think COULD be a Boise over saving a few bucks to ship them to one I don't think ever will be.

I want to be associated in conference with programs that I think have the best chance to grow and become more relevant. No matter the distance.

In my mind, it is a matter of what you want your conference to be. Cheaper...or better.

Regardless of how realignment happens, I just hope they get it right and people chill for a while. P5 conferences could easily use continued instability at our level as evidence they should be allowed to break off. Irony is, it's their instability and maneuvering that caused a good portion of it.

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

Man, you are too well reasoned and mostly non emotional in your posts. That's probably a reason you have few "rep points." You make too much sense. :)

(04-28-2017 01:39 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 03:19 AM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  Some thing's just never change:


"So to Summarize:

Stogdog is doing what stogdog usually does? Fail to understand why we hate Tech, and then after listening to why, tells us why we actually hate Tech and why that particular opinion is wrong.

I mean, I just wanted to be clear here."
ChiefsFan

http://csnbbs.com/thread-781913-page-32.html

So that makes ME hateful? You're right, some things never change unlike your forum name. Last time I read this forum (before this thread), you were ULM fan "Shonuff." I had it figured out long before the moderators did. Why was "Dawgxas" banned? I have only read this thread, which has taken me a couple of weeks to find the time to do, but never read anything he wrote that broke any rules. Granted, his posts were not well received, but he never went so far as to misrepresent who he is or what school he supported. Did you lobby for his being banned? I'm quite sure you have lobbied to have me banned, but I don't know that to be true.

You are a techie so I hope you get banned. Not up to me or you would have been gone as soon as I saw who you rooted for. Full of love for you...Lol.

(04-24-2017 09:13 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 09:03 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  Why would a member of the I Bowl Committee lie to me? He would have absolutely no reason to.

Because he he knows what a die hard @ruston fan you are, and knew what you wanted to hear.
Because you badgered him as much as you badger us in your unrelenting ability to accept facts/reality. In other words, you probably wore the poor guy out....easier to tell you want you want to hear and the only thing you will accept, rather than trying to convince you of the truth.

Man, you are making assumptions that are flatly untrue. The guy had no idea what school, if any, I supported. You have absolutely no idea of the circumstances of our meeting or how the discussion of the Indy Bowl even happened. It was all by happenstance. Why do you continually speak for me? You don't know anything about me. I accept and understand reality and people that actually know me pretty much like me and know me as a very friendly person, though somewhat introverted. You had a chance to meet me, at my invitation to buy you lunch and drinks, but failed to show.

As far as badgering, it is you who has chased me from one board to another for no other reason than to call me a liar and hate filled, when the opposite is true. That is "Shonuff" and that is all I have to say on the matter. Leave me alone, don't speak for me, and I will do the same. Peace, man, peace.

(04-24-2017 09:35 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 10:13 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 01:06 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 01:30 AM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 08:02 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  No one seems to have more animosity towards the Sun Belt than La. Tech fans. The other former members' fans don't seem to have any problems. FIU and FAU... I hardly come across any of their fans on message boards. MTSU and WKU fans seem respectful. North Texas fans moved up, in their minds, but their lack of winning has kept them grounded.

Tech fans do not have animosity towards the SBC. Actually, it is the other way around and we will defend our university.

The Sun Belch? Seriously? Tech fans have been monkeys throwing poo at the Sun Belt for a decade and a half, any defense you do comes from pure hate directed at member schools over that time. Hell you guys lurk here as much as the CUSA board.

Can't deny that some use the term Sun Belch. I don't think it is hatred, but may be. Let's just say I and Tech fans I personally speak with have no hatred toward the SBC or any of its members. Also, we don't call SBC member ULM "the Hoax" or "ULMost" ...........

Yeah, a very quick search of the @ruston fan board proves you are very wrong and totally delusional and /or completely lying.

Here are a just a few of the doozies used to refer to ulm:

"MeTooU"
"nlulm"
"Kentucky Fried Chickenhawks"
"Me too JUCO" ("they are a waste Louisiana taxpayer money.)
"the LaMoners"

Try again.

