(11-18-2014 08:09 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 07:31 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 07:22 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 06:39 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  I'll go with the one of guys who uilt the place, thanks...

Makes sense. All along those numbnuts on that forum should have been asking the pipe fitters, electricians, plumbers, painters, carpenters, and concrete guys on the number of seats installed instead of the AD. Construction guys are always keenly aware of stuff like that.

This clearly seems like some 'end all, be all' for you.

I watched Tulane play GTech and Memphis at Yulman via ESPN3...it looked like 10x the atmosphere they had at the Dome, and a real 'college feel' to it.

I also believe our fan who talked to the construction engineer at the club box...if you wish to believe different, OK.

Ah, so now we've gone from a gentleman who 'worked' on the place to the construction engineer

Okay, I've been yanking your chain here because after reading page upon page over a period of several months of Tulane fans questioning the exact seating capacity of Yulman (and no one getting a satisfactory answer from anyone at Tulane), it just seems a bit far-fetched that a friend of a friend stumbles into the place and gets the exact seating from a guy hanging out at the bar. As one article says, depending on who's doing the counting, it seats anywhere from 22,000 to 30,000. I can vouch for that because a quick search of the internets comes up with no exact number, at least not anywhere that I've seen.

And btw, no where did I comment on the atmosphere of Yulman versus the Dome so you're arguing a point I didn't try to make.

I listed to Saturday's game between the Tigers and the Wave. Congrats on a good game. Hard to figure how a team can play so well one week (Wave vs Coogs) and suck donkey balls the next when the talent level of the competition from one week to the next is not that drastically different.

Good luck going forward.

Is this an argument between an AAC fan and a SBC fan on the C-USA board? Odd.

(11-18-2014 09:02 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Is this an argument between an AAC fan and a SBC fan on the C-USA board? Odd.

Yes it is, and yes it is.

Before July 1, I would've jumped into this thread with both feet, but for now I'll just say that I am very pleased with how Yulman turned out, and optimistic that other improvements -- to facilities and competitiveness -- will soon follow.

In the spring of 2003, and then again in the autumn of 2005, the future of Tulane football outwardly seemed to be as precarious as the future of UAB outwardly seems to be right now. Tulane lived to tell the tale and I am hopeful that UAB will, too. #FreeUAB

(11-18-2014 09:02 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Is this an argument between an AAC fan and a SBC fan on the C-USA board? Odd.

Yeah, first time anything like that has ever happened on these forums.

(11-17-2014 08:02 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  I see no good reason to wait till the end of the season if it was good news.

Exactly. Doesn't look good, Blazers. As an old CUSA guy, it's sad to hear. Still holding out hope for you.

We all know how expensive it has become to play football at this level. Schools have dropped out in the past, some returned. But $$$ is a big problem for most schools. I hope UAB keeps their program. But this waiting period does not help with recruiting, not a good sign.

OUch.. just saw someone else write the following:

Quote:I don't think anyone has mentioned this, but right now UAB only fields six men's varsity teams. If UAB drops football it must add at least one more men's sport to maintain Division I membership, and possibly several to maintain Title IX compliance, given that UAB has 12 women's teams.

Is this true? So the argument about whether or not UAB can even remain in C-USA is almost a moot point if they don't move something else up to a varsity team!

(11-18-2014 12:52 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-18-2014 10:32 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 06:33 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  I think UAB will keep its football program. In fact, this was all orchestrated as a means to improve the financial support UAB sports get from the Birmingham business community.

Living in AL I do not believe this was the case, but could be the BEST unintended result. If UAB can get B'ham fired up, it will pay dividends. Hoping for the best!

You missed the point in all of this. UAB graduates medical Drs who typically have high salaries. Bama wants that money. They will kill the UAB program just to keep that money from going to things like a nice new on campus stadium for the Blazers. Happened to a smaller degree to USM.

I very much get the point...just refuting claims I've seen that UAB is behind this to drum up support from the local community. *IF* it were to come to fruition (it being B'ham rising up and saving UAB fball) the BOT may have given UAB the best Christmas gift ever.

(11-19-2014 09:41 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  OUch.. just saw someone else write the following:

Quote:I don't think anyone has mentioned this, but right now UAB only fields six men's varsity teams. If UAB drops football it must add at least one more men's sport to maintain Division I membership, and possibly several to maintain Title IX compliance, given that UAB has 12 women's teams.

Is this true? So the argument about whether or not UAB can even remain in C-USA is almost a moot point if they don't move something else up to a varsity team!

A non-revenue sport can be started almost instantly. Maintaining Division I status (and Title IX compliance) is not an issue here and won't be in the future. The only question here is FBS-level football, nothing else.

#FreeUAB

UAB could easily add men's cross country or track & field if need be. I'd also expect to see several women's sports get the ax.

(11-19-2014 10:42 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  UAB could easily add men's cross country or track & field if need be. I'd also expect to see several women's sports get the ax.

It's my understanding that most university olympic programs consume far more money than they generate, with football usually holding its own or at least generating something and consuming the least. If, in the end, Uab drops football to save dollars, it seems to defy logic that they'd consider keeping any olympic sports, much less expanding them.

Just my 2 cents.

Dropping football to "save money" would only be the excuse used by the BOT to shutter the program. Doesn't matter if it's true.

(11-18-2014 06:55 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 07:55 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 07:28 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  I can't come up with one solid reason 'to keep' would not be announced immediately......

I feel the same though maybe as one of the posters suggest it's an orchestrated effort to drum up support. Still sounds like a huge gamble...even greater than the AD at Hawaii saying they 'might' have to drop football........but he really didn't mean it.

I recall in one thread a poster commenting about Tulane doing something similar over 10 years ago. That's sure worked out well for them.

Tulane raised tons of money from donations after discussions arose of possibly shutting down their football program. Evidence of this is easy enough to see. If you haven't noticed, they just built a brand new stadium. I'd say it worked out about as well as they could have hoped.

The donations came from a very small group of donors who basically agreed to underwrite the FB program.