Guest CardAmbassador Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 I look at budgets and when schools like La Tech can compete in the WAC for $15 million, I think LU can too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdcurran235 Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 Honestly I think the most important part of athletics is the athletic budget. With a large enough budget we can compete at any level. I dont see our budget that out of line with the rest of the WAC or a lot of other FBS teams. And our budget has room to grow with the increases in enrollment we have and donors coming out of the woodwork. We are going to continue to improve and I think quickly. IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearkat25 Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 I think Terror was referring to the posters over on bobcatreport.com as a lot of them think SHSU (and Lamar to a certain extent) are not good enough for the WAC like Texas State is. Correct. They all are stating that Lamar, but particularly SHSU - are not ready for FBS and would knock the wind out of their sails. Unfortunately, they need one - if not both - of our schools in order for the WAC to maintain some stability. Lamar and SHSU are clearly not their first choice(s), but ultimately may be their only choice(s). I really don't understand why the txst posters operate with such arrogance! Don't they understand they are equal to both LU and SHSU? Anyways, one way or the other txst is going to get the "wind knocked of their sails" really soon.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NorthoftheBorder Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 I think Terror was referring to the posters over on bobcatreport.com as a lot of them think SHSU (and Lamar to a certain extent) are not good enough for the WAC like Texas State is. Correct. They all are stating that Lamar, but particularly SHSU - are not ready for FBS and would knock the wind out of their sails. Unfortunately, they need one - if not both - of our schools in order for the WAC to maintain some stability. Lamar and SHSU are clearly not their first choice(s), but ultimately may be their only choice(s). You know how that works, you see a kid that gets drafted late or not at all but gets invited to camp and then three years later he is a budding superstar. That could happen here with LU and/or SHSU in FBS (although I will grant it will take more than 3 years for their programs to develop at the FBS level) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CardAmbassador Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 I think Terror was referring to the posters over on bobcatreport.com as a lot of them think SHSU (and Lamar to a certain extent) are not good enough for the WAC like Texas State is. Correct. They all are stating that Lamar, but particularly SHSU - are not ready for FBS and would knock the wind out of their sails. Unfortunately, they need one - if not both - of our schools in order for the WAC to maintain some stability. Lamar and SHSU are clearly not their first choice(s), but ultimately may be their only choice(s). I really don't understand why the txst posters operate with such arrogance! Don't they understand they are equal to both LU and SHSU? Anyways, one way or the other txst is going to get the "wind knocked of their sails" really soon.... I think I know why. Many of their posters aren't happy with some SHSU and LU fans telling them what a horrible decision joining the WAC is. I don't know if you remember, but shortly after TxSt announced it was going to the WAC, many SHSU fans (their were LU fans too) started telling them how badly they were going to get beaten, and how FCS is real football where you play for a championship. There has always been some back and forth between TxSt and SHSU/LU, it mostly has to do with their perception as the flagship of the TSUS, and their desire to become that. So some of them literally do think TxSt is better. I don't personally feel that way at all, in my mind the TSUS has a horizontal structure making at least the big 3 (TxSt, SHSU and LU) equal. Now what they are likely doing is attempting to piss us off with these comments. Though many of them probably don't want either SHSU or LU in the WAC because they think this will separate TxSt from SHSU/LU. I'm not defending TxSt by any means, although I do have a more favorable opinion of their chances in the new WAC. I have a feeling that LU will eventually be in FBS, and I think SHSU is starting to warm up to the same plan. So they can try and separate all they want but it's not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexGator Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 I think Terror was referring to the posters over on bobcatreport.com as a lot of them think SHSU (and Lamar to a certain extent) are not good enough for the WAC like Texas State is. Correct. They all are stating that Lamar, but particularly SHSU - are not ready for FBS and would knock the wind out of their sails. Unfortunately, they need one - if not both - of our schools in order for the WAC to maintain some stability. Lamar and SHSU are clearly not their first choice(s), but ultimately may be their only choice(s). I really don't understand why the txst posters operate with such arrogance! Don't they understand they are equal to both LU and SHSU? Anyways, one way or the other txst is going to get the "wind knocked of their sails" really soon.... I think I know why. Many of their posters aren't happy with some SHSU and LU fans telling them what a horrible decision joining the WAC is. I don't know if you remember, but shortly after TxSt announced it was going to the WAC, many SHSU fans (their were LU fans too) started telling them how badly they were going to get beaten, and how FCS is real football where you play for a championship. There has always been some back and forth between TxSt and SHSU/LU, it mostly has to do with their perception as the flagship of the TSUS, and their desire to become that. So some of them literally do think TxSt is better. I don't personally feel that way at all, in my mind the TSUS has a horizontal structure making at least the big 3 (TxSt, SHSU and LU) equal. Now what they are likely doing is attempting to piss us off with these comments. Though many of them probably don't want either SHSU or LU in the WAC because they think this will separate TxSt from SHSU/LU. I'm not defending TxSt