I have kept quiet during all of this realignment stuff because I don't think it's cool to celebrate this transition on the Belt Board. It lacks class and North Texas fans needs to remember that this is a business move more than anything. I have really enjoyed the Belt and those are the only games I follow on Saturdays in the Fall. I am always rooting for the other Belt teams and will continue to do so. I hope that Belt members remember that North Texas was loyal to the conference when the WAC came calling - not once, not twice, but three times. And that was when the WAC had Boise, Fresno, Hawaii, and Nevada still in the fold. I really hope that the Belt members remember that we chose the Belt every time when the WAC came calling.

With all that said, I think that the Belt is at a crossroads. The market game is stupid. Unless you have a successful team, it won't matter what conference or city you are in. And Boise has shown that you don't have to be in a big DMA to have national audience. But Boise wasn't the first - traditionally the biggest and most successful programs are in smaller markets - Nebraska, Florida State, and Texas Tech aren't exactly in bountiful markets. Any school with the right type of commitment can succeed.

If I was the commissioner - this would be my focus. Screw the markets, look for quality. It's a lot easier to win over fans across the country and in your state with wins and upsets then it is to win over a saturated market. Appy State and Georgia Southern seem to really fit the bill for quality schools with a commitment to excellence. Yes, they are a little harder to get to - but those schools will move the needle in terms of perception more than any big market bottom feeder. The Belt s filled with smaller market teams that can build special programs - that should be the niche. The Belt should go against the current trend and search for quality, not markets.

I will end with one small thing, ULM needs to make a commitment to all f their programs, not just their football team. They are playing on a shoestring budget and putting every dime into football. What this does is force the rest of their programs to operate on Div II budgets while football gets the lion's share. They need to decide if they are going to be a true Div I school and fund all of their sports fairly - or they need to drop down to FCS. Yes, they bring a competitive team (.500) team to the Belt for football but they really bring the rest of the conference down and have an extremely poor basketball program. I hate to end on that note - but I want to see the Belt succeed and these are my honest observations. North Texas was very similar to ULM under our old administration. We had a run down stadium, a handful of passionate fans, and a dream of being better - but it wasn't until we started funding all of our programs equally that we really started to move forward. I know this is a time when people are trying to get more for less - but if you can't do something right, you shouldn't do it at all. There are other schools that are willing to spend the money and make the commitment that would make the Belt stronger, helping all the members in the process. I really hope that this is addressed. If the Belt wants to succeed - and get over the hump - they need to add quality programs, not worry about the market crap, and get a full commitment from the members that are currently in the conference. If they can't get that commitment - the Belt needs to pass legislation to expel those members (much like the Belt did to push UNO and Denver out the door).

Ok, I have said my two cents. I hope this is taken in the same spirit that I wrote it, with sincerity and with the hopes of the Belt getting to the next level.

(06-17-2012 02:42 PM)stebo Wrote:  I have kept quiet during all of this realignment stuff because I don't think it's cool to celebrate this transition on the Belt Board. It lacks class and North Texas fans needs to remember that this is a business move more than anything. I have really enjoyed the Belt and those are the only games I follow on Saturdays in the Fall. I am always rooting for the other Belt teams and will continue to do so. I hope that Belt members remember that North Texas was loyal to the conference when the WAC came calling - not once, not twice, but three times. And that was when the WAC had Boise, Fresno, Hawaii, and Nevada still in the fold. I really hope that the Belt members remember that we chose the Belt every time when the WAC came calling.

With all that said, I think that the Belt is at a crossroads. The market game is stupid. Unless you have a successful team, it won't matter what conference or city you are in. And Boise has shown that you don't have to be in a big DMA to have national audience. But Boise wasn't the first - traditionally the biggest and most successful programs are in smaller markets - Nebraska, Florida State, and Texas Tech aren't exactly in bountiful markets. Any school with the right type of commitment can succeed.

If I was the commissioner - this would be my focus. Screw the markets, look for quality. It's a lot easier to win over fans across the country and in your state with wins and upsets then it is to win over a saturated market. Appy State and Georgia Southern seem to really fit the bill for quality schools with a commitment to excellence. Yes, they are a little harder to get to - but those schools will move the needle in terms of perception more than any big market bottom feeder. The Belt s filled with smaller market teams that can build special programs - that should be the niche. The Belt should go against the current trend and search for quality, not markets.

