(09-09-2012 04:07 PM)Buc66 Wrote:  435 packed the place for some Saturday night futbol at ETSU on 9/8. It must have been one spectacular day on the ETSU campus building up to that one. Bet that place was rocking.

435? that is like one fan for everyone of those GAMEDAY windsocks they got all over campus. Maybe, think there are a few more windsocks then that.

Embarrassing. The only word for it. If they had any integrity whatsoever they would at least put "match day" on the stupid signs. They are continuing to try and cover up that we are the only school in the state without football on campus by spending all the money on soccer. It just will not be accepted by us and we need need a change of direction very soon. The alumni are restless.

(09-09-2012 06:43 PM)RodShaw2 Wrote:  

(09-09-2012 04:07 PM)Buc66 Wrote:  435 packed the place for some Saturday night futbol at ETSU on 9/8. It must have been one spectacular day on the ETSU campus building up to that one. Bet that place was rocking.

435? that is like one fan for everyone of those GAMEDAY windsocks they got all over campus. Maybe, think there are a few more windsocks then that.

Seriously, were the windsocks for this soccer thing on Saturday night? Heck, if I had of known that, I would have driven 250 miles for that.

A proposal to create an independent conference for non-scholarship football teams composed of Atlantic Sun member schools (and current Pioneer Football League schools) is now in the beginning stages.

Gumbart said ETSU, Campbell, Jacksonville, Mercer and Kennesaw State are among the schools that would be considered if such a conference was formed.

“It’s something that we have on our radar screen,” Gumbart said. “We will continue to monitor the number of schools that are interested in or are currently participating in non-scholarship football. So, I think it’s fair to say that we’ll continue to be sensitive to that and try to be able to act when and if the circumstances dictate that we could help meet our memberships’ needs with a new sport.”



Copied from a 2008 article: http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.c...-ne?blog=2

(09-09-2012 08:02 PM)bucfan81 Wrote:  Embarrassing. The only word for it. If they had any integrity whatsoever they would at least put "match day" on the stupid signs. They are continuing to try and cover up that we are the only school in the state without football on campus by spending all the money on soccer. It just will not be accepted by us and we need need a change of direction very soon. The alumni are restless.

Let's see how unpopular a post I can make: If ETSU didn't put up the "windsocks" (or whatever they're called), I bet about the same number of people here would be saying things like, "ETSU doesn't even promote their minor sports." And, if ETSU put "Match Day" on them, some here would say things like, "What a waste to have two sets of those things." "Embarrassing?" "Integrity?" Really????

In 2001, Austin Peay downgraded their football program to non-scholarship. They built their program back up to FCS in 2007. All the while, they played in the old Governor's Stadium (a.k.a. Municipal Stadium--built in 1946) which they purchased from the city of Clarksville in 1970. After this season, they are going to demo, then rebuild much of the old stadium, to be ready by 2014.

Will ETSU be so wise as to follow a similar time line when rebuilding its football program? Or, will it choose to put the cart before the horse and delay playing football for many, many more years because they "need" a new stadium to re-start the program?

Austin Peay to build new football stadium
http://origin.news10.net/sports/college/...ll-stadium

(09-09-2012 10:47 PM)WingedWarrior Wrote:  Let's see how unpopular a post I can make: If ETSU didn't put up the "windsocks" (or whatever they're called), I bet about the same number of people here would be saying things like,

I am 100% certain that you are wrong, very few people on this board give a damn about soccer, so I am sure most could care less if they promoted it. I do wonder how many man hours it takes to put all those things up (and take them down) assuming since everyday isn't gameday they do take them down. It just struck me, it was a Saturday in football season, when I see banners proclaiming GAMEDAY that is what I think of, not soccer that is for sure. But yeah ETSU was right it was GAMEDAY, everywhere in Tennessee BUT ETSU.

(09-10-2012 12:45 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote:  

(09-09-2012 10:47 PM)WingedWarrior Wrote:  Let's see how unpopular a post I can make: If ETSU didn't put up the "windsocks" (or whatever they're called), I bet about the same number of people here would be saying things like,

I am 100% certain that you are wrong, very few people on this board give a damn about soccer, so I am sure most could care less if they promoted it. I do wonder how many man hours it takes to put all those things up (and take them down) assuming since everyday isn't gameday they do take them down. It just struck me, it was a Saturday in football season, when I see banners proclaiming GAMEDAY that is what I think of, not soccer that is for sure. But yeah ETSU was right it was GAMEDAY, everywhere in Tennessee BUT ETSU.

