(05-13-2014 12:47 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 10:28 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 06:42 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-12-2014 06:53 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-12-2014 06:21 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  Just how stupid can a person be?

I stand by my comment. What have you done in the last 10 years? 1 bowl victory over a 6-7 team. Congrats. Or 7 wins over FBS teams that finished with winning records in 10 years.

If La Tech had finished 5-7 in 2011, you'd be in Sun Belt. I went and ran the numbers for the last 10 years (see earlier in the thread). You don't have anything on ULM. Nor does your CUSA membership carry any real 'separation' either.

I guess you won't be satisfied until you prove exactly just how stupid a person can be. Conference realignment is never about a single football or basketball season. It is about the total package a university has to offer. University presidents and chancellors are the ones that decide who is invited to join their conference, and academics play a very major role in their decisions. Also, I plainly stated earlier that Tech's membership in CUSA makes us members of a SEPARATE conference, not necessarily a better conference. That designation will have to be earned.

What's La Tech's resume? 1 bowl win in 10 years over a 6-7 team? 1 high profile loss in 10 years? Is that all? Academics? I'm not seeing it. Endowment? Not at all. Market? Not at all. I think CUSA was desperate for new members and decided on La Tech due to perception not matched by reality.

You seem to think I'm jealous of La Tech's membership in CUSA. I'm not. I'm just tired of La Tech's ridiculous assertion that they have separation over ULM.

Congrats on joining a conference ranked below that of the Sun Belt in football for 2 years running now.

Tom, I don't know if you're an idiot or blind. Since Ulm joined div 1 football in 95 to 2011, they went 68-129 without one winning record and no bowl appearances. Absolutely awful. Everything they've done has been in the past 2 years. They're historically an awful football program. Time will tell if they keep any momentum from their only winning record in FBS football from 2 years ago.

I'm not saying ULM is Alabama (although they did beat them - once). I'm saying LTU hasn't performed much (if at all) better than ULM in the last 10 years. Look at bowl games, bowl wins, wins over AQ/P5 teams, wins over teams with winning records, etc. LTU started hot by beating a bunch of teams that stunk up the joint and got ranked in one year. Then got exposed.

LTU has been to two big bad bowl games in the last 10 years. Congratulations are in order as they beat a team that finished 6-7 in their lone bowl victory since 1977 (!). That's all LTU has to its record. One lousy bowl victory in the last 35 years (!). Big whoop.

ULM has issues with attendance, funding, etc. But they certainly stack up quite well versus CUSA. ULM's record versus teams currently in CUSA in the last 10 years....25-20.

25-20.

In short, I see no justification for LTU's attitude problem towards ULM. None whatsoever.

(05-13-2014 02:36 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  In short, I see no justification for LTU's attitude problem towards ULM. None whatsoever.

If it were based on a rational assessment, it wouldn't be an attitude problem.

But once people get an idea fixed in their head, they often remember points that seem to support the idea, and overlook points that overturn it.

(05-13-2014 02:36 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 12:47 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 10:28 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 06:42 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-12-2014 06:53 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I stand by my comment. What have you done in the last 10 years? 1 bowl victory over a 6-7 team. Congrats. Or 7 wins over FBS teams that finished with winning records in 10 years.

If La Tech had finished 5-7 in 2011, you'd be in Sun Belt. I went and ran the numbers for the last 10 years (see earlier in the thread). You don't have anything on ULM. Nor does your CUSA membership carry any real 'separation' either.

I guess you won't be satisfied until you prove exactly just how stupid a person can be. Conference realignment is never about a single football or basketball season. It is about the total package a university has to offer. University presidents and chancellors are the ones that decide who is invited to join their conference, and academics play a very major role in their decisions. Also, I plainly stated earlier that Tech's membership in CUSA makes us members of a SEPARATE conference, not necessarily a better conference. That designation will have to be earned.

What's La Tech's resume? 1 bowl win in 10 years over a 6-7 team? 1 high profile loss in 10 years? Is that all? Academics? I'm not seeing it. Endowment? Not at all. Market? Not at all. I think CUSA was desperate for new members and decided on La Tech due to perception not matched by reality.