I will end with one small thing, ULM needs to make a commitment to all f their programs, not just their football team. They are playing on a shoestring budget and putting every dime into football. What this does is force the rest of their programs to operate on Div II budgets while football gets the lion's share. They need to decide if they are going to be a true Div I school and fund all of their sports fairly - or they need to drop down to FCS. Yes, they bring a competitive team (.500) team to the Belt for football but they really bring the rest of the conference down and have an extremely poor basketball program. I hate to end on that note - but I want to see the Belt succeed and these are my honest observations. North Texas was very similar to ULM under our old administration. We had a run down stadium, a handful of passionate fans, and a dream of being better - but it wasn't until we started funding all of our programs equally that we really started to move forward. I know this is a time when people are trying to get more for less - but if you can't do something right, you shouldn't do it at all. There are other schools that are willing to spend the money and make the commitment that would make the Belt stronger, helping all the members in the process. I really hope that this is addressed. If the Belt wants to succeed - and get over the hump - they need to add quality programs, not worry about the market crap, and get a full commitment from the members that are currently in the conference. If they can't get that commitment - the Belt needs to pass legislation to expel those members (much like the Belt did to push UNO and Denver out the door).

Ok, I have said my two cents. I hope this is taken in the same spirit that I wrote it, with sincerity and with the hopes of the Belt getting to the next level.

UNT was a very good conference mate . . I have no hard feelings about you guys moving to CUSA . . I will be rooting for the Mean Green against any and all CUSA teams . . the Mean Green and stAte have been together for many years and I enjoyed having you guys in the SBC . . Go Mean Green !!

I don't see that (overall eg not just in conference, including bowl games and ooc wins) that UNT or FIU really stood out any more than MT or Troy. I have to believe that market had something to do with it. It's the strategy that Cons USA is apparently using. I don't see why we would do anything different. I think we can go for quality and market really. In the beginning we were just a hodge podge group of wanna be FBS schools. I think we have moved beyond that. Yes, Boise has done well. They are also the only game for miles and miles around and haven't really played that tough of a schedule most years, imo. Everyone wants to point to Boise as the example. Maybe Boise is the exception and not the rule? I would think so. I don't want to bring in teams that are more than an hour from a major market. I guess we can if the powers that be feel the need but I don't see it happening, or at least not happening much. IMO, UNT and FIU got into Conf USA mostly due to market. They have been as succesful as other teams in conf, even more that some, but I don't think they get in if they are another hour ourside of Dallas.

(06-17-2012 02:42 PM)stebo Wrote:  I will end with one small thing, ULM needs to make a commitment to all f their programs, not just their football team. They are playing on a shoestring budget and putting every dime into football. What this does is force the rest of their programs to operate on Div II budgets while football gets the lion's share. They need to decide if they are going to be a true Div I school and fund all of their sports fairly - or they need to drop down to FCS. Yes, they bring a competitive team (.500) team to the Belt for football but they really bring the rest of the conference down and have an extremely poor basketball program. I hate to end on that note - but I want to see the Belt succeed and these are my honest observations. North Texas was very similar to ULM under our old administration. We had a run down stadium, a handful of passionate fans, and a dream of being better - but it wasn't until we started funding all of our programs equally that we really started to move forward. I know this is a time when people are trying to get more for less - but if you can't do something right, you shouldn't do it at all. There are other schools that are willing to spend the money and make the commitment that would make the Belt stronger, helping all the members in the process. I really hope that this is addressed. If the Belt wants to succeed - and get over the hump - they need to add quality programs, not worry about the market crap, and get a full commitment from the members that are currently in the conference. If they can't get that commitment - the Belt needs to pass legislation to expel those members (much like the Belt did to push UNO and Denver out the door).

That's funny. Until two years ago I was thinking the same thing about North Texas. Don't worry, Stebo, ULM's working on it just like North Texas was working on it. Don't be in such a hurry to get rid of us.

As to ULM's stadium, it was considered top notch when it was built in 1978 so be sure to tell me how great your stadium is 35 years from now. Trust me, unless you're sure you can put the money into it for that many years it'll start showing its age, too.

