(06-02-2012 12:01 AM)theATLDawg Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 11:52 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(05-30-2012 01:42 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  It's very hard to tell. ULL didn't play anyone ranked where Tech finished (#39). They lost to #3 by 27 points and lost to #60 by 8 points.

Tech played several teams ranked around where ULL finished (#89), with mixed results:

69. Utah St (won by 7)
87. Hawaii (lost by 18)
95. SJ State (won by 10)
96. Fresno St (won by 20)

ULL could have beaten Tech, but they would have needed to play good and Tech not so good. I don't think it is fair to say they definitely would have won.

Those are sagarin rankings.....ULL was ranked higher than LT in 4 of the 6 computer rankings that comprise the BCS formula and was ranked quite a bit higher in the human polls....The only two computer rankings that ranked LT higher were the two that include FCS teams with FBS teams. ULL was ranked higher in all 4 computer rankings that do not include FCS teams. Once again, the Sagarin rating is only 1/6 of the computer ranking portion of the BCS rankings formula. Overall, last year ASU and ULL were ranked quite a bit higher in the final BCS rankings than LT. LT's final ranking was similar to FIU's, which placed 4th in the Sun Belt.

dude that is such bullshite and you know it.

You are correct. That BMcKetchup troll continues to make up untrue BS about Tech and the WAC. He never has any source that can back him up.

Here are last year's "BCS" rankings broken down by each component:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/bcs

Tech ranked higher than ULL in every single ranking.

I put "BCS" in quotes because the official BCS rankings only rank 1-25.

(06-01-2012 08:59 PM)winston70 Wrote:  What is ULL's all time record against Tech in Men's BB and Baseball? I know we have the edge in football but curious about the other 2 sports.

Football:
LaTech leads ULL, 46-33-6

Men's Basketball:
LaTech leads ULL, 86-71

Women's Basketball:
LaTech leads ULL, 38-0

Baseball:
ULL leads LaTech, 76-62 (record incomplete)
Our media guide only goes back to 1972, and I couldn't find ULL's media guide.

Also, if anyone is interested to know which ranking system is most accurate, the research has been done and Sagarin is the best:

Sagarin - 73.39%
Colley - 71.64%
Billingsley - 70.47%
Massey - 70.47%
Anderson-Hester - 70.18%
Wolfe - 69.71%

http://www.barkingcarnival.com/2011/12/1...-be-rated/

(06-02-2012 12:09 AM)Dawg06 Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 12:01 AM)theATLDawg Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 11:52 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(05-30-2012 01:42 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  It's very hard to tell. ULL didn't play anyone ranked where Tech finished (#39). They lost to #3 by 27 points and lost to #60 by 8 points.

Tech played several teams ranked around where ULL finished (#89), with mixed results:

69. Utah St (won by 7)
87. Hawaii (lost by 18)
95. SJ State (won by 10)
96. Fresno St (won by 20)

ULL could have beaten Tech, but they would have needed to play good and Tech not so good. I don't think it is fair to say they definitely would have won.

Those are sagarin rankings.....ULL was ranked higher than LT in 4 of the 6 computer rankings that comprise the BCS formula and was ranked quite a bit higher in the human polls....The only two computer rankings that ranked LT higher were the two that include FCS teams with FBS teams. ULL was ranked higher in all 4 computer rankings that do not include FCS teams. Once again, the Sagarin rating is only 1/6 of the computer ranking portion of the BCS rankings formula. Overall, last year ASU and ULL were ranked quite a bit higher in the final BCS rankings than LT. LT's final ranking was similar to FIU's, which placed 4th in the Sun Belt.

dude that is such bullshite and you know it.

You are correct. That BMcKetchup troll continues to make up untrue BS about Tech and the WAC. He never has any source that can back him up.

Here are last year's "BCS" rankings broken down by each component:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/bcs

Tech ranked higher than ULL in every single ranking.

I put "BCS" in quotes because the official BCS rankings only rank 1-25.

Those aren't the final standings. If they are then LSU won the national championship...