We also aren't conference brethren that made a deal with them in order to get our name changed. I said we don't call them "TheHoax" or "ULMost." Point being, you folks should be thankful to them for going along with you in the name change thing. They upheld their end of the bargain.

I thought you didn't lower yourself to read the Tech board. Since you cut and paste from it, bring your criticisms there. You were reinstated here so I'm sure you can be reinstated there. You have a lot of bad things to say about Tech. Be a man and quit doing it behind our backs, so to speak. Again, peace, man.

(04-24-2017 10:43 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 09:41 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 11:26 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 10:25 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(04-17-2017 05:50 PM)AZcats Wrote:  I have not wasted one second of thought about the SWC since before my son was born, he will be 30 later this year. I'm sure stAte could not care less about the membership of that long gone conference either. If the purpose of this "merger" is to reduce costs then it's better to have LaTech with Texas. Ruston is the western-most of the AR and LA schools; compare with miles and road travel times.

————stAte ————LaTech
UNT — 484 — 7:06 || 289 — 4:09
RICE — 567 — 8:53 || 308 — 4:54
TSU — 671 — 9:51 || 428 — 6:36
UTEP — 1084 — 15:41 || 889 — 12:35
UTSA — 725 — 10:39 || 481 — 7:21
TOT — 3531 — 52:10 || 2395 — 35:35
AVG — 706.2 — 10.43 || 479 — 7.12

————stAte
UAB — 305 — 4:39
USA — 454 — 6:58
LA — 505 — 7:21
ULM — 303 — 5:02
USM — 362 — 5:58
TOT — 1929 — 29:58
AVG — 385.8 — 5.99

LaTech's Texas travel is 32.2% less than stAte while stAte cuts travel by 45.4% by switching from TX to AL, LA, and MS. Alabama is a prefered recruiting area for the Red Wolves and would like to keep that connection.

So, you want Louisiana Tech's conference fate to be decided by what is in the best interests of Ark St? Yet, you folks object to Tech fan's opinions being expressed on this board when you brought Tech into the conversation from the beginning. At the same time, members of the SBC have an irrational hatred of Louisiana Tech, while having alleged members of the media spreading misinformation about Tech. And Tech is the bad player here?

Oh Stog, quit acting like you guys are mistreated. We don't have to allow you to post here, especially every time you pull a name debate with your cousins to the South.

Either way, that whole argument was more based off a pod system which had Tech playing in a pod with ULM and state in a pod with Texas schools. Are you honestly telling me it's better for your "prestigious" university to consort with those "heathens" from Monroe than playing the Texas schools?

Man, I don't think Tech is mistreated. I don't understand the hatred you have of Tech, if that is what you call mistreated. I certainly have no hatred of Ark St. I have absolutely no reason to. I always enjoyed playing, especially in basketball even though we usually lost. Despite what some UL@L fans say, I don't hate UL@L. I do hate their name game, but that doesn't mean I hate the school or their fans. Actually, I have always been a proponent of playing regularly ULL and ULM. Don't be like some others and misinterpret what I write or claim that I have made statements I never made, please. And please never call me a liar, as others have, as I have never lied on this or any other forum. Why was Dawgxas banned? I have read nothing on this thread that should have had him banned. He may have dissenting opinions, but isn't that the point of this board? Don't be like UC-Berkeley and shout down those that have differing opinions. Also, for the record, I have never used the terms "Sun Belch" or "separation."

Stog, we were intense rivals in the 80's and early 90's. Our football games ended in literal brawls sometimes. Any Arkansas State fan who was alive to remember those games is going to hate Tech. That hate gets passed on to their children and so on and so forth.

You're playing the "we don't think about Arkansas State" card, but here you are on a Sun Belt forum complaining about one of your posters getting banned, and asking why we hate you.

If you really didn't care about Arkansas State...the fact that we hated you would be the last thing on your mind. I swear sometimes you guys are worse than Razorback fans.

I'm not complaining, I just asked a question as I saw no reason for his being banned.

I like intense rivalries. Rivalries do not equate to hatred, at least not to me. I didn't say I don't care about Ark St. I said that I enjoyed our rivalry. It was a lot of fun. For years, we had a rivalry with Northeast, but it was good natured. I don't know how old you are, but maybe it is a generational thing and that is why we can't understand each other.