No, I'm not saying lots of people (or even anyone) here likes soccer. I'm just saying it would be another "reason" to criticize. Sometimes I think the URL is all wrong and should be something like http://www.ihateeverythingetsudoes.com

(09-10-2012 04:09 AM)WingedWarrior Wrote:  [

No, I'm not saying lots of people (or even anyone) here likes soccer. I'm just saying it would be another "reason" to criticize. Sometimes I think the URL is all wrong and should be something like http://www.ihateeverythingetsudoes.com

I know what you were saying and I was saying no you would be wrong.
Just were just making a stupid post trying to stir the pot, Hell you even said as much. I think on the internet it is called "trolling".Same as this post, you are just trying to get a rise out of people.
So here you go I rose to the bait. Stupid posts on your part. Happy?

(09-10-2012 04:50 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote:  

(09-10-2012 04:09 AM)WingedWarrior Wrote:  [

No, I'm not saying lots of people (or even anyone) here likes soccer. I'm just saying it would be another "reason" to criticize. Sometimes I think the URL is all wrong and should be something like http://www.ihateeverythingetsudoes.com

I know what you were saying and I was saying no you would be wrong.
Just were just making a stupid post trying to stir the pot, Hell you even said as much. I think on the internet it is called "trolling".Same as this post, you are just trying to get a rise out of people.
So here you go I rose to the bait. Stupid posts on your part. Happy?

Not trying to stir the pot so much as taking an alternate position and (perhaps poorly) articulating a different perspective. Heaven forbid there might be more than one way to legitimately look at something.

(09-10-2012 05:23 AM)WingedWarrior Wrote:  Not trying to stir the pot so much as taking an alternate position and (perhaps poorly) artulating a different perspective. Heaven forbid there might be more than one way to legitimately look at something.

WHen you start a post with

"Let's see how unpopular a post I can make"

That is trying to stir the pot, that is trolling.

(09-10-2012 06:20 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote:  

(09-10-2012 05:23 AM)WingedWarrior Wrote:  Not trying to stir the pot so much as taking an alternate position and (perhaps poorly) articulating a different perspective. Heaven forbid there might be more than one way to legitimately look at something.

WHen you start a post with

"Let's see how unpopular a post I can make"

That is trying to stir the pot, that is trolling.

No, you can question my intent, but you can't determine it. My (admittedly) poorly worded intro was simply intended as an acknowledgment that my message would not likely meet with much agreement. Maybe I'm not up on my netiquette, but I'm not sure trying to "stir the pot" as in posting a message of a different perspective is necessarily "trolling." Hmmm, talking about towing the "party line..." Heaven forbid we step out of it here. Of course I agreed with you about soccer's popularity, or lack thereof.

(09-09-2012 11:38 PM)BucSinceTheSixties Wrote:  In 2001, Austin Peay downgraded their football program to non-scholarship. They built their program back up to FCS in 2007. All the while, they played in the old Governor's Stadium (a.k.a. Municipal Stadium--built in 1946) which they purchased from the city of Clarksville in 1970. After this season, they are going to demo, then rebuild much of the old stadium, to be ready by 2014.

Will ETSU be so wise as to follow a similar time line when rebuilding its football program? Or, will it choose to put the cart before the horse and delay playing football for many, many more years because they "need" a new stadium to re-start the program?

Austin Peay to build new football stadium
http://origin.news10.net/sports/college/...ll-stadium

This is most revealing. When ETSU dropped football, Austin Peay, UT-Martin, and Western Carolina, as examples, would surely follow ETSU and help launch the movement that would see many I-AA programs going out of business. Instead, the others said no thanks ETSU, you can take that idea and shove it. Now Austin Peay rubs a little more salt into the wound called the Stanton-Mullins athletic model by continuing to show the stupidity of ETSU athletics. Austin Peay can do this and ETSU cannot? As president of ETSU, I would be beginning to feel some humiliation at this point.

(09-09-2012 10:47 PM)WingedWarrior Wrote:  

(09-09-2012 08:02 PM)bucfan81 Wrote:  Embarrassing. The only word for it. If they had any integrity whatsoever they would at least put "match day" on the stupid signs. They are continuing to try and cover up that we are the only school in the state without football on campus by spending all the money on soccer. It just will not be accepted by us and we need need a change of direction very soon. The alumni are restless.

Let's see how unpopular a post I can make: If ETSU didn't put up the "windsocks" (or whatever they're called), I bet about the same number of people here would be saying things like, "ETSU doesn't even promote their minor sports." And, if ETSU put "Match Day" on them, some here would say things like, "What a waste to have two sets of those things." "Embarrassing?" "Integrity?" Really????