In the final BCS rankings:

Billingsly - ULL - #60, LT - #66

Anderson & Hester - ULL - #49, LT - #58

Colley Matrix - ULL - #43, LT - #53

Massey (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT - #45, ULL #103

Wolfe - ULL - #44, LT #51

Sagarin (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT #48, ULL - #82

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4765872

ULL also received a vote in the final coaches poll where LT did not.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

(06-02-2012 08:04 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  In the final BCS rankings:

Billingsly - ULL - #60, LT - #66

Anderson & Hester - ULL - #49, LT - #58

Colley Matrix - ULL - #43, LT - #53

Massey (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT - #45, ULL #103

Wolfe - ULL - #44, LT #51

Sagarin (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT #48, ULL - #82

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4765872

ULL also received a vote in the final coaches poll where LT did not.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

Tech still averages out higher than ULL at #53.6 to #65.5

(06-02-2012 08:32 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 08:04 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  In the final BCS rankings:

Billingsly - ULL - #60, LT - #66

Anderson & Hester - ULL - #49, LT - #58

Colley Matrix - ULL - #43, LT - #53

Massey (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT - #45, ULL #103

Wolfe - ULL - #44, LT #51

Sagarin (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT #48, ULL - #82

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4765872

ULL also received a vote in the final coaches poll where LT did not.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

Tech still averages out higher than ULL at #53.6 to #65.5

Except that the highest and lowest of the 6 computer rankings are dropped and ULL was ranked higher in the human polls which is 2/3 of the formula.

(06-02-2012 08:43 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 08:32 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 08:04 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  In the final BCS rankings:

Billingsly - ULL - #60, LT - #66

Anderson & Hester - ULL - #49, LT - #58

Colley Matrix - ULL - #43, LT - #53

Massey (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT - #45, ULL #103

Wolfe - ULL - #44, LT #51

Sagarin (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT #48, ULL - #82

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4765872

ULL also received a vote in the final coaches poll where LT did not.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

Tech still averages out higher than ULL at #53.6 to #65.5

Except that the highest and lowest of the 6 computer rankings are dropped and ULL was ranked higher in the human polls which is 2/3 of the formula.

So how do we know where they finished?

WOW, do we really have latex fans here? On this board?? Why?

Bare in mind in one year we have reached your level in football. 2012 we surpass you.

It really pisses me off when I think of how much time we wasted in the Authement regime.

Z

(06-02-2012 08:47 AM)zeebart21 Wrote:  WOW, do we really have latex fans here? On this board?? Why?

Bare in mind in one year we have reached your level in football. 2012 we surpass you.

It really pisses me off when I think of how much time we wasted in the Authement regime.

Z

I like visiting sites where Tech football is discussed.

We were both at a higher level than usual last year and I know Tech will maintain or surpass that level next year. 2013 will be interesting though.

(06-02-2012 08:43 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 08:32 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 08:04 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  In the final BCS rankings:

Billingsly - ULL - #60, LT - #66

Anderson & Hester - ULL - #49, LT - #58

Colley Matrix - ULL - #43, LT - #53

Massey (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT - #45, ULL #103

Wolfe - ULL - #44, LT #51

Sagarin (ranks FCS with FBS) - LT #48, ULL - #82

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4765872

ULL also received a vote in the final coaches poll where LT did not.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

Tech still averages out higher than ULL at #53.6 to #65.5

Except that the highest and lowest of the 6 computer rankings are dropped and ULL was ranked higher in the human polls which is 2/3 of the formula.

When I search for it, Dawg06's link above keeps coming up. It appears those were the final BCS rankings. Tech was ranked higher than ULL in the Harris Poll (6-0) and Tech got credit for 2 votes from the Coaches Poll and ULL didn't get any. Tech also had the higher computer rankings, but I see your point that the numbers don't match for some reason.

Let me know if you can find something more official than that.

(06-02-2012 07:38 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 12:09 AM)Dawg06 Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 12:01 AM)theATLDawg Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 11:52 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(05-30-2012 01:42 PM)T_Won1 Wrote:  It's very hard to tell. ULL didn't play anyone ranked where Tech finished (#39). They lost to #3 by 27 points and lost to #60 by 8 points.

Tech played several teams ranked around where ULL finished (#89), with mixed results:

69. Utah St (won by 7)
87. Hawaii (lost by 18)
95. SJ State (won by 10)
96. Fresno St (won by 20)

ULL could have beaten Tech, but they would have needed to play good and Tech not so good. I don't think it is fair to say they definitely would have won.