When I was still playing football, brawls happened just about every game between team's players. I'm sure you played the game and know that there are basically 11 battles going on in the war that is the game. At the end of the game, we shook hands and expressed how much fun we had playing. Fans were the same way. I guess things are just different now.

(04-20-2017 10:31 AM)GoBigRed26 Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 10:21 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 09:23 AM)APPdiesel Wrote:  Clearly Arkansas State wants no part of being lumped into a division with the Texas schools. Jonesboro being in the extreme northeast of the state and all...

So let's pretend for a minute a 4-pod 24 team conference was green lit....objectively, how would the LA Tech (or even Lafayette) fans feel about being podded with the Texas schools?

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

Im not even sure all the Texas schools want to be together. Honestly, UTEP needs to go west. UTEP is so far and isolated from the rest of the Texas schools, it makes little sense if the point is making a "tight regional conference".

If UTEP heads west, then things get a lot tighter.

No, the Texas schools always talk about being together. That's why UNT went to CUSA, so they could be with their brethren. TxSt says they only reason they'd want to get a CUSA bid would be to be with other Texas schools. Just add NMSU to give UTEP a buddy and all six of them would be one big happy family.

Agree. UTEP has alums all over San Antonio and Houston. They benefit a lot more from being with the Texas schools than going to the MWC. I hope NMSU would be part of any merger. They have good basketball and would give UTEP their biggest rival.
I'm a Rice fan, and I like it. I know most other Rice fans would hold their noses to it, but merging is the practical solution. As far as Arkansas State is concerned, I think they'd benefit a lot from playing most of their games in Texas and Louisiana, especially with recruiting. I'm sorry ULM, but you guys have to go. Your budget is too small and you aren't committed enough. No more FCS startups !

(04-28-2017 02:17 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 09:35 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 10:13 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 01:06 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 01:30 AM)stodgdog Wrote:  Tech fans do not have animosity towards the SBC. Actually, it is the other way around and we will defend our university.

The Sun Belch? Seriously? Tech fans have been monkeys throwing poo at the Sun Belt for a decade and a half, any defense you do comes from pure hate directed at member schools over that time. Hell you guys lurk here as much as the CUSA board.

Can't deny that some use the term Sun Belch. I don't think it is hatred, but may be. Let's just say I and Tech fans I personally speak with have no hatred toward the SBC or any of its members. Also, we don't call SBC member ULM "the Hoax" or "ULMost" ...........

Yeah, a very quick search of the @ruston fan board proves you are very wrong and totally delusional and /or completely lying.

Here are a just a few of the doozies used to refer to ulm:

"MeTooU"
"nlulm"
"Kentucky Fried Chickenhawks"
"Me too JUCO" ("they are a waste Louisiana taxpayer money.)
"the LaMoners"

Try again.

We also aren't conference brethren that made a deal with them in order to get our name changed. I said we don't call them "TheHoax" or "ULMost." Point being, you folks should be thankful to them for going along with you in the name change thing. They upheld their end of the bargain.

I thought you didn't lower yourself to read the Tech board. Since you cut and paste from it, bring your criticisms there. You were reinstated here so I'm sure you can be reinstated there. You have a lot of bad things to say about Tech. Be a man and quit doing it behind our backs, so to speak. Again, peace, man.

Louisiana @ Monroe has only recently "embraced" the ULM moniker. At least from an administration position. I'm sure many of the fans and alumni have yet to fully embrace it; which is their right. But many were right there at the beginning of the naming fiasco trying to lay claim to "Louisiana", even promoting "Louisiana' on their uniforms. I distinctly recall a football helmet with the Louisiana script and arrow. Probably more examples too. Granted the Cajuns have been more persistent in pursuing the Louisiana moniker for athletics. And I'm glad we have continued our pursuit, if for no other reason, the reversal of the Legal name change in the 80's. Without that underhanded, backwater LA politics we wouldn't be having this discussion................But it is what it is...........

(04-28-2017 11:51 AM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 06:52 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Problems Solved...