Winged, your post are always well taken here and well-respected. But our post are of course using a great deal of sarcasm to get our points across about the mis-manangement of our athletics. They are actively attempting to replace real football with soccer and it is not and will never be accepted as such. The stupid signs are just their most obvious attempt to do that. All other schools in Tennessee have GameDay that means football on their campus and that is what we want back on our campus pure and simple. Then having soccer as an additional sport for the few hundred people who want to watch it is fine. But it is not and never will be a replacement for football on the campus of ETSU or any other state university in Tennessee. When football comes back on our campus I will then go to the soccer matches and watch even though I do not like watching soccer. But first things first: Football will never be replace by soccer at ETSU!

(09-10-2012 10:40 AM)bucfan81 Wrote:  Football will never be replace by soccer at ETSU!

Agreed

(09-10-2012 10:52 AM)WingedWarrior Wrote:  

(09-10-2012 10:40 AM)bucfan81 Wrote:  Football will never be replace by soccer at ETSU!

Agreed

And if the idiots in the athletic department think they're ever going to replace football with soccer, then they've verified that they're even more stupid than stupid. I'm sure they would put up an argument that 410 soccer fans is a much better example of "winning the right way" than 6,000 football fans.

Copied from: http://thematadorsports.com/blog/?p=11399

Campuses Adding Football Teams
August 10, 2012

College football is right around the corner and as fan support grows so does the number of teams fielded. This season, there will be five new institutions fielding college football teams (Bluefield College, Lindenwood University-Belleville, Misericordia University, Point University, and Wayland Baptist University). The expansion does not stop here. It is anticipated that 17 more institutions will launch teams between 2013-2015. Since 2008, 28 new football teams have sprung from Dordt College in Sioux City, Iowa to Presentation College in Aberdeen, South Dakota.

Football popularity is at an all time high and so is the amount of money to be made. Institutions who lack a team see the potential value in investing in a football program. With a successful program comes benefits to include raising the school’s profile, attracting better students and more money, but most of all, creating visibility. This was evident when the University of Texas at San Antonio launched its program last season which averaged 35,521 attendees per game despite a 4-6 record. This exposure had a positive impact on the school increasing donations and applications. Additionally, the RoadRunners saw its annual fund drive steadily grow. Even if the program was to not turn a financial profit, the mere fact of having a football team played a significant role in increased exposure and provided a certain buzz on campus.

This is not to say football will always generate a huge cash flow or positively impact the school. In 2009, Northeastern University dropped its football program because of financial reasons. The university could no longer justify spending the money on a failing program. At the end of the day though, an institution’s return is directly associated with its investment. And programs that do not invest on the best coaches, facilities, and players will suffer at the hands of programs that do.

To date, there are 640 football teams playing in the NCAA, 92 playing in the NAIA and 68 playing in the NJCAA. If history is any indication, and if the RoadRunners are an example, there is an opportunity to cash in on the slice of that football pie.

Schools to launch programs from 2013-2015

•Alderson-Broaddus College (2013)
•Berry College (2013)
•Florida Tech (2013)
•Hendrix College (2013)
•Mercer University (2013)
•Oklahoma Baptist University (2013)
•Reinhardt University (2013)
•Southwestern University (2013)
•Stetson University (2013)
•University of North Carolina at Charlotte (2013)
•Warner University (TBD)
•College of Idaho (2014)
•George Fox University (2014)
•Houston Baptist University (2014)
•Kennesaw State University (2014)
•Finlandia University (TBD)
•University of New Orleans (TBD)

(09-14-2012 12:15 AM)BucSinceTheSixties Wrote:  Copied from: http://thematadorsports.com/blog/?p=11399

Campuses Adding Football Teams
August 10, 2012

College football is right around the corner and as fan support grows so does the number of teams fielded. This season, there will be five new institutions fielding college football teams (Bluefield College, Lindenwood University-Belleville, Misericordia University, Point University, and Wayland Baptist University). The expansion does not stop here. It is anticipated that 17 more institutions will launch teams between 2013-2015. Since 2008, 28 new football teams have sprung from Dordt College in Sioux City, Iowa to Presentation College in Aberdeen, South Dakota.

Football popularity is at an all time high and so is the amount of money to be made. Institutions who lack a team see the potential value in investing in a football program. With a successful program comes benefits to include raising the school’s profile, attracting better students and more money, but most of all, creating visibility. This was evident when the University of Texas at San Antonio launched its program last season which averaged 35,521 attendees per game despite a 4-6 record. This exposure had a positive impact on the school increasing donations and applications. Additionally, the RoadRunners saw its annual fund drive steadily grow. Even if the program was to not turn a financial profit, the mere fact of having a football team played a significant role in increased exposure and provided a certain buzz on campus.

