Van De Velde left tainted Tech legacy

[SilverEagle]

I think Tech fans are most excited about playing Southern Miss, Rice, and North Texas. We look forward to playing y'all. And from what I understand, UNT will travel the band to Ruston. That will make for a great atmosphere.

In theory. ...............

Edited July 4, 2013 by SilverEagle

[SilverEagle]

I realize a lot of people hate La Tech because they think we are arrogant. That's fair I guess, but I call it pride. We are really just a small school in a small town with big aspirations. It's that attitude that got us into C-USA. T

I think where North Texas alums/fans might have a problem is if we feel/believe that LT has moved over the line from Pride to Pridefulness. Which is where SMU has been for quite some time. You earlier comment about not playing ULM because there is really nothing in it for LT, is pretty much the same comment that SMU fans have made for years. And to be fair to SMU (the only time you'll see me doing that) TCU says the same thing.

Well, the answer for that is "local rivalry and butts in the seats". During LT's tenure in the WAC, what was the largest group of WAC- opponent fans that came to Ruston? I bet the ULM fans attendance would beat any of them three times over. And their money spends the same as any WAC fans' money.

So be careful about using the Pride word. North Texas alumni/fans have had to live around SMU and TCU for decades and we have a pretty fine tuned "pridefulness-O-meter".

[Dawg06]

For me, the reason why I want to pound LaTech is because they remind me of SMU. Arrogance and always trying to push the university next door down by avoiding them.

We aren't pushing ULM down. ULM (Me Too U) is there own worst enemy. The only reason they are in the FBS is because LaTech moved up. It was an irrational decision by their admin because they are a Southland level program without the resources to succeed at the FBS level. ULM basically committed suicide trying to keep up with LaTech. ULM is now in debt to their ears. ULM has lost an entire generation of fans taking 19 years to record their first ever winning season and bowl game at the FBS level. Arkansas let ULM schedule ULM "home" games against them in Little Rock just so they could meet the FBS attendance requirements. They are the smallest public school in the FBS, the worst academic school in the FBS per USN&WR, and have the smallest budget in the FBS. ULM simply doesn't belong. They can't even afford a ninth assistant football coach or even a director of basketball operations. That's how poor they are. Because of all the added costs of FBS football that they can't afford, all of their other sports suffer. They have the 14th smallest MBB budget in all of Division I (link) and only spend more than some SWAC schools. ULM is basically on life support, and the only thing keeping them alive is the hope of playing Tech again. We are the only thing that can save them, and their new AD knows it. Their choices are to die a slow death in the FBS, or swallow their pride and lose what little remaining support they have by moving back to the Southland to become competitive again. It's a lose-lose situation for them. And why should we be obligated to save another university in our backyard that we compete with for students, money, and support?

The difference between LaTech and SMU is that we started from nowhere, took significant risks, and worked hard without cheating to earn the competitive advantage that we enjoy today.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Dawg06

[Dawg06]

I think where North Texas alums/fans might have a problem is if we feel/believe that LT has moved over the line from Pride to Pridefulness. Which is where SMU has been for quite some time. You earlier comment about not playing ULM because there is really nothing in it for LT, is pretty much the same comment that SMU fans have made for years. And to be fair to SMU (the only time you'll see me doing that) TCU says the same thing.

Well, the answer for that is "local rivalry and butts in the seats". During LT's tenure in the WAC, what was the largest group of WAC- opponent fans that came to Ruston? I bet the ULM fans attendance would beat any of them three times over. And their money spends the same as any WAC fans' money.

So be careful about using the Pride word. North Texas alumni/fans have had to live around SMU and TCU for decades and we have a pretty fine tuned "pridefulness-O-meter".