Louisiana, N Tex, Rice, UTEP, UTSA, Tex St
A State, GA St, UAB, MTSU, ULM, WKU
FAU, FIU, La Tech, So Miss, Troy, USA
App, Charlotte, Coastal, Ga So, Marshall, ODU

Texas schools are together.
Louisiana & La Tech don't have to put up with each other.
Same with Ga So & GA St.
FAU & FIU are just a quick jump across the Gulf from the other division schools.
A State isn't left out in no mans land.
App fans get to go to Myrtle Beach every 2 years!

I certainly think it would be in Tech's better interest "to put up with" (your words) the ULXs than being in a division with the F_Us. We are not in the same division now. The argument that "FAU & FIU are just a quick jump across the Gulf from the other division schools" doesn't hold water, so to speak.

Mid South Conference
N Tex, Rice, UTEP, UTSA, Tex St, UAB, Troy, Lousiana Tech, ULL, southern miss, Arkansas State, USA

Sunshine Conference
FAU, FIU, Georgia Southern, Coastal Carolina, Charlotte, Georgia State, Appalachian State, MTSU, James Madison, ODU, Marshall, Liberty.

(04-28-2017 09:10 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  I'm not totally on board with the idea that there is no TV money to be made.

I don't think there is NATIONAL money to be made unless you start paying schools like web site owners based on viewers on the stream.

There just aren't G5's moving the national needle enough to be worth a premium.

Consider this. In the NBA, 38% of television revenue is local television. 56% of television revenue earned by the MLB is local television. NHL gets roughly half of its TV money from local deals.

Interest in most NBA. MLB, NHL clubs fades dramatically the further you get from the arena. They are playing 82 to 164 regular season games vs just 16 for the NFL. The entire NFL plays 256 regular season games and 80% on a regional rather than national basis. CBS and Fox tailor their broadcasts to local interest.

A Dallas Cowboys vs. Washington Redskins Fox telecast is available in fewer homes than ESPN showing Vandy at Bama because Fox is also showing the Cardinals and Rams.

College football doesn't follow the model that works for the four primary professional leagues showing select games nationally with the bulk of telecasts regionally, instead the bulk of college football games telecast are shown nationally.

A local telecast of the Nashville Predators, or Cleveland Indians, or Oklahoma City Thunder draws advertisers who want their brand associated with the popular local team. Those advertiser dollars generally reach people close enough to do business that local company.

There is money out there for regional television but you have to have critical mass. Showing Troy-Georgia State in the Ark-La-Tex region isn't getting the local ad buyer what they need and showing AState-TXST in Alabama and Georgia isn't getting the advertisers there what they need.

That's the card up the sleeve for the AD's looking for regionalism. Local distribution whether it is on the back of existing regional sports networks, syndication to local broadcast outlets, or assembling a local network of cable systems for an ad hoc network has the potential to work if the footprint is tight enough and the volume of inventory high enough to consistently fill a given slot with the local team or a team reasonably close by.

The flip side. It takes a lot more work to generate a dollar and it is most likely that a regional deal requires buying the ad time and selling it yourself because it requires more labor.

Depends on how you define "money". CUSA is only getting 2.8 million for their TV rights. I suspect a regional conference that included the G5's in Texas, Oklahoma, Ark, and Louisiana could probably get something in that range from Fox Sports-SW. Add a small package of mid week games for CBS-Sports, NBC-Sports, or ESPN---and you may equal or better the current CUSA TV deal.

The down side is that's probably close to the ceiling for a small regional conference in terms of traditional TV money in todays marketplace. We may be getting close to a time where a regional deal for 15 Saturday games and a national 8-game weeknight deal will represent the traditional part of the tv revenue---with the rest derived from a streaming subscription based conference digital network. Another possibility is letting each member school sell its remaining games to the local stations while retaining the digital rights for the conference digital network. The digital network would then just mirror the local telecast. The digital revenue in such a model would represent the "growth" side of the conference income.

If you are able to maintain or improve TV income, decrease travel costs, and increase ticket sales (due to more games vs nearby fan bases)---that's a hard model for G5 AD's to ignore.

