And what is your definition of infastructure?

If it is the non-mainstream sports, golf has not returned to their No. 3 ranking of 1996 despite the new facility, a new soccer field has essentially only replaced a competitive team we watched for a couple of losing teams we don't, and the softball field has done nothing in the short term to improve that program.

Here's the question. Kentucky would probably win more in football if they dropped to the Conference USA and would be the dominant basketball school there.

But would it be worth the loss of prestige?

This is what has happened to ETSU without football. Whatever the cost, it's a worthy endeavor, and the "infrastructure" will clearly be better in the Southern than the A-Sun conference.

(11-30-2009 08:29 AM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  And what is your definition of infastructure?

If it is the non-mainstream sports, golf has not returned to their No. 3 ranking of 1996 despite the new facility, a new soccer field has essentially only replaced a competitive team we watched for a couple of losing teams we don't, and the softball field has done nothing in the short term to improve that program.

Here's the question. Kentucky would probably win more in football if they dropped to the Conference USA and would be the dominant basketball school there.

But would it be worth the loss of prestige?

This is what has happened to ETSU without football. Whatever the cost, it's a worthy endeavor, and the "infrastructure" will clearly be better in the Southern than the A-Sun conference.

Infrastructure is things that are necessary for an organization to function. For the USA that would be roads, bridges an electrical system. For a university sports program it would be arenas, practice facilities, stadiums, fields. I provided links to the definitions above.

So, infrastructure has improved because we have better facilities now than before when we had football. Also the campus improvements have made the campus look better, it no longer looks as much like a community college. Granted the campus infrastructure doesn't help the athletic programs much if at all, but it certainly looks better.

I guess the money could have gone to keep an underfunded losing football team in bread an water for a year or two.

So you are suggesting the only reason we have the campus improvements is because we dropped football?

We do NOT have better facilities. Memorial Center has had a dramatic demise because they don't have football.

Let's recall- with no football, we need a new homecoming event. It is determined it will be a Ludicris concert!

And when Pete Peterson says that he won't allow Ludicris to play Freedom Hall, well, then, we'll put him up here at Memorial Center, the fact it will forever make the venue have 6,000 empty seats every after be damned!

We have a soccer field that wouldn't have been necessary if ETSU had just kept football and stayed in the SoCon, and it still, three years later, doesn't have lights. We have a softball field that is, honestly, unnecessary in the scheme of things and because of the love affair the athletic department had with it, it meant Milligan and not ETSU got the USA Olympic Team to play them.

Is it good for "infrastructure" that we tore down a baseball park named after a great ETSU athlete whose nephew is currently a professor at ETSU?

Is the A-Sun better for "infrastructure" than the SoCon?

The softball field is not on campus. A baseball park is the most attractive of all athletic structures- that's why they call them "Park" or "Field" and not "Stadium."

What campus improvements have taken place? The new soccer field? This has significantly improved the look of campus?

You are on the ropes, my friend.

Lastly, is it good for infrastructure to replace one sport that draws 5,000 fans a game and sports a 48-44 record during its final seasons for one that draws 200 fans and 6-9-3 is considered a fantastic season by its lone fan on this board, despite the recruiting budget, coach, and facilities built that were designed for the aforementioned 6-9-3 program to succeed?

Your arguements are simply and completely wrong and seem to be based on your fandom for the University of Memphis and making excuses for why the Tigers have a championship caliber basketball team but a .500 football program.

You could be honest about it and say it's because the championship basketball team cheats, but, hey, gotta support the Tigers at all costs, right?

Hey Pitt: I never said they had a 'fantastic season' you idiot. That's a nice lie you tell there, however. I congratulated them for a win. ONE WIN. In the ASun tournament. They are in their 2nd year of existence.

Arguement was misspelled. It's spelled: Argument. Look it up.

The fire code is the fire code, it's state law. I know, we should ignore it. After all, it's Tennessee, where state laws don't matter since we're all so uncivilized.

By the way: Men's basketball, I believe is 5-2 vs. SoCon teams the last 3 years, which includes a win over last year's tournament champ (UTC) and this year's preseason pick to win their league (Coll of Charleston). And women's b-ball picked off the preseason pick of the SoCon this year by what? 25? I'm so shocked you have failed to mention this, or post on any of the game threads, or congratulate the team for the nice win over Arkansas. Or is that how you are teaching us all how to be a great fan?