It is funny how many want to talk about ULM's commitment or the perceived lack thereof. I believe we just won the SBC baseball tournament, which gave us our second SBC title (regular season or tournament) in 6 years. In addition, our women's softball team was .500 this season. We do not pour all of our money into football, maybe those who say such need to step back and get educated on all things ULM before talking crap. The truth of the matter of it all is that many are looking at our basketball program and our football record after money games and wanted to cast negative thoughts over ULM as a whole due to those 2 things. Doing such shows ignorance. A review of ULM's record shows that ULM's men's basketball has suffered due to a death penalty-esqe punishment fom APR issues. We are finally out of that and will employ all of our scholarships come this coming season and next. Judge us then. As for football, we play the toughest schedule in the SBC. The toughest..that is why our overall record suffers. However, instead of spewing ignorance review our SBC record over the past few years you would see a .500 or above record in the SBC.

It seems absurd and dumb to tell a program that finishes above programs in its league that outspends it by a ratio of 3-1 to spend more money. Our issue is not spending more, our issue is just raising more money internally so that we do not have to play as many money games. Spending more does not guarantee league championships...ask Texas and USC. In the SBC ask MTSU and your own program UNT.

(06-17-2012 05:16 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  It is funny how many want to talk about ULM's commitment or the perceived lack thereof. I believe we just won the SBC baseball tournament, which gave us our second SBC title (regular season or tournament) in 6 years. In addition, our women's softball team was .500 this season. We do not pour all of our money into football, maybe those who say such need to step back and get educated on all things ULM before talking crap. The truth of the matter of it all is that many are looking at our basketball program and our football record after money games and wanted to cast negative thoughts over ULM as a whole due to those 2 things. Doing such shows ignorance. A review of ULM's record shows that ULM's men's basketball has suffered due to a death penalty-esqe punishment fom APR issues. We are finally out of that and will employ all of our scholarships come this coming season and next. Judge us then. As for football, we play the toughest schedule in the SBC. The toughest..that is why our overall record suffers. However, instead of spewing ignorance review our SBC record over the past few years you would see a .500 or above record in the SBC.

It seems absurd and dumb to tell a program that finishes above programs in its league that outspends it by a ratio of 3-1 to spend more money. Our issue is not spending more, our issue is just raising more money internally so that we do not have to play as many money games. Spending more does not guarantee league championships...ask Texas and USC. In the SBC ask MTSU and your own program UNT.

With all due respect, what he said was absolutely true. You may finish above programs that spend three times as much as you occasionally in a sport or two a season, but I'm pretty sure the next time you finish outside of the bottom three in the Bubas cup will be the first time. I don't want to pile on, but when you start calling things dumb and absurd, I cannot help but throw out some numbers.

Let's just look at the last four seasons:

2011-2012: I cannot find the standing after baseball, so perhaps you passed Troy to finish next to last, but regardless, you finished at best next to last.

Men's cross country: 5th out of 11
Women's cross country: 9th out of 11
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 11th out of 12
Football: 6th out of 9
Men's indoor: 6th out of 9
Women's indoor: 11th out of 11
Men's basketball: 12th out of 12
Women's basketball: 6th out of 12
Women's tennis: 4th out of 12
Men's golf: 9th out of 11
Women's golf: 9th out of 11
Softball: 7th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 8th out of 10
Women's outdoor: 9th out of 10

2010-2011

11th out of 12 in Bubas cup

Men's cross country: 5th out of 12
Women's cross country: 11th out of 12
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 12th out of 12
Football: T-4th out of 9
Men's indoor: 8th out of 9
Women's indoor: 10th out of 11
Men's basketball: 12th out of 12
Women's basketball: 7th out of 12
Women's tennis: 5th out of 12
Men's golf: T-1st out of 11
Women's golf: 10th out of 11
Softball: 6th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 2nd out of 10
Women's outdoor: 10th out of 11
Baseball: T-9th out of 10

2009-2010 12th out of 13 in Bubas cup

Men's cross country: 9th out of 11
Women's cross country: 9th out of 11
Soccer: T-10th out of 12
Volleyball: 13th out of 13
Football: T-3rd out of 9
Men's indoor: 7th out of 9
Women's indoor: 7th out of 11
Men's basketball: T-9th out of 13
Women's basketball: T-11th out of 13
Women's tennis: 3rd out of 13
Men's golf: 7th out of 12
Women's golf: 10th out of 11
Softball: 7th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 5th out of 10
Women's outdoor: 8th out of 11
Baseball: 9th out of 11