First, we don't want a local rivalry. That's what ULM wants. We want to play on a more regional and national platform to expand our brand and increase our national exposure. We want rivalries with Southern Miss, Rice, and North Texas and ultimately Tulane and LSU for in-state rivalries. You can't compare LaTech playing ULM to LaTech playing WAC schools (BTW Hawai'i brought the most fans). You have to compare it to the non-conference games we scheduled. We usually have to play 2 money games and 1 FCS game to balance out a money game. (ULM usually has to schedule 3 money games and 1 FCS game to balance their budget.) That really only leaves room for 1 home-and-home game per season. LaTech played or signed home-and-home deals while in the WAC with Texas A&M, two with Mississippi State, Oklahoma State, Cal, Miami (FL), BYU, Navy, Army, Houston, Southern Miss, Rice, UNLV, North Texas, two with ULL, South Alabama, and Bowling Green. Why should we have to schedule ULM? We don't need ULM butts in our seats, and the last time couple times we played them no ULM fans showed up because we pounded them every time.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Dawg06

[SilverEagle]

First, we don't want a local rivalry. That's what ULM wants. We want to play on a more regional and national platform to expand our brand and increase our national exposure. We want rivalries with Southern Miss, Rice, and North Texas. You can't compare LaTech playing ULM to LaTech playing WAC schools (BTW Hawai'i brought the most fans). You have to compare it to the non-conference games we scheduled. We usually have to play 2 money games and 1 FCS game to balance out a money game. (ULM usually has to schedule 3 money games and 1 FCS game to balance their budget.) That really only leaves room for 1 home-and-home game per season. LaTech has signed home-and-homes recently with Texas A&M, two with Mississippi State, Oklahoma State, Cal, Miami (FL), BYU, Navy, Army, Houston, Southern Miss, Rice, UNLV, North Texas, ULL, South Alabama, and Bowling Green. Why should we have to schedule ULM? We don't need ULM butts in our seats, and the last time couple times we played them no ULM fans showed up because we pounded them every time.

Well, I can kind of see your point about not having a local rivalry. You've probably got all the local fans that you need and/or that the Shreveport area can provide for you. Whereas the D/FW area is constantly growing and full of new "potential" customers that a rivalry could attract for North Texas and the other schools.

Edited July 4, 2013 by SilverEagle

[Dawg06]

Well, I can kind of see your point about not having a local rivalry. You've probably got all the local fans that you need and/or that the Shreveport area can provide for you. Whereas the D/FW area is constantly growing and full of new "potential" customers that a rivalry could attract for North Texas and and the other schools.

There you go. The DFW metroplex has what, about 6.5 million people? The entire state of Louisiana only has a population of about 4.5 million people, and probably 80% of that is concentrated in South Louisiana. We have 3 DI universities (Grambling, LaTech, ULM) located within a 30 mile stretch in rural North Louisiana. Playing in the DFW and Houston markets is huge for us, and our new president has a plan to ramp up academic recruiting efforts in those areas. Playing football and basketball games in those big markets is important for us to reconnect with many of our alumni who can't or won't travel to Ruston. We have a lot of alumni living and working in Houston and DFW because there are no jobs in North Louisiana, especially for our engineering alumni. That's why this Heart of Dallas Classic vs. Army is so big for us and why we were working to get the Liberty Bowl to trade us to the Heart of Dallas Bowl during the bowl mess.

And we have room for plenty more fans in Shreveport-Bossier, and there is no DI university in Shreveport. The problem is that they are all bandwagon LSU/Saints/Cowboys fans depending on the year, and they refuse to support anything local. Shreveport has to be the worst sports town in America. Pretty much all of our fans are alumni.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Dawg06

[UNT90]

The difference between LaTech and SMU is that we started from nowhere, took significant risks, and worked hard without cheating to earn the competitive advantage that we enjoy today.

Yet, because ULM isnt at the point in the process where you perceive La. Tech to be, you begrudge ULM the same opportunity.

Interesting.

Edited July 4, 2013 by UNT90

[Dawg06]

Yet, because ULM isnt at the point in the process where you perceive La. Tech to be, you begrudge ULM the same opportunity.

Interesting.

Why should La Tech be obligated to bail out ULM for their failures? We don't owe them anything. We have to look out for our own interests and do what's best for Tech. We got to where we are on our own despite everybody else in the state including ULM trying to pull (or push in LSU's case) us down. What's wrong with letting ULM figure out how to solve their own problems and improve themselves on their own like everybody else? Why should we give them special treatment to our detriment?

Edited July 4, 2013 by Dawg06

[letsgiveacheer]

Are you sure you didn't mean to hire Art van de Lay instead?