by any means, although I do have a more favorable opinion of their chances in the new WAC. I have a feeling the LU will eventually be in FBS, and I think SHSU is starting to warm up to the same plan. So they can try and separate all they want but it's not going to happen. SWT changed their name to try to create this "flagship" mentality. But, even as they did that, Lamar still basically functioned as the flagship campus in the system (partially because it formerly acted as a flagship of its own system). The academic reputation is superior. The only thing TSU-SM has on LU is a larger student body (and with it alumni base). But, though LU's Academic Partnership program, they've expanded the alumni assocation by several thousand extra grads around the state- raising their profile even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTerror Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 SWT changed their name to try to create this "flagship" mentality. But, even as they did that, Lamar still basically functioned as the flagship campus in the system (partially because it formerly acted as a flagship of its own system). The academic reputation is superior. The only thing TSU-SM has on LU is a larger student body (and with it alumni base). But, though LU's Academic Partnership program, they've expanded the alumni assocation by several thousand extra grads around the state- raising their profile even more. First I've heard of Lamar 'acting' or anything related to flagship. A 'flagship study' conducted around the time of the name change indicated that SHSU was just as deserving, if not more so due to research and post-graduate criteria associated with being valued as the flagship of an institution. Around the time - SHSU was the one fighting the name change more than any other school, as well as their flagship fight. SHSU was the first to file a bill protecting their name as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bigred360 Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 There is no "flagship" institution in the TSUS! I think CA nailed it with his post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexGator Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 SWT changed their name to try to create this "flagship" mentality. But, even as they did that, Lamar still basically functioned as the flagship campus in the system (partially because it formerly acted as a flagship of its own system). The academic reputation is superior. The only thing TSU-SM has on LU is a larger student body (and with it alumni base). But, though LU's Academic Partnership program, they've expanded the alumni assocation by several thousand extra grads around the state- raising their profile even more. First I've heard of Lamar 'acting' or anything related to flagship. A 'flagship study' conducted around the time of the name change indicated that SHSU was just as deserving, if not more so due to research and post-graduate criteria associated with being valued as the flagship of an institution. Around the time - SHSU was the one fighting the name change more than any other school, as well as their flagship fight. SHSU was the first to file a bill protecting their name as well. US News and World Report has them both as "Tier 2". And, in one of the no-punches-pulled rankings: http://setxp16.org/wp/2010/08/forgetharvard/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearkat25 Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 SWT changed their name to try to create this "flagship" mentality. But, even as they did that, Lamar still basically functioned as the flagship campus in the system (partially because it formerly acted as a flagship of its own system). The academic reputation is superior. The only thing TSU-SM has on LU is a larger student body (and with it alumni base). But, though LU's Academic Partnership program, they've expanded the alumni assocation by several thousand extra grads around the state- raising their profile even more. First I've heard of Lamar 'acting' or anything related to flagship. A 'flagship study' conducted around the time of the name change indicated that SHSU was just as deserving, if not more so due to research and post-graduate criteria associated with being valued as the flagship of an institution. Around the time - SHSU was the one fighting the name change more than any other school, as well as their flagship fight. SHSU was the first to file a bill protecting their name as well. US News and World Report has them both as "Tier 2". And, in one of the no-punches-pulled rankings: http://setxp16.org/wp/2010/08/forgetharvard/ First I’ve heard of LU trying to claim TSU flagship as well. I know that SHSU and txst have been battling over this for years. Trust me SHSU will never EVER let txst claim flagship status! Like TT said, at one point TSU wanted flagship status and in the process change SHSU’s name to Texas State at Huntsville. Our student body and alums were pretty furious. Random though, I wish we could change the name of the Texas State System to something else because a lot of people think that txst is the flagship for our system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexGator Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 SWT changed their name to try to create this "flagship" mentality. But, even as they did that, Lamar still basically functioned as the flagship campus in the system (partially because it formerly acted as a flagship of its own system). The academic reputation is superior. The only thing TSU-SM has on LU is a larger student body (and with it alumni base). But, though LU's Academic Partnership program, they've expanded the alumni assocation by several thousand extra grads around the state- raising their profile even more. First I've heard of Lamar 'acting' or anything related to flagship. A 'flagship study' conducted around the time of the name change indicated that SHSU was just as deserving, if not more so due to research and post-graduate criteria associated with being valued as the flagship of an institution. Around the time - SHSU was the one fighting the name change more than any other school, as well as their flagship fight. SHSU was the first to file a bill protecting their name as well. US News and World Report has them both as "Tier 2". And, in one of the no-punches-pulled rankings: http://setxp16.org/wp/2010/08/forgetharvard/ First I’ve heard of LU trying to claim TSU flagship as well. I know that SHSU and txst have been battling over this for years. Trust me SHSU will never EVER let txst claim flagship status! Like TT said, at one point TSU wanted flagship status and in the process change SHSU’s name to Texas State at Huntsville. Our student body and alums were pretty furious. Random though, I wish we could change the name of the Texas State System to something else because a lot of people think that txst is the flagship for our system. Agreed. Of course, it's hard not to make the Sam Houston Institute of Technology joke. ..... Anyway, anyone know why UT-Arlington isn't being talked to about moving to a bigger conference? Is it just that they won't restart football? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdcurran235 Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 You talk to SWT alums and they are pissed the name was changed still. They should still be SWT. And if you think I am nostalgic, well I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CardAmbassador Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 The Texas Presidents University System. Make TxSt change their name to David G. Burnet State University. This would honestly make the most sense. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachacola Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 I saw on the TSUS website that the new chairman of the TSUS board of regents brought up the idea of changing the name of the university system, but I think it was put on hold for a while. As for as having a flagship school, until LU, SHSU or Texas State gets a $500 million endowment and becomes a very high-research doctoral school, then there's no point in having that discussion. I do believe it's in the best interest of all the schools in the system if they all increase academic standards, endowments and research activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearkat25 Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 The Texas Presidents University System. Make TxSt change their name to David G. Burnet State University. This would honestly make the most sense. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) I like the way you think CA! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CardAmbassador Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 The Texas Presidents University System. Make TxSt change their name to David G. Burnet State University. This would honestly make the most sense. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) I like the way you think CA! :laugh: Glad you liked it, I thought it was pretty funny myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexGator Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 The Texas Presidents University System. Make TxSt change their name to David G. Burnet State University. This would honestly make the most sense. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) I think they'd change it to LBJ St. if anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CardAmbassador Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 That's a good one too. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mint Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Keep the envy coming, boys. It isn't because we think we're better athletically, it's that we are more poised for the transition. We have the coaches, facilities, budget, etc to be competitive in the WAC. My point all along has been - do yall? If the answer is no, then you're not going to get the Bobcat's blessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CardAmbassador Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Keep the envy coming, boys. It isn't because we think we're better athletically, it's that we are more poised for the transition. We have the coaches, facilities, budget, etc to be competitive in the WAC. My point all along has been - do yall? If the answer is no, then you're not going to get the Bobcat's blessing. Envy? I don't really know who that is aimed at. No one has said anything about being envious. In fact all I have said regarding TxSt in this thread is that I thought your school would do well in the WAC. I also said that TxSt San Marcos will never be the flagship neither will LU or SHSU. Can we just drop that discussion? The David G. Burnett and LBJ suggestions are jokes, and light hearted ones at that. If you can't take a joke you should find some different reading material. As far as being ready for the WAC, yes LU can compete in the WAC. We have very good facilities and there is not much needed for us to get ready beyond a football stadium expansion. Please tell me what about LU in the WAC concerns you and then we can have a real discussion. Thanks for joining and have a great Easter. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUSportsFan Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Hi Mint, As far as facilities, which do you mean. Texas State University - San Marcos Football - Currently 15,908 with a nice expansion Basketball - Currently 7,200 with some additions, but unless something has changed still not up to Montagne Center capacity. Baseball - 2,000 Lamar University Football - 16,000 with last year's attendance exceeding capacity in all except one game. Rolling two year average of 15,000 is the requirement so we'll see. It would be nice to have a little more capacity since some of last year's games were turn-away standing room only sellouts. Basketball - 10,080 Baseball - 3,500 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bigred360 Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Envy of this and we have yet to play football or softball in the SLC. http://www.southland.org/fls/18400/pdf/10-11_all-sports.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=18400 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mint Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 The biggest difference in the WAC and the Southland is the fact the WAC competes in the Bowl Subdivision. Thus, football facilities are the ones looked at the most when a school is coming from a Championship Subdivision. http://www.txstatebobcats.com/images/2010/12/1/Track-Stadium-Aerial-Rendering.jpg http://www.txstatebobcats.com/images/2011/1/11/Bobcat_Stadium_-_North_Side_Complex_Stadium_Model.jpg http://www.txstatebobcats.com/images/2010/8/3/West-Side-Complex.jpg But again, facilities are only one piece to the FBS pie. What about Lamar's coaching staff? Are they FBS ready? And is your