(04-28-2017 03:25 PM)Ourland Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 10:31 AM)GoBigRed26 Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 10:21 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 09:23 AM)APPdiesel Wrote:  Clearly Arkansas State wants no part of being lumped into a division with the Texas schools. Jonesboro being in the extreme northeast of the state and all...

So let's pretend for a minute a 4-pod 24 team conference was green lit....objectively, how would the LA Tech (or even Lafayette) fans feel about being podded with the Texas schools?

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

Im not even sure all the Texas schools want to be together. Honestly, UTEP needs to go west. UTEP is so far and isolated from the rest of the Texas schools, it makes little sense if the point is making a "tight regional conference".

If UTEP heads west, then things get a lot tighter.

No, the Texas schools always talk about being together. That's why UNT went to CUSA, so they could be with their brethren. TxSt says they only reason they'd want to get a CUSA bid would be to be with other Texas schools. Just add NMSU to give UTEP a buddy and all six of them would be one big happy family.

Agree. UTEP has alums all over San Antonio and Houston. They benefit a lot more from being with the Texas schools than going to the MWC. I hope NMSU would be part of any merger. They have good basketball and would give UTEP their biggest rival.
I'm a Rice fan, and I like it. I know most other Rice fans would hold their noses to it, but merging is the practical solution. As far as Arkansas State is concerned, I think they'd benefit a lot from playing most of their games in Texas and Louisiana, especially with recruiting. I'm sorry ULM, but you guys have to go. Your budget is too small and you aren't committed enough. No more FCS startups !

It might benefit UTEP more--but if your a bunch of east Texas/Louisiana/Oklahoma/Ark schools trying to regroup in a configuration that cuts travel costs---UTEP isn't very attractive--even with a travel partner. You can cut 700+ miles off the width of your conference by letting them move west.

(04-28-2017 01:48 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  How would you split the money?

Combo of streaming and regional TV carriers:

All games should be available for streaming. League office sells sponsorships for streaming. Add subscription fees. All of that goes into a communal pot to be evenly distributed among all league members.

Sell marquee match-ups to local/regional affiliates. FOX's regionalized affiliates would be perfect for this. Half the TV rights go to the schools playing that day (an incentive to be better and build interesting rivalries). Half goes into the league pot to be evenly distributed. Up to 3 games per Saturday could be sold, 3:30, 7:30, and in extreme conditions noon.

I'm not a financial expert but you'd have to think with 2/5 of the G5 inventory this 24 team league would be in a strong position to bargain. This league should be all-in with streaming. Every game made available online. Save money by running commentary for "lesser" matchups out of a central hub (ESPN already does this) and put live talent at the marquee games.

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

(04-28-2017 01:51 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  Man, you are too well reasoned and mostly non emotional in your posts. That's probably a reason you have few "rep points." You make too much sense. :)

There are enough monkeys throwing feces here. I like to be a voice of reason.

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

(04-28-2017 05:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 03:25 PM)Ourland Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 10:31 AM)GoBigRed26 Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 10:21 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 09:23 AM)APPdiesel Wrote:  Clearly Arkansas State wants no part of being lumped into a division with the Texas schools. Jonesboro being in the extreme northeast of the state and all...

So let's pretend for a minute a 4-pod 24 team conference was green lit....objectively, how would the LA Tech (or even Lafayette) fans feel about being podded with the Texas schools?

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

Im not even sure all the Texas schools want to be together. Honestly, UTEP needs to go west. UTEP is so far and isolated from the rest of the Texas schools, it makes little sense if the point is making a "tight regional conference".

If UTEP heads west, then things get a lot tighter.

No, the Texas schools always talk about being together. That's why UNT went to CUSA, so they could be with their brethren. TxSt says they only reason they'd want to get a CUSA bid would be to be with other Texas schools. Just add NMSU to give UTEP a buddy and all six of them would be one big happy family.

Agree. UTEP has alums all over San Antonio and Houston. They benefit a lot more from being with the Texas schools than going to the MWC. I hope NMSU would be part of any merger. They have good basketball and would give UTEP their biggest rival.
I'm a Rice fan, and I like it. I know most other Rice fans would hold their noses to it, but merging is the practical solution. As far as Arkansas State is concerned, I think they'd benefit a lot from playing most of their games in Texas and Louisiana, especially with recruiting. I'm sorry ULM, but you guys have to go. Your budget is too small and you aren't committed enough. No more FCS startups !