Those are sagarin rankings.....ULL was ranked higher than LT in 4 of the 6 computer rankings that comprise the BCS formula and was ranked quite a bit higher in the human polls....The only two computer rankings that ranked LT higher were the two that include FCS teams with FBS teams. ULL was ranked higher in all 4 computer rankings that do not include FCS teams. Once again, the Sagarin rating is only 1/6 of the computer ranking portion of the BCS rankings formula. Overall, last year ASU and ULL were ranked quite a bit higher in the final BCS rankings than LT. LT's final ranking was similar to FIU's, which placed 4th in the Sun Belt.

dude that is such bullshite and you know it.

You are correct. That BMcKetchup troll continues to make up untrue BS about Tech and the WAC. He never has any source that can back him up.

Here are last year's "BCS" rankings broken down by each component:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/bcs

Tech ranked higher than ULL in every single ranking.

I put "BCS" in quotes because the official BCS rankings only rank 1-25.

Those aren't the final standings. If they are then LSU won the national championship...

The BCS rankings stop at the end of the regular season. Postseason games are not considered by the BCS.

(06-02-2012 10:05 AM)Dawg06 Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 07:38 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 12:09 AM)Dawg06 Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 12:01 AM)theATLDawg Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 11:52 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  Those are sagarin rankings.....ULL was ranked higher than LT in 4 of the 6 computer rankings that comprise the BCS formula and was ranked quite a bit higher in the human polls....The only two computer rankings that ranked LT higher were the two that include FCS teams with FBS teams. ULL was ranked higher in all 4 computer rankings that do not include FCS teams. Once again, the Sagarin rating is only 1/6 of the computer ranking portion of the BCS rankings formula. Overall, last year ASU and ULL were ranked quite a bit higher in the final BCS rankings than LT. LT's final ranking was similar to FIU's, which placed 4th in the Sun Belt.

dude that is such bullshite and you know it.

You are correct. That BMcKetchup troll continues to make up untrue BS about Tech and the WAC. He never has any source that can back him up.

Here are last year's "BCS" rankings broken down by each component:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/bcs

Tech ranked higher than ULL in every single ranking.

I put "BCS" in quotes because the official BCS rankings only rank 1-25.

Those aren't the final standings. If they are then LSU won the national championship...

The BCS rankings stop at the end of the regular season. Postseason games are not considered by the BCS.

There are not BCS rankings after the postseason, however, there is a final coaches poll and all 6 computer rankings update after the postseason. What I am referring to are the rankings after the postseason.

(06-02-2012 11:02 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 10:05 AM)Dawg06 Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 07:38 AM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 12:09 AM)Dawg06 Wrote:  

(06-02-2012 12:01 AM)theATLDawg Wrote:  dude that is such bullshite and you know it.

You are correct. That BMcKetchup troll continues to make up untrue BS about Tech and the WAC. He never has any source that can back him up.

Here are last year's "BCS" rankings broken down by each component:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/rankings/bcs

Tech ranked higher than ULL in every single ranking.

I put "BCS" in quotes because the official BCS rankings only rank 1-25.

Those aren't the final standings. If they are then LSU won the national championship...

The BCS rankings stop at the end of the regular season. Postseason games are not considered by the BCS.

There are not BCS rankings after the postseason, however, there is a final coaches poll and all 6 computer rankings update after the postseason. What I am referring to are the rankings after the postseason.

That is correct, but that is not what you have been posting.

1. The official BCS rankings only rank 1-25.

2. The BCS rankings do not change after the end of the regular season.

3. The BCS does not recognize the results of postseason play.

(05-29-2012 07:11 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  Louisiana has more students, right?

This is a nice article on the state of the Cajuns' program.

http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/201...dy-move-up

----------------------------------------------------

I am back, been on a "working vacation" for a month with no time for trivial matters like message boards. However, its fun and I will initially start pitching in only with factual stuff, holding personal opinions until later.

The reason why La Tech has a bigger budget is because they transfer more from the university general fund to cover their expenses than does ULL. Last Louisiana Legislative Auditor report shows Tech came up short on last years budget (income vs expenses) by $9, 238,000 and transferred that amount from school funds (taxpayer dollars) in order to get a balance. ULL lacked only $5,827,000 in generating enough funds to cover their $13,556,000 budget and transferred that amount for a balance. Thus, Tech used $3,411,000 more in taxpayer funds, the difference in Lt and Ull budget was $3,590,000 so if ULL transferred as much to cover their shortage as LT then budgets would be basically the same.