2008-2009 Bubas Cup 12th out of 13

Men's cross country: 9th out of 11
Women's cross country: 11th out of 11
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 12th out of 12
Football: Three way tie for 5th out of 8
Men's indoor: 3rd out of 9
Women's indoor: 7th out of 11
Men's basketball: T-10th out of 13
Women's basketball: 9th out of 13
Women's tennis: 8th out of 13
Men's golf: 9th out of 12
Women's golf: 9th out of 11
Softball: 8th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 3rd out of 10
Women's outdoor: 5th out of 11
Baseball: T-7th out of 11

So out of 64 individual seasons you finished 3rd or better 7 times or 11% of the time. You finished in the bottom 3 33 times or 52% of the time. 52% of your last 64 individual seasons have been in the bottom three of the league.

If you still think it's dumb and absurd to suggest ULM needs to really step their game up, you need to seriously re-evaluate what you consider to be competitive.

I have said my peace and I will stand by it.

(06-18-2012 10:52 AM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  I have said my peace and I will stand by it.

Monroe, Louisiana-Where finishing in the bottom 3 52% of the time is perfectly acceptable.

(06-18-2012 10:48 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-17-2012 05:16 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  It is funny how many want to talk about ULM's commitment or the perceived lack thereof. I believe we just won the SBC baseball tournament, which gave us our second SBC title (regular season or tournament) in 6 years. In addition, our women's softball team was .500 this season. We do not pour all of our money into football, maybe those who say such need to step back and get educated on all things ULM before talking crap. The truth of the matter of it all is that many are looking at our basketball program and our football record after money games and wanted to cast negative thoughts over ULM as a whole due to those 2 things. Doing such shows ignorance. A review of ULM's record shows that ULM's men's basketball has suffered due to a death penalty-esqe punishment fom APR issues. We are finally out of that and will employ all of our scholarships come this coming season and next. Judge us then. As for football, we play the toughest schedule in the SBC. The toughest..that is why our overall record suffers. However, instead of spewing ignorance review our SBC record over the past few years you would see a .500 or above record in the SBC.

It seems absurd and dumb to tell a program that finishes above programs in its league that outspends it by a ratio of 3-1 to spend more money. Our issue is not spending more, our issue is just raising more money internally so that we do not have to play as many money games. Spending more does not guarantee league championships...ask Texas and USC. In the SBC ask MTSU and your own program UNT.

With all due respect, what he said was absolutely true. You may finish above programs that spend three times as much as you occasionally in a sport or two a season, but I'm pretty sure the next time you finish outside of the bottom three in the Bubas cup will be the first time. I don't want to pile on, but when you start calling things dumb and absurd, I cannot help but throw out some numbers.

Let's just look at the last four seasons:

2011-2012: I cannot find the standing after baseball, so perhaps you passed Troy to finish next to last, but regardless, you finished at best next to last.

Men's cross country: 5th out of 11
Women's cross country: 9th out of 11
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 11th out of 12
Football: 6th out of 9
Men's indoor: 6th out of 9
Women's indoor: 11th out of 11
Men's basketball: 12th out of 12
Women's basketball: 6th out of 12
Women's tennis: 4th out of 12
Men's golf: 9th out of 11
Women's golf: 9th out of 11
Softball: 7th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 8th out of 10
Women's outdoor: 9th out of 10

2010-2011

11th out of 12 in Bubas cup

Men's cross country: 5th out of 12
Women's cross country: 11th out of 12
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 12th out of 12
Football: T-4th out of 9
Men's indoor: 8th out of 9
Women's indoor: 10th out of 11
Men's basketball: 12th out of 12
Women's basketball: 7th out of 12
Women's tennis: 5th out of 12
Men's golf: T-1st out of 11
Women's golf: 10th out of 11
Softball: 6th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 2nd out of 10
Women's outdoor: 10th out of 11
Baseball: T-9th out of 10

2009-2010 12th out of 13 in Bubas cup

Men's cross country: 9th out of 11
Women's cross country: 9th out of 11
Soccer: T-10th out of 12
Volleyball: 13th out of 13
Football: T-3rd out of 9
Men's indoor: 7th out of 9
Women's indoor: 7th out of 11
Men's basketball: T-9th out of 13
Women's basketball: T-11th out of 13
Women's tennis: 3rd out of 13
Men's golf: 7th out of 12
Women's golf: 10th out of 11
Softball: 7th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 5th out of 10
Women's outdoor: 8th out of 11
Baseball: 9th out of 11