[UNT90]

Why should La Tech be obligated to bail out ULM for their failures? We don't owe them anything. We have to look out for our own interests and do what's best for Tech. We got to where we are on our own despite everybody else in the state including ULM trying to pull (or push in LSU's case) us down. What's wrong with letting ULM figure out how to solve their own problems and improve themselves on their own like everybody else? Why should we give them special treatment to our detriment?

No one said you should, but to say they should drop down to FCS and go away is pretty... Arrogant? I mean, they are just trying to accomplish the same things you guys have, after all.

And if last year is any indication, they may have turned the corner, competitively.

And I have to wonder how much that worries you.

Don't get me wrong , I'm glad we are in a conference with you and not them currently, but I don't begrudge them the chance to better themselves.

I mean, it is the American way! On America's day!

[Dawg06]

No one said you should, but to say they should drop down to FCS and go away is pretty... Arrogant? I mean, they are just trying to accomplish the same things you guys have, after all.

And if last year is any indication, they may have turned the corner, competitively.

And I have to wonder how much that worries you.

Don't get me wrong , I'm glad we are in a conference with you and not them currently, but I don't begrudge them the chance to better themselves.

I mean, it is the American way! On America's day!

I never said they should drop down. If they did that, they would have to swallow their pride and lose what little support they do have. They would also lose so much revenue from their money games. I said it was a poor decision for them to move up in the first place because they simply don't have the resources to be competitive across the board with football at the FBS level. They can't go back in time two decades to fix that mistake. It's not just about football. The result is that it's starved all their other sports and killed support for the university. They also lost a lost of support with their name change, and the name change allowed ULL the opportunity to falsely imply that ULM is their branch campus. ULL is doing more harm to ULM's perception than Tech has ever done, and ULL is doing it illegally. Call it arrogance if you want, but it's really just being honest, objective, and realistic regarding ULM's situation.

Nobody at Tech is worried about ULM. They are irrelevant and always will be. They simply don't have the resources to sustain any competitive success. It took them 19 years for them to have 1 winning season and go to their first ever bowl game. They finally lucked into landing a good QB, knocked out the Arkansas QB, and lucked into winning 3 overtime games last year. ULM was bound to get some lucky breaks at some point. Academically (what really matters), there's no comparison between the two universities, and everybody knows it.

If ULM can better themselves, then good for them. But Tech shouldn't be expected to help better ULM like so many are implying. That's up for them to figure out on their own.

Happy Independence Day! Cheers!

Edited July 5, 2013 by Dawg06

[untjim1995]

In my opinion, here is what La Tech has done correctly over time:

1.) Focus on Money Sports--they have been good to great in football, mens hoops, and womens hoops at different points over the last 3 decades.

2.) Use the Independence Bowl Stadium to bring in bigger name opponents for their schedule. Playing Miami, Texas A&M, etc... is a great recruiting tool.

3.) Win in whatever conference they have played in. The only reason they are in CUSA is because they have won. In many ways, losing tough games against TCU in a bowl game and barely losing to Texas A&M last year actually HELPS them more than beating anyone they have played in conference play.

Here's what they have done wrong:

1.) You cannot turn down a bowl invite. You lost your coach and now your AD over it. When North Texas State couldn't get a 9-2 team into a bowl game back in 1978, we lost Hayden Fry. Obviously, that set off a domino fall that we have never recovered from. Not saying y'all will fall that far down--your school actually cares about athletics that produce money--but it will stay with your program for a long time after this. Sonny Dykes >>>>>> Skip Holtz

2.) Sticking your nose up in the air against the rest of your Louisiana brethren not named Tulane or LSU. Your arrogance toward them is unbelievable. No one is saying you have to play ULM or ULL in anything, but to go around disparaging them in the public is bush-league. Yes, ULM doesn't belong in FBS based off of their budgets, but they have beaten Alabama and Arkansas in the last 6 years, plus they have narrow losses against Arkansas, Auburn, and Baylor in the same time. That's a pretty good bang for your buck return, in my opinion. As a matter of fact, I would argue that ULM has done more with less than anyone in the country. ULL has turned into a nice progam, as well. We have seen La Tech avoid playing ULM and ULL in two I-bowls within the last 5 years. That's embarrassing. And this past bowl fiasco just screamed "small man parts" to most of the country about La Tech's leadership, no matter what the excuses are. That stench will not go away anytime soon.