Well, thanks for identifying yourself Go.

For the record, I'm getting to my comments about the Arkansas game. I was away to a school reunion in Shippensburg, Pa. this weekend.

I realize this makes me a hack for not blowing off people I truly love that I hadn't seen in 23 years for the sake of watching a November college basketball game, but, hey, I have my priorities.

But thanks for your prejudgement. Shows your character.

And for the record, you may or may not have said 6-9-3 was a fantastic season. But you sure as anything tried to push it down our throats as something of a fantastic accomplishment, and you're still doing that with "it was only their second year! It was only their second year!"

Florida Gulf Coast has been Division I soccer for, what, two or three years? Yet they had a winning record, finished higher in the A-Sun standings this year, and most assuredly do not have the facilities or a men's soccer coach with the resume that ETSU has.

So not impressed with men's soccer this year. Not at all. Nobody with any knowledge of sports should be.

It is only their 2nd year. How long has FGCU had a soccer team, period? Don't you know that, sports journalist?

If it's all about facilities, then why haven't the Vols won more than what, two national titles in football?

I didn't push that down anyone's throats, I said then and said now it's about getting you riled & congratulating them for their win in the tourney. It's fun... sometimes. And sometimes it just gets old, because it's the same tired old arguments (or is it arguements?).

Remember, I'm pro-football. I just don't support it via non-support of ETSU athletics.

"Getting to your comments...." Can't wait to see how you disparage that win.

Actually, it's their third year. They were club in 2007.

And I would say that rising from Division II doesn't give Gulf Coast any significant advantage, if any advantage at all, especially since they don't have the greatest soccer stadium of all time.

I would also point out that while the Bucs' coach came from Clemson, FGCU's came from a non-scholarship program at Pennsylvania. Before that he was the head coach at St. Bonaventure, which probably isn't something to laugh at but also hasn't really produced a coach that went on to national prominence since John McGraw.

Neyland Stadium and the Vols' facilities are good, but not necessarily unique. Are the football facilities in Knoxville significantly better than those in their own conference- nay- dare I say DIVISION?

Are they truly leaps and bounds superior to those that Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina have (let alone Alabama, Auburn, LSU, or Arkansas)?

But I would say that facilities are the reason why the SEC is the best football conference. You can't say it's geography. Of the top states for producing pro football players, Florida is the only SEC state among the top four (the others being California, Texas, and Ohio).

Besides, if facilities WEREN'T important, then why is ETSU building new ones (albeit for the wrong sports)?

I'm hardly riled. I am, however, making fun of you and proving your lack of knowledge.

(11-30-2009 05:13 PM)ETSUfan1 Wrote:  So you are suggesting the only reason we have the campus improvements is because we dropped football?

I think it is a factor. The money required to prop up football had to come from the general fund, where else could it come from? The basketball program was/isn't generating the money to prop them up. So I would guess some of the minor improvements are due to the lack of football. Major capital expenditures for construction would have come from a different fund account. I have no inside knowledge of this.

(11-30-2009 08:41 PM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  We do NOT have better facilities. Memorial Center has had a dramatic demise because they don't have football.

Let's recall- with no football, we need a new homecoming event. It is determined it will be a Ludicris concert!

And when Pete Peterson says that he won't allow Ludicris to play Freedom Hall, well, then, we'll put him up here at Memorial Center, the fact it will forever make the venue have 6,000 empty seats every after be damned!

Seeing as how I think the Memorial Center should be torn down, these comments fall on deaf ears. Of course the school doesn't have the money to tear it down and build a real basketball arena, but Rome wasn't built in a day.

(11-30-2009 08:41 PM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  We have a soccer field that wouldn't have been necessary if ETSU had just kept football and stayed in the SoCon, and it still, three years later, doesn't have lights. We have a softball field that is, honestly, unnecessary in the scheme of things and because of the love affair the athletic department had with it, it meant Milligan and not ETSU got the USA Olympic Team to play them.

Is it good for "infrastructure" that we tore down a baseball park named after a great ETSU athlete whose nephew is currently a professor at ETSU?

But the key here is that we have them and they will be here for years to come. Compared to spending money on propping up a football team for a year or so, and not having any facilities to show for it.

(11-30-2009 08:41 PM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  Is the A-Sun better for "infrastructure" than the SoCon?