2008-2009 Bubas Cup 12th out of 13

Men's cross country: 9th out of 11
Women's cross country: 11th out of 11
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 12th out of 12
Football: Three way tie for 5th out of 8
Men's indoor: 3rd out of 9
Women's indoor: 7th out of 11
Men's basketball: T-10th out of 13
Women's basketball: 9th out of 13
Women's tennis: 8th out of 13
Men's golf: 9th out of 12
Women's golf: 9th out of 11
Softball: 8th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 3rd out of 10
Women's outdoor: 5th out of 11
Baseball: T-7th out of 11

So out of 64 individual seasons you finished 3rd or better 7 times or 11% of the time. You finished in the bottom 3 33 times or 52% of the time. 52% of your last 64 individual seasons have been in the bottom three of the league.

If you still think it's dumb and absurd to suggest ULM needs to really step their game up, you need to seriously re-evaluate what you consider to be competitive.

I know these guys get hammered alot, but good statistics. You certainly did your homework and sadly it does support Stebo's comments. I just didn't think it was that bad in the overall scheme of athletics.

(06-18-2012 11:29 AM)CrazyCajun Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 10:48 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-17-2012 05:16 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  It is funny how many want to talk about ULM's commitment or the perceived lack thereof. I believe we just won the SBC baseball tournament, which gave us our second SBC title (regular season or tournament) in 6 years. In addition, our women's softball team was .500 this season. We do not pour all of our money into football, maybe those who say such need to step back and get educated on all things ULM before talking crap. The truth of the matter of it all is that many are looking at our basketball program and our football record after money games and wanted to cast negative thoughts over ULM as a whole due to those 2 things. Doing such shows ignorance. A review of ULM's record shows that ULM's men's basketball has suffered due to a death penalty-esqe punishment fom APR issues. We are finally out of that and will employ all of our scholarships come this coming season and next. Judge us then. As for football, we play the toughest schedule in the SBC. The toughest..that is why our overall record suffers. However, instead of spewing ignorance review our SBC record over the past few years you would see a .500 or above record in the SBC.

It seems absurd and dumb to tell a program that finishes above programs in its league that outspends it by a ratio of 3-1 to spend more money. Our issue is not spending more, our issue is just raising more money internally so that we do not have to play as many money games. Spending more does not guarantee league championships...ask Texas and USC. In the SBC ask MTSU and your own program UNT.

With all due respect, what he said was absolutely true. You may finish above programs that spend three times as much as you occasionally in a sport or two a season, but I'm pretty sure the next time you finish outside of the bottom three in the Bubas cup will be the first time. I don't want to pile on, but when you start calling things dumb and absurd, I cannot help but throw out some numbers.

Let's just look at the last four seasons:

2011-2012: I cannot find the standing after baseball, so perhaps you passed Troy to finish next to last, but regardless, you finished at best next to last.

Men's cross country: 5th out of 11
Women's cross country: 9th out of 11
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 11th out of 12
Football: 6th out of 9
Men's indoor: 6th out of 9
Women's indoor: 11th out of 11
Men's basketball: 12th out of 12
Women's basketball: 6th out of 12
Women's tennis: 4th out of 12
Men's golf: 9th out of 11
Women's golf: 9th out of 11
Softball: 7th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 8th out of 10
Women's outdoor: 9th out of 10

2010-2011

11th out of 12 in Bubas cup

Men's cross country: 5th out of 12
Women's cross country: 11th out of 12
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 12th out of 12
Football: T-4th out of 9
Men's indoor: 8th out of 9
Women's indoor: 10th out of 11
Men's basketball: 12th out of 12
Women's basketball: 7th out of 12
Women's tennis: 5th out of 12
Men's golf: T-1st out of 11
Women's golf: 10th out of 11
Softball: 6th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 2nd out of 10
Women's outdoor: 10th out of 11
Baseball: T-9th out of 10

2009-2010 12th out of 13 in Bubas cup

Men's cross country: 9th out of 11
Women's cross country: 9th out of 11
Soccer: T-10th out of 12
Volleyball: 13th out of 13
Football: T-3rd out of 9
Men's indoor: 7th out of 9
Women's indoor: 7th out of 11
Men's basketball: T-9th out of 13
Women's basketball: T-11th out of 13
Women's tennis: 3rd out of 13
Men's golf: 7th out of 12
Women's golf: 10th out of 11
Softball: 7th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 5th out of 10
Women's outdoor: 8th out of 11
Baseball: 9th out of 11