It might benefit UTEP more--but if your a bunch of east Texas/Louisiana/Oklahoma/Ark schools trying to regroup in a configuration that cuts travel costs---UTEP isn't very attractive--even with a travel partner. You can cut 700+ miles off the width of your conference by letting them move west.

True, but does the MWC even want them now? All the g5 revenue is disappearing. The rumors of MWC expansion have gone cold lately.

(04-25-2017 07:50 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 09:47 PM)LaCajunsFan Wrote:  Again, it was clearly spelled out just how much @ruston is despised by just about everyone in the following thread:

http://csnbbs.com/thread-781913-page-32.html

Admittedly I'm looking at this thing from a great distance and I understand we all have great pride in our schools, but I honestly don't understand how or why La Tech fans think so much of themselves. My first glimpse into this came from a bunch of McNeese folks I got to know. They honesly could not stand La Tech fans. They used words like arrogant, condescending and elitist snobs to describe them. I realize they've had some success through the years but it's not like they've been a athletic juggernaut. I've been thru Ruston and quite honestly I didn't see anything that would make me want to go back. The La Tech campus wasn't awful, but it was nothing out of the ordinary. Not my intention to pile on, just trying to understand.

I'm trying to understand as well. As a Tech grad, exactly what have I posted that you describe as arrogant? I'm also trying to understand when Tech fans visit this board it offends the SBC posters when SBC fans visit the CUSA board as often. I have received multiple neg reps from a particular Cajun fan for posts I have made on the CUSA board, but he questions why I visit this board. It really doesn't make much sense to me.

Tech has a very nice campus. I'm sure App St does though I have never had the pleasure of visiting. I would like to as I have looked at pictures of Boone and it is truly beautiful. I would like to live in that area if I can ever retire. A lifelong good friend lives in Maggie Valley, NC. Is that near Boone? Is Mt. Airy close by? As a huge Andy Griffith Show fan I would love to visit there and have a bottle of pop at Wally's.

I think, though I don't know this for sure, that many SBCers have formed a neg opinion of Tech from comments of Cajun fans, who have an irrational hatred of Tech and make personal attacks against us. As far as I know, your school and mine have never even played each other, though I don't know that to be fact. Were you to visit Ruston on gameday, if we ever play, you would find us to be very friendly and accommodating hosts.

I really wouldn't put much stock into LCFs opinions regarding Tech or Tech folks. He truly hates us, not only the school but the people. I have no idea why as he has never made a rational answer. He claims to be a supporter of free speech, but I have observed he wants to enjoy that freedom but attacks anyone who posts something he disagrees with. He doesn't seem to understand that people can disagree without hate.

BTW, I have known of App St for a long time, much prior to 2007. I was merely responding to a poster that said he had never heard of Louisiana Tech prior to your school joining the SBC.

It has taken me a couple weeks to get through this thread and still have a ways to go to complete.

Man, I really don't like this right side Shift button on my Lenovo computer as it is inconveniently located.

(04-25-2017 08:11 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 08:13 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 04:39 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  If ULM weren't involved in the Sun Belt you wouldn't hear **** from La.Tech fans, they'd be big on the whole idea.
Thing is they are the reason ULM is FBS today. If Tech had joined Sun Belt football instead of the WAC, ULM wouldn't have been in the first group of the Sun Belt and probably wouldn't have survived in FBS as an independent long enough to be in the discussion.

I don't think that is true. Then NLU went along with then USL in the name change deal, as law required that at least two schools change their name to UL@X, in exchange for support in joining the SBC. Tech had nothing to do with that. It may be true that NLU pursued Div 1A status because Tech had done so 6 or 7 wins prior.

ULM wouldn't survived as an independent long enough. The Sun Belt took MTSU, UNT, and NMSU as full members and gave football only to ULM to get to the required number. When the required number was 8 full members, the Sun Belt added Troy and added Utah State and Idaho as FULL MEMBERS before finally adding ULM.