Donations to ULL was $2,041,000 compared to Tech fan donations of $2,523,000, a difference of about a half mil.

(06-03-2012 08:15 PM)eager eagle Wrote:  

(05-29-2012 07:11 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  Louisiana has more students, right?

This is a nice article on the state of the Cajuns' program.

http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/201...dy-move-up

----------------------------------------------------

I am back, been on a "working vacation" for a month with no time for trivial matters like message boards. However, its fun and I will initially start pitching in only with factual stuff, holding personal opinions until later.

The reason why La Tech has a bigger budget is because they transfer more from the university general fund to cover their expenses than does ULL. Last Louisiana Legislative Auditor report shows Tech came up short on last years budget (income vs expenses) by $9, 238,000 and transferred that amount from school funds (taxpayer dollars) in order to get a balance. ULL lacked only $5,827,000 in generating enough funds to cover their $13,556,000 budget and transferred that amount for a balance. Thus, Tech used $3,411,000 more in taxpayer funds, the difference in Lt and Ull budget was $3,590,000 so if ULL transferred as much to cover their shortage as LT then budgets would be basically the same.

Donations to ULL was $2,041,000 compared to Tech fan donations of $2,523,000, a difference of about a half mil.

Thanks. That is some subsidy.

(06-03-2012 08:15 PM)eager eagle Wrote:  

(05-29-2012 07:11 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  Louisiana has more students, right?

This is a nice article on the state of the Cajuns' program.

http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/201...dy-move-up

----------------------------------------------------

I am back, been on a "working vacation" for a month with no time for trivial matters like message boards. However, its fun and I will initially start pitching in only with factual stuff, holding personal opinions until later.

The reason why La Tech has a bigger budget is because they transfer more from the university general fund to cover their expenses than does ULL. Last Louisiana Legislative Auditor report shows Tech came up short on last years budget (income vs expenses) by $9, 238,000 and transferred that amount from school funds (taxpayer dollars) in order to get a balance. ULL lacked only $5,827,000 in generating enough funds to cover their $13,556,000 budget and transferred that amount for a balance. Thus, Tech used $3,411,000 more in taxpayer funds, the difference in Lt and Ull budget was $3,590,000 so if ULL transferred as much to cover their shortage as LT then budgets would be basically the same.

Donations to ULL was $2,041,000 compared to Tech fan donations of $2,523,000, a difference of about a half mil.

Welcome back. I didn't expect to hear from you again. You probably know that Louisiana state law only allows universities to transfer a maximum of 3% of the general funds towards athletics. Tech chooses to use all of the 3%, whereas ULL does not use the entire 3%.

(06-04-2012 06:31 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(06-03-2012 08:15 PM)eager eagle Wrote:  

(05-29-2012 07:11 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  Louisiana has more students, right?

This is a nice article on the state of the Cajuns' program.

http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/201...dy-move-up

----------------------------------------------------

I am back, been on a "working vacation" for a month with no time for trivial matters like message boards. However, its fun and I will initially start pitching in only with factual stuff, holding personal opinions until later.

The reason why La Tech has a bigger budget is because they transfer more from the university general fund to cover their expenses than does ULL. Last Louisiana Legislative Auditor report shows Tech came up short on last years budget (income vs expenses) by $9, 238,000 and transferred that amount from school funds (taxpayer dollars) in order to get a balance. ULL lacked only $5,827,000 in generating enough funds to cover their $13,556,000 budget and transferred that amount for a balance. Thus, Tech used $3,411,000 more in taxpayer funds, the difference in Lt and Ull budget was $3,590,000 so if ULL transferred as much to cover their shortage as LT then budgets would be basically the same.

Donations to ULL was $2,041,000 compared to Tech fan donations of $2,523,000, a difference of about a half mil.

Welcome back. I didn't expect to hear from you again. You probably know that Louisiana state law only allows universities to transfer a maximum of 3% of the general funds towards athletics. Tech chooses to use all of the 3%, whereas ULL does not use the entire 3%.