You seem to think I'm jealous of La Tech's membership in CUSA. I'm not. I'm just tired of La Tech's ridiculous assertion that they have separation over ULM.

Congrats on joining a conference ranked below that of the Sun Belt in football for 2 years running now.

Tom, I don't know if you're an idiot or blind. Since Ulm joined div 1 football in 95 to 2011, they went 68-129 without one winning record and no bowl appearances. Absolutely awful. Everything they've done has been in the past 2 years. They're historically an awful football program. Time will tell if they keep any momentum from their only winning record in FBS football from 2 years ago.

I'm not saying ULM is Alabama (although they did beat them - once). I'm saying LTU hasn't performed much (if at all) better than ULM in the last 10 years. Look at bowl games, bowl wins, wins over AQ/P5 teams, wins over teams with winning records, etc. LTU started hot by beating a bunch of teams that stunk up the joint and got ranked in one year. Then got exposed.

LTU has been to two big bad bowl games in the last 10 years. Congratulations are in order as they beat a team that finished 6-7 in their lone bowl victory since 1977 (!). That's all LTU has to its record. One lousy bowl victory in the last 35 years (!). Big whoop.

ULM has issues with attendance, funding, etc. But they certainly stack up quite well versus CUSA. ULM's record versus teams currently in CUSA in the last 10 years....25-20.

25-20.

In short, I see no justification for LTU's attitude problem towards ULM. None whatsoever.

Tom, the problem is not just their attitude toward ULM, it is their attitude toward the whole Sun Belt Conference.

I agree with you that anything beyond 10 years ago is irrelevant. Look at Tech's record over that period compared to, not just ULM, but Troy, stAte and UL, the four programs that have been in the Conference about that long.

I know their record is worse than the Cajuns in just about every possible measurable over that span. I suspect that that is also the case with Troy and stAte.

(05-13-2014 03:27 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 02:36 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  In short, I see no justification for LTU's attitude problem towards ULM. None whatsoever.

If it were based on a rational assessment, it wouldn't be an attitude problem.

But once people get an idea fixed in their head, they often remember points that seem to support the idea, and overlook points that overturn it.

I just don't see any data that really shows much, if any, separation between LTU and ULM even if I go back 10 years.

All I see is a bunch of (undeserved) legacy stuff and some subjective opinions.

Where's the data to support the theory that LTU is significantly better than ULM? I don't think I'm cherry picking.

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

When I started looking into the data, I actually thought I was going to see some obvious data points showing LTU's dominance over ULM. I was actually pretty surprised to find very little to support that dominance. Stunned actually given LTU's attitude.

What are they putting in the barbeque in Ruston?

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

Back to the OT. I'm not sure I want a team that rests on entitled and tries to make arbitrary distinctions of superiority to mask mediocrity (or worse) in actual results. We might be lucky they're in CUSA.

(05-13-2014 03:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 03:27 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 02:36 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  In short, I see no justification for LTU's attitude problem towards ULM. None whatsoever.

If it were based on a rational assessment, it wouldn't be an attitude problem.

But once people get an idea fixed in their head, they often remember points that seem to support the idea, and overlook points that overturn it.

I just don't see any data that really shows much, if any, separation between LTU and ULM even if I go back 10 years.

All I see is a bunch of (undeserved) legacy stuff and some subjective opinions.

Where's the data to support the theory that LTU is significantly better than ULM? I don't think I'm cherry picking.

With regard to ULM, the Tech guys only valid point of separation is academics. Tech is a Carnegy National Doctoral University, Research. ULM is a Regional Master's University. The State classifies Tech [along with UL and UNO] as a "Statewide University" and ULM as a "Regional University".

Although they claim academic superiority over UL as well, a quick look at facts dispels that.

UL is Carnegy National Doctoral, High Research, so the Tech claim to superior academics over UL is spurious, in spite of their USNR Tier 1 rating, which UL will attain as soon as the BOR approves a currently proposed 10th PhD program.