Edited July 6, 2013 by untjim1995

[Dawg06]

In my opinion, here is what La Tech has done correctly over time:

1.) Focus on Money Sports--they have been good to great in football, mens hoops, and womens hoops at different points over the last 3 decades.

2.) Use the Independence Bowl Stadium to bring in bigger name opponents for their schedule. Playing Miami, Texas A&M, etc... is a great recruiting tool.

3.) Win in whatever conference they have played in. The only reason they are in CUSA is because they have won. In many ways, losing tough games against TCU in a bowl game and barely losing to Texas A&M last year actually HELPS them more than beating anyone they have played in conference play.

Here's what they have done wrong:

1.) You cannot turn down a bowl invite. You lost your coach and now your AD over it. When North Texas State couldn't get a 9-2 team into a bowl game back in 1978, we lost Hayden Fry. Obviously, that set off a domino fall that we have never recovered from. Not saying y'all will fall that far down--your school actually cares about athletics that produce money--but it will stay with your program for a long time after this. Sonny Dykes >>>>>> Skip Holtz

2.) Sticking your nose up in the air against the rest of your Louisiana brethren not named Tulane or LSU. Your arrogance toward them is unbelievable. No one is saying you have to play ULM or ULL in anything, but to go around disparaging them in the public is bush-league. Yes, ULM doesn't belong in FBS based off of their budgets, but they have beaten Alabama and Arkansas in the last 6 years, plus they have narrow losses against Arkansas, Auburn, and Baylor in the same time. That's a pretty good bang for your buck return, in my opinion. As a matter of fact, I would argue that ULM has done more with less than anyone in the country. ULL has turned into a nice progam, as well. We have seen La Tech avoid playing ULM and ULL in two I-bowls within the last 5 years. That's embarrassing. And this past bowl fiasco just screamed "small man parts" to most of the country about La Tech's leadership, no matter what the excuses are. That stench will not go away anytime soon.

Again, Tech never turned down an Indy Bowl invite. Tech asked them to wait until Sunday like almost ever other bowl because Tech was in talks with the Liberty and Heart of Dallas bowls, and the Indy Bowl would essentially get the last picks. The Indy Bowl got their feelings hurt and had pressure put on them by the MAC commish so they invited ULM and Ohio. When NIU made the BCS, it screwed up the trade to the Heart of Dallas Bowl because it knocked Oklahoma out of a BCS bowl, and the Liberty Bowl director went back on his word. He was telling both Tech, Arkansas State, and Iowa State that they would get that open spot. After all that went down, Tech went back to the Indy Bowl to accept the invite, but it was too late. The only bowl Tech has ever turned down was the Texas Bowl in 2008 to play in Shreveport.

You think we lost a coach over the bowl mess? Lol. Rumor has it that Dykes had been shopping around since October, and that's one of the reasons our season ended poorly. We lost Coach Dykes because we can't pay him $2 million per year, and he can't win national championships at a non-AQ school. We had 32 seniors, and he felt he needed to move on when he stock was the highest. Also, our AD wasn't exactly fired over it either. Seven months passed between the bowl mess and when he was forced to resign because we had a new president coming in who wants his guy. Our AD's biggest fault is that we haven't broken ground on the $20 million end zone complex that he announced over 3 years ago. But the bowl rumors did destroy BVDV's reputation, and our new president believed it was time to move on. Our AD was never even liked by our fan base in the first place.

Which Tech administrator has ever publicly disparaged ULM or ULL? And why should Tech want to play ULL or ULM in a bowl game if we have better options? It's not a reward or beneficial for Tech to play either one of those schools in a bowl game. And Tech didn't keep ULL out of any bowl. ULL kept themselves out by only finishing 6-6. At that time, 7 wins would have guaranteed them a bowl game somewhere. ULL only has themselves to blame.

Edited July 7, 2013 by Dawg06