The Indian Warhawks would never have made it in had Tech joined Sun Belt football.

Maybe, but Tech did what was in their best interest at the time and wanted to be associated with SMU, Rice, and Tulsa. Tech not joining the SBC was not detrimental to the Sunbelt. Tech is not in the business of putting other people, i.e. ULM, out of business. It has worked out pretty well for us. Nevertheless, what I said still holds true. USL and NLU made a deal (sometimes called the LSU deal) and both got what they wanted, i.e., USL changed their name and backed ULM in its pursuit of the SBC. Part of the deal, and the law, was that any school who changed their name to ULX would have the location of the school in its name for all purposes, including athletics, and that neither school would gain a strategic or tactical advantage. ULM honored the deal. ULL has not. I did not know that Ark St wanted ULM to fold its tent. That is news to me.

Now, please don't claim that I am bringing up the name game thing. Tech chose to remain named Louisiana Tech University, which has been our official name since 1970 and remains so today.

(04-25-2017 11:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Outside of La Tech and maybe Rice and USM who would really object to the consolidation. I think UAB would be onboard as long as they were with the eastern schools. Everyone else is either new to D1or former sunbelt so who would really object.

I do see how La Tech could really screw everything up though by either refusing to leave CUSA for the Sunbelt where ULM is or by refusing to allow ULM admittance into CUSA. If they were left stranded as a western outpost perhaps they would cave but that is a big risk

What could you possibly know about Louisiana Tech? Is your school in the SBC?

(04-26-2017 07:49 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 11:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Outside of La Tech and maybe Rice and USM who would really object to the consolidation. I think UAB would be onboard as long as they were with the eastern schools. Everyone else is either new to D1or former sunbelt so who would really object.

I do see how La Tech could really screw everything up though by either refusing to leave CUSA for the Sunbelt where ULM is or by refusing to allow ULM admittance into CUSA. If they were left stranded as a western outpost perhaps they would cave but that is a big risk

I suspect most of the objection to consolidation you see from fans is not reflected in the rooms where they actually have to calculate how many dollars are available to athletics and how to allocate those dollars. The sound and fury of fans is more popcorn fart than severe thunderstorm

I wouldn't have said it that way, but you are right. Fact is no one posting in this thread knows a thing about what will happen with realignment and I doubt any have any influence whatsoever. So far it is a 40+ page of posted ignorance, but entertaining for a couple of weeks now.

(04-26-2017 09:24 AM)APPdiesel Wrote:  

(04-26-2017 08:22 AM)sdcritter Wrote:  I still say that I want my AD to be looking at whatever arrangement best fits putting butts in seats AND providing the best streaming experience. As technology progresses more people are devoted to devices instead of traditional content delivery via TV. That's one thing I like about the Belt right now. ESPN3 works very well for my lifestyle.

Agreed. The fact that every single Sunbelt game is available to stream is no small victory. An alliance of these two leagues coupled with a dedicated digital platform (which it sounds like the merged ASN/Campus Insiders/120 Sports wants to create) could be very powerful.

I've heard a lot of CUSA fans complain about viewing access. This could be how that gets accomplished.

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

90% or so of Tech's game were available on my TV provider the 3 years as members of CUSA. I don't know about 2017

(04-29-2017 02:25 AM)stodgdog Wrote:  Tech has a very nice campus. I'm sure App St does though I have never had the pleasure of visiting. I would like to as I have looked at pictures of Boone and it is truly beautiful. I would like to live in that area if I can ever retire. A lifelong good friend lives in Maggie Valley, NC. Is that near Boone? Is Mt. Airy close by? As a huge Andy Griffith Show fan I would love to visit there and have a bottle of pop at Wally's.

BTW, I have known of App St for a long time, much prior to 2007. I was merely responding to a poster that said he had never heard of Louisiana Tech prior to your school joining the SBC.

Boone is a little over an hour from Mt Airy. And I honestly didn't know anything about LA Tech until we joined the FBS. Why would I, grew up an App fan and only knew 1-AA and what ESPN showed of 1-A. The only "G5" programs I knew about were local ones like ECU and ones we met in the playoffs that moved to 1-A.