UNO also has better research numbers than Tech, though not by much. UL's research programs have annual expenditures higher than all the other UL system schools, combined.

UL's endowment is roughly 4x as large as Tech's.

(05-13-2014 04:05 PM)Vobserver Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 03:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 03:27 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 02:36 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  In short, I see no justification for LTU's attitude problem towards ULM. None whatsoever.

If it were based on a rational assessment, it wouldn't be an attitude problem.

But once people get an idea fixed in their head, they often remember points that seem to support the idea, and overlook points that overturn it.

I just don't see any data that really shows much, if any, separation between LTU and ULM even if I go back 10 years.

All I see is a bunch of (undeserved) legacy stuff and some subjective opinions.

Where's the data to support the theory that LTU is significantly better than ULM? I don't think I'm cherry picking.

With regard to ULM, the Tech guys only valid point of separation is academics. Tech is a Carnegy National Doctoral University, Research. ULM is a Regional Master's University. The State classifies Tech [along with UL and UNO] as a "Statewide University" and ULM as a "Regional University".

Although they claim academic superiority over UL as well, a quick look at facts dispels that.

UL is Carnegy National Doctoral, High Research, so the Tech claim to superior academics over UL is spurious, in spite of their USNR Tier 1 rating, which UL will attain as soon as the BOR approves a currently proposed 10th PhD program.

UNO also has better research numbers than Tech, though not by much. UL's research programs have annual expenditures higher than all the other UL system schools, combined.

UL's endowment is roughly 4x as large as Tech's.

So USA has the exact same classification as LTU in the Carnegie list. And LTU is on the last page of the USNR rankings. And has a 71% acceptance rate. Ok, so they aren't open admissions. But they aren't far from it.

So, lets see if understand this....LTU plays in a conference with

unranked National Universities - USM, MTSU, UNT, UTSA, UTEP, FIU, FAU, ODU and Regional Universities WKU and Marshall

But and they've got a big bad ranking of page 9 of 10 on the rankings, a full 50 places behind UAB and they're giving ULM grief?

Neither Tech nor UL is open admissions. USA blows Tech and UL out of the water in every economic metric I have seen, except for research, where USA and UL are close, but far above Tech.

(05-09-2014 04:33 PM)Redwolves06 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 04:29 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:05 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 03:00 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I know politically no way it could happen, but if you could merge Tech, ULM, and Grambling all into one school. Wow that could be a very nice all around completive school across the board. Or if Tech was in Shreveport things would be a little easier on everybody as well.

It certainly would solve SOME of our higher ed problems.

New problem - Would the new mascot be Wardogs or Bullhawks?

Oh well for the complimentary post I was about to make about the Cajuns. We do a lot with a little and have an admin in place that is not putting up with losing and is raising money. Tech's facilities are no better than ours and they are in the same region with less of the amenities at ULM's disposal. Hard to argue that Tech football or baseball is any better than ours. Basketball, yes, but we basically had the death penalty. For that matter they are better an ANYONE in the Belt. What I WAS going to say about the Cajuns, is that you are in a high population, growing area of the state, and are doing VERY well with your sports programs right now. Where Tech, I just don't like, I actually pull for the Cajuns to do well out of conference usually. You guys are starting to wear on that concept though. However, even as well as you are doing, I wouldn't bash us too much. With our tiny budget and low income area, we still beat you in football and split with you in basketball.

Facilities aren't better? Their end zone project is gonna blow your stadium away. And no offense, but your basketball arena sucks. Granted, you don't have alumni like Karl Malone and Paul Milsap pouring money in it.

Tech's football stadium is a dump even with the end zone project. They should have spent that money on adding some suites and luxury boxs. I believe they have neither. I really can't think of anything on that campus that I would consider better facility wise than what ULM has. We also have our own end zone facility that will be built as soon as the field turf project is complete. Also faint Ewing is looking like it could be upgrade to something similar to the Cajun dome with the same type of relationship between the city and university.