The softball field is not on campus. A baseball park is the most attractive of all athletic structures- that's why they call them "Park" or "Field" and not "Stadium."

What campus improvements have taken place? The new soccer field? This has significantly improved the look of campus?

Apparently it is better for infrastructure, as permanent structures have and are being built.

When I was referring to campus improvements I wasn't talking about sporting venues. I was talking about the general upgrade that has taken place over the last few years. The campus just looks better kept. It is beginning to not look like a dreary run down community college. I'm not talking about the major building projects per se, just some minor improvements and general upkeep.

(11-30-2009 08:41 PM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  You are on the ropes, my friend.

Hardly

(11-30-2009 08:41 PM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  Lastly, is it good for infrastructure to replace one sport that draws 5,000 fans a game and sports a 48-44 record during its final seasons for one that draws 200 fans and 6-9-3 is considered a fantastic season by its lone fan on this board, despite the recruiting budget, coach, and facilities built that were designed for the aforementioned 6-9-3 program to succeed?

Still having trouble with the definition for infrastructure? Should I repost the links to the definitions?

Apparently it has been good for infrastructure as new structures are being built. 5K for a college football game in the south is a joke. I think you could get that for a dead rabbit toss contest. It wasn't worth the money lost to keep it. Soccer will never lose what football did, never going to happen. I'm not a soccer fan, but I hope they do well.

(11-30-2009 08:41 PM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  Your arguements are simply and completely wrong and seem to be based on your fandom for the University of Memphis and making excuses for why the Tigers have a championship caliber basketball team but a .500 football program.

You could be honest about it and say it's because the championship basketball team cheats, but, hey, gotta support the Tigers at all costs, right?

Why do you keep bringing the U of M up all of the time. They have been paying a head football coach almost a million a year and have the third highest coaches salaries in CUSA and they were a long way from being .500 this year or the last several years. But like I said I'm all for them having football as long as basketball can continue to prop it up.

YOU bring up Memphis, and evidently, don't know the record of the football team for the immediate years before this season.

I bring up the Pitt Panthers all the time, for crying out loud!

You must be a Shakespeare fan. Is the moon the sun when you say so?

As you wish.

ETSU is debt servicing and selling bonds to get these things done, i.e. putting it on the backs of the students for YEARS TO COME. Does it sound familiar? Are you one of these people that agreed with the porkulus package that the moron in D.C. got approved? Stanton has taxed GENERATIONS OF STUDENTS to pay for half assed built, worthless sports facilities that they couldn't even finish. IF the mafia had pulled the crap that the ETSU administration has been pulling with the new dorms, CPA, and various other new places they'd be hanging out in such places as Leavenworth, Riker's Island or any other beautiful gray bar hotels.
The short of it is under your way of thinking towards football there would be NO SPORTS AT ALL in colleges, at all, period.

(12-01-2009 08:55 PM)PittsburghBucs Wrote:  YOU bring up Memphis, and evidently, don't know the record of the football team for the immediate years before this season.

I bring up the Pitt Panthers all the time, for crying out loud!

You must be a Shakespeare fan. Is the moon the sun when you say so?

As you wish.

You must be an ETSU football fan, where a reality distortion field rules the day. Either that or you can't add or subtact, no maybe you just think money along with football fans grow on trees. I know maybe you think you can poop money. If you can poop money maybe you should put that talent to good use.

(12-02-2009 04:33 PM)Buccaneerlover Wrote:  ETSU is debt servicing and selling bonds to get these things done, i.e. putting it on the backs of the students for YEARS TO COME. Does it sound familiar? Are you one of these people that agreed with the porkulus package that the moron in D.C. got approved? Stanton has taxed GENERATIONS OF STUDENTS to pay for half assed built, worthless sports facilities that they couldn't even finish. IF the mafia had pulled the crap that the ETSU administration has been pulling with the new dorms, CPA, and various other new places they'd be hanging out in such places as Leavenworth, Riker's Island or any other beautiful gray bar hotels.
The short of it is under your way of thinking towards football there would be NO SPORTS AT ALL in colleges, at all, period.

Better to put fixed assets (infrastructure) on the backs of students for items that will be around for years, than put bread and water on the backs of students for something that is gone after one year AND has to be continually replaced (ie. bottomless pit).

Reality is that you are the one who brings up Memphis football.