2008-2009 Bubas Cup 12th out of 13

Men's cross country: 9th out of 11
Women's cross country: 11th out of 11
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 12th out of 12
Football: Three way tie for 5th out of 8
Men's indoor: 3rd out of 9
Women's indoor: 7th out of 11
Men's basketball: T-10th out of 13
Women's basketball: 9th out of 13
Women's tennis: 8th out of 13
Men's golf: 9th out of 12
Women's golf: 9th out of 11
Softball: 8th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 3rd out of 10
Women's outdoor: 5th out of 11
Baseball: T-7th out of 11

So out of 64 individual seasons you finished 3rd or better 7 times or 11% of the time. You finished in the bottom 3 33 times or 52% of the time. 52% of your last 64 individual seasons have been in the bottom three of the league.

If you still think it's dumb and absurd to suggest ULM needs to really step their game up, you need to seriously re-evaluate what you consider to be competitive.

I know these guys get hammered alot, but good statistics. You certainly did your homework and sadly it does support Stebo's comments. I just didn't think it was that bad in the overall scheme of athletics.

Who finished below ULM in last place in 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 in the Burbas Cup ?

I agree that I would like to see ULM make an upgrade to its funding, but I have no interest in kicking them to the curb.

Thanks for the kind words about Georgia Southern and our conference mate App. It's nice to hear that some people still care about wins and losses.

(06-18-2012 11:33 AM)MG61 Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 11:29 AM)CrazyCajun Wrote:  

(06-18-2012 10:48 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-17-2012 05:16 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  It is funny how many want to talk about ULM's commitment or the perceived lack thereof. I believe we just won the SBC baseball tournament, which gave us our second SBC title (regular season or tournament) in 6 years. In addition, our women's softball team was .500 this season. We do not pour all of our money into football, maybe those who say such need to step back and get educated on all things ULM before talking crap. The truth of the matter of it all is that many are looking at our basketball program and our football record after money games and wanted to cast negative thoughts over ULM as a whole due to those 2 things. Doing such shows ignorance. A review of ULM's record shows that ULM's men's basketball has suffered due to a death penalty-esqe punishment fom APR issues. We are finally out of that and will employ all of our scholarships come this coming season and next. Judge us then. As for football, we play the toughest schedule in the SBC. The toughest..that is why our overall record suffers. However, instead of spewing ignorance review our SBC record over the past few years you would see a .500 or above record in the SBC.

It seems absurd and dumb to tell a program that finishes above programs in its league that outspends it by a ratio of 3-1 to spend more money. Our issue is not spending more, our issue is just raising more money internally so that we do not have to play as many money games. Spending more does not guarantee league championships...ask Texas and USC. In the SBC ask MTSU and your own program UNT.

With all due respect, what he said was absolutely true. You may finish above programs that spend three times as much as you occasionally in a sport or two a season, but I'm pretty sure the next time you finish outside of the bottom three in the Bubas cup will be the first time. I don't want to pile on, but when you start calling things dumb and absurd, I cannot help but throw out some numbers.

Let's just look at the last four seasons:

2011-2012: I cannot find the standing after baseball, so perhaps you passed Troy to finish next to last, but regardless, you finished at best next to last.

Men's cross country: 5th out of 11
Women's cross country: 9th out of 11
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 11th out of 12
Football: 6th out of 9
Men's indoor: 6th out of 9
Women's indoor: 11th out of 11
Men's basketball: 12th out of 12
Women's basketball: 6th out of 12
Women's tennis: 4th out of 12
Men's golf: 9th out of 11
Women's golf: 9th out of 11
Softball: 7th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 8th out of 10
Women's outdoor: 9th out of 10

2010-2011

11th out of 12 in Bubas cup

Men's cross country: 5th out of 12
Women's cross country: 11th out of 12
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 12th out of 12
Football: T-4th out of 9
Men's indoor: 8th out of 9
Women's indoor: 10th out of 11
Men's basketball: 12th out of 12
Women's basketball: 7th out of 12
Women's tennis: 5th out of 12
Men's golf: T-1st out of 11
Women's golf: 10th out of 11
Softball: 6th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 2nd out of 10
Women's outdoor: 10th out of 11
Baseball: T-9th out of 10