This is not to say football will always generate a huge cash flow or positively impact the school. In 2009, Northeastern University dropped its football program because of financial reasons. The university could no longer justify spending the money on a failing program. At the end of the day though, an institution’s return is directly associated with its investment. And programs that do not invest on the best coaches, facilities, and players will suffer at the hands of programs that do.

To date, there are 640 football teams playing in the NCAA, 92 playing in the NAIA and 68 playing in the NJCAA. If history is any indication, and if the RoadRunners are an example, there is an opportunity to cash in on the slice of that football pie.

Schools to launch programs from 2013-2015

•Alderson-Broaddus College (2013)
•Berry College (2013)
•Florida Tech (2013)
•Hendrix College (2013)
•Mercer University (2013)
•Oklahoma Baptist University (2013)
•Reinhardt University (2013)
•Southwestern University (2013)
•Stetson University (2013)
•University of North Carolina at Charlotte (2013)
•Warner University (TBD)
•College of Idaho (2014)
•George Fox University (2014)
•Houston Baptist University (2014)
•Kennesaw State University (2014)
•Finlandia University (TBD)
•University of New Orleans (TBD)

We're on the leading edge of a movement that will see large numbers of college football programs going out of business.

Paul Stanton
President, East Tennessee State University
2003

(09-14-2012 12:15 AM)BucSinceTheSixties Wrote:  Copied from: http://thematadorsports.com/blog/?p=11399

Campuses Adding Football Teams
August 10, 2012

College football is right around the corner and as fan support grows so does the number of teams fielded. This season, there will be five new institutions fielding college football teams (Bluefield College, Lindenwood University-Belleville, Misericordia University, Point University, and Wayland Baptist University). The expansion does not stop here. It is anticipated that 17 more institutions will launch teams between 2013-2015. Since 2008, 28 new football teams have sprung from Dordt College in Sioux City, Iowa to Presentation College in Aberdeen, South Dakota.

Football popularity is at an all time high and so is the amount of money to be made. Institutions who lack a team see the potential value in investing in a football program. With a successful program comes benefits to include raising the school’s profile, attracting better students and more money, but most of all, creating visibility. This was evident when the University of Texas at San Antonio launched its program last season which averaged 35,521 attendees per game despite a 4-6 record. This exposure had a positive impact on the school increasing donations and applications. Additionally, the RoadRunners saw its annual fund drive steadily grow. Even if the program was to not turn a financial profit, the mere fact of having a football team played a significant role in increased exposure and provided a certain buzz on campus.

This is not to say football will always generate a huge cash flow or positively impact the school. In 2009, Northeastern University dropped its football program because of financial reasons. The university could no longer justify spending the money on a failing program. At the end of the day though, an institution’s return is directly associated with its investment. And programs that do not invest on the best coaches, facilities, and players will suffer at the hands of programs that do.

To date, there are 640 football teams playing in the NCAA, 92 playing in the NAIA and 68 playing in the NJCAA. If history is any indication, and if the RoadRunners are an example, there is an opportunity to cash in on the slice of that football pie.

Schools to launch programs from 2013-2015

•Alderson-Broaddus College (2013)
•Berry College (2013)
•Florida Tech (2013)
•Hendrix College (2013)
•Mercer University (2013)
•Oklahoma Baptist University (2013)
•Reinhardt University (2013)
•Southwestern University (2013)
•Stetson University (2013)
•University of North Carolina at Charlotte (2013)
•Warner University (TBD)
•College of Idaho (2014)
•George Fox University (2014)
•Houston Baptist University (2014)
•Kennesaw State University (2014)
•Finlandia University (TBD)
•University of New Orleans (TBD)

You should have highlighted the part about the return being equal to the investment as well. That is why the Dome is an unacceptable facility to play in and additional money has to be raised if football will provide a positive benefit. Simply having a team isnt good enough.

If the Dome is unacceptable for football, and the next major facility for athletics is a basketball arena (convocation center), then the return of football is next to impossible within the next 10 to 20 years. It seems that far too many people are constantly searching for reasons not to bring the program back, with the Dome at the top of their list. Let's get real, with the present athletic department set-up, the present can't do attitude, the depressed mood regarding athletics at ETSU, and the failure of the BFFF to make any difference these past nine years, the school will be fortunate to even build a convocation center within the next 10 to 20 years. At this time in 2012, the entire athletic situation looks rather dismal. I am greatly discouraged at this juncture and cannot see a positive way forward. ETSU athletics simply looks snake bitten. Of course my views on this are completely irrelevant unless I have $25 million to interject into the discussion.

If someone can refute my assessment here, please bring on the facts and shoot me down.