That is correct, I was double checking the numbers late last night, and they do fit within the three percent guidelines for both schools. The overall budget for UL is is around forty five percent larger than LTU. The overall amount of money used from the state revenues is about the same for either school with regards to athletics.

(06-04-2012 06:38 AM)CajunExpress Wrote:  

(06-04-2012 06:31 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(06-03-2012 08:15 PM)eager eagle Wrote:  

(05-29-2012 07:11 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  Louisiana has more students, right?

This is a nice article on the state of the Cajuns' program.

http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/201...dy-move-up

----------------------------------------------------

I am back, been on a "working vacation" for a month with no time for trivial matters like message boards. However, its fun and I will initially start pitching in only with factual stuff, holding personal opinions until later.

The reason why La Tech has a bigger budget is because they transfer more from the university general fund to cover their expenses than does ULL. Last Louisiana Legislative Auditor report shows Tech came up short on last years budget (income vs expenses) by $9, 238,000 and transferred that amount from school funds (taxpayer dollars) in order to get a balance. ULL lacked only $5,827,000 in generating enough funds to cover their $13,556,000 budget and transferred that amount for a balance. Thus, Tech used $3,411,000 more in taxpayer funds, the difference in Lt and Ull budget was $3,590,000 so if ULL transferred as much to cover their shortage as LT then budgets would be basically the same.

Donations to ULL was $2,041,000 compared to Tech fan donations of $2,523,000, a difference of about a half mil.

Welcome back. I didn't expect to hear from you again. You probably know that Louisiana state law only allows universities to transfer a maximum of 3% of the general funds towards athletics. Tech chooses to use all of the 3%, whereas ULL does not use the entire 3%.

That is correct, I was double checking the numbers late last night, and they do fit within the three percent guidelines for both schools. The overall budget for UL is is around forty five percent larger than LTU. The overall amount of money used from the state revenues is about the same for either school with regards to athletics.

The only differences between the 2 athletic budgets that I could see were that Tech spent more in these areas:

Scholarships: + 1.1 Million
Travel: + 500K
Facility maintenance: + 1.4 Million
Uniforms and Equipment: + 700K

* Does Tech play more sports than ULL?

(06-04-2012 07:07 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(06-04-2012 06:38 AM)CajunExpress Wrote:  

(06-04-2012 06:31 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(06-03-2012 08:15 PM)eager eagle Wrote:  

(05-29-2012 07:11 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  Louisiana has more students, right?

This is a nice article on the state of the Cajuns' program.

http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/201...dy-move-up

----------------------------------------------------

I am back, been on a "working vacation" for a month with no time for trivial matters like message boards. However, its fun and I will initially start pitching in only with factual stuff, holding personal opinions until later.

The reason why La Tech has a bigger budget is because they transfer more from the university general fund to cover their expenses than does ULL. Last Louisiana Legislative Auditor report shows Tech came up short on last years budget (income vs expenses) by $9, 238,000 and transferred that amount from school funds (taxpayer dollars) in order to get a balance. ULL lacked only $5,827,000 in generating enough funds to cover their $13,556,000 budget and transferred that amount for a balance. Thus, Tech used $3,411,000 more in taxpayer funds, the difference in Lt and Ull budget was $3,590,000 so if ULL transferred as much to cover their shortage as LT then budgets would be basically the same.

Donations to ULL was $2,041,000 compared to Tech fan donations of $2,523,000, a difference of about a half mil.

Welcome back. I didn't expect to hear from you again. You probably know that Louisiana state law only allows universities to transfer a maximum of 3% of the general funds towards athletics. Tech chooses to use all of the 3%, whereas ULL does not use the entire 3%.

That is correct, I was double checking the numbers late last night, and they do fit within the three percent guidelines for both schools. The overall budget for UL is is around forty five percent larger than LTU. The overall amount of money used from the state revenues is about the same for either school with regards to athletics.

The only differences between the 2 athletic budgets that I could see were that Tech spent more in these areas:

Scholarships: + 1.1 Million
Travel: + 500K
Facility maintenance: + 1.4 Million
Uniforms and Equipment: + 700K

* Does Tech play more sports than ULL?

According to both athletic web sites each sponsor 14 sports. I did not attempt to find out how many athletic schlorships are available.