2009-2010 12th out of 13 in Bubas cup

Men's cross country: 9th out of 11
Women's cross country: 9th out of 11
Soccer: T-10th out of 12
Volleyball: 13th out of 13
Football: T-3rd out of 9
Men's indoor: 7th out of 9
Women's indoor: 7th out of 11
Men's basketball: T-9th out of 13
Women's basketball: T-11th out of 13
Women's tennis: 3rd out of 13
Men's golf: 7th out of 12
Women's golf: 10th out of 11
Softball: 7th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 5th out of 10
Women's outdoor: 8th out of 11
Baseball: 9th out of 11

2008-2009 Bubas Cup 12th out of 13

Men's cross country: 9th out of 11
Women's cross country: 11th out of 11
Soccer: 12th out of 12
Volleyball: 12th out of 12
Football: Three way tie for 5th out of 8
Men's indoor: 3rd out of 9
Women's indoor: 7th out of 11
Men's basketball: T-10th out of 13
Women's basketball: 9th out of 13
Women's tennis: 8th out of 13
Men's golf: 9th out of 12
Women's golf: 9th out of 11
Softball: 8th out of 9
Men's outdoor: 3rd out of 10
Women's outdoor: 5th out of 11
Baseball: T-7th out of 11

So out of 64 individual seasons you finished 3rd or better 7 times or 11% of the time. You finished in the bottom 3 33 times or 52% of the time. 52% of your last 64 individual seasons have been in the bottom three of the league.

If you still think it's dumb and absurd to suggest ULM needs to really step their game up, you need to seriously re-evaluate what you consider to be competitive.

I know these guys get hammered alot, but good statistics. You certainly did your homework and sadly it does support Stebo's comments. I just didn't think it was that bad in the overall scheme of athletics.

Who finished below ULM in last place the past two years in the Burbas Cup ?

10/11-UALR
09/10-UNO
08/09-UNO

Sounds like a really tough proposition for ULM. Have to play a high number of buy games because not enough money is being generated internally. Losing more games because of it. Because of losing a high number of games it becomes harder to sell tickets and get donations. Not sure how to break that cycle.

(06-17-2012 04:48 PM)SOT1977 Wrote:  

(06-17-2012 02:42 PM)stebo Wrote:  I will end with one small thing, ULM needs to make a commitment to all f their programs, not just their football team. They are playing on a shoestring budget and putting every dime into football. What this does is force the rest of their programs to operate on Div II budgets while football gets the lion's share. They need to decide if they are going to be a true Div I school and fund all of their sports fairly - or they need to drop down to FCS. Yes, they bring a competitive team (.500) team to the Belt for football but they really bring the rest of the conference down and have an extremely poor basketball program. I hate to end on that note - but I want to see the Belt succeed and these are my honest observations. North Texas was very similar to ULM under our old administration. We had a run down stadium, a handful of passionate fans, and a dream of being better - but it wasn't until we started funding all of our programs equally that we really started to move forward. I know this is a time when people are trying to get more for less - but if you can't do something right, you shouldn't do it at all. There are other schools that are willing to spend the money and make the commitment that would make the Belt stronger, helping all the members in the process. I really hope that this is addressed. If the Belt wants to succeed - and get over the hump - they need to add quality programs, not worry about the market crap, and get a full commitment from the members that are currently in the conference. If they can't get that commitment - the Belt needs to pass legislation to expel those members (much like the Belt did to push UNO and Denver out the door).

That's funny. Until two years ago I was thinking the same thing about North Texas. Don't worry, Stebo, ULM's working on it just like North Texas was working on it. Don't be in such a hurry to get rid of us.

As to ULM's stadium, it was considered top notch when it was built in 1978 so be sure to tell me how great your stadium is 35 years from now. Trust me, unless you're sure you can put the money into it for that many years it'll start showing its age, too.

We've had our share of bad decisions and poor personel hires but the athletic department has been trending updward for a decade now. The department is getting Head Coaches in good standing from the ACC and the B1G to come to UNT because of facilities and support. It has taken a long time to get to this point. It's been so much more that a new football coach and stadium.

I don't see winning the tournament after coming out of the pack as a sign of any great progress.

ULM won the tournament and I congratulate the War Hawks on a nice run but ULM finished 5 1/2 games out of first in baseball and 4 games out of last. That's middle of the pack. Not bad, not great. Certainly better than last year's 12 games out of first or 14 out the year before.

I have no doubt ULM is trying but resources are stretched thin. My general rule of thumb is to ignore budget talk simply because there are so many ways to report things that a school can produce most any result they like in reporting their budget. Two of the guys who just won their party's nomination in Arkansas for Congress were heavily out-spent by their opponent yet won. I look at results, what are you doing with the resources you have. The past several years the result has not been pretty for ULM.

(06-17-2012 02:42 PM)stebo Wrote:  I have kept quiet during all of this realignment stuff because I don't think it's cool to celebrate this transition on the Belt Board. It lacks class and North Texas fans needs to remember that this is a business move more than anything. I have really enjoyed the Belt and those are the only games I follow on Saturdays in the Fall. I am always rooting for the other Belt teams and will continue to do so. I hope that Belt members remember that North Texas was loyal to the conference when the WAC came calling - not once, not twice, but three times. And that was when the WAC had Boise, Fresno, Hawaii, and Nevada still in the fold. I really hope that the Belt members remember that we chose the Belt every time when the WAC came calling.

With all that said, I think that the Belt is at a crossroads. The market game is stupid. Unless you have a successful team, it won't matter what conference or city you are in. And Boise has shown that you don't have to be in a big DMA to have national audience. But Boise wasn't the first - traditionally the biggest and most successful programs are in smaller markets - Nebraska, Florida State, and Texas Tech aren't exactly in bountiful markets. Any school with the right type of commitment can succeed.

If I was the commissioner - this would be my focus. Screw the markets, look for quality. It's a lot easier to win over fans across the country and in your state with wins and upsets then it is to win over a saturated market. Appy State and Georgia Southern seem to really fit the bill for quality schools with a commitment to excellence. Yes, they are a little harder to get to - but those schools will move the needle in terms of perception more than any big market bottom feeder. The Belt s filled with smaller market teams that can build special programs - that should be the niche. The Belt should go against the current trend and search for quality, not markets.

I will end with one small thing, ULM needs to make a commitment to all f their programs, not just their football team. They are playing on a shoestring budget and putting every dime into football. What this does is force the rest of their programs to operate on Div II budgets while football gets the lion's share. They need to decide if they are going to be a true Div I school and fund all of their sports fairly - or they need to drop down to FCS. Yes, they bring a competitive team (.500) team to the Belt for football but they really bring the rest of the conference down and have an extremely poor basketball program. I hate to end on that note - but I want to see the Belt succeed and these are my honest observations. North Texas was very similar to ULM under our old administration. We had a run down stadium, a handful of passionate fans, and a dream of being better - but it wasn't until we started funding all of our programs equally that we really started to move forward. I know this is a time when people are trying to get more for less - but if you can't do something right, you shouldn't do it at all. There are other schools that are willing to spend the money and make the commitment that would make the Belt stronger, helping all the members in the process. I really hope that this is addressed. If the Belt wants to succeed - and get over the hump - they need to add quality programs, not worry about the market crap, and get a full commitment from the members that are currently in the conference. If they can't get that commitment - the Belt needs to pass legislation to expel those members (much like the Belt did to push UNO and Denver out the door).

Ok, I have said my two cents. I hope this is taken in the same spirit that I wrote it, with sincerity and with the hopes of the Belt getting to the next level.

Stebo,
Several years ago, you and I visited briefly at a tailgate held in Monroe prior to a ULM/UNT game. You did not seem to be a particularly vindictive individual, so I assume that you sincerely believe the many negative criticisms you have directed at my school over the years to be legitimate and justified. In any case, a "farewell address" from you to this board without a parting shot at ULM would have surprised me.

In acknowledging your (hopefully last) comments in this vein, I will not respond by either defending my school, or by attacking yours. What I will do is hope, as you say you do, that the Sun Belt Conference has a bright future. In addition, I will welcome any future actions taken by the conference to improve its membership and will encourage ULM to conform fully with ever higher standards as they are proposed and implemented. Finally, I will continue to believe that the conference will have the best chance of prospering in the future when all or most of its membership becomes dedicated to remaining in the conference and doing everything possible to make it the best it can be.

Good luck in CUSA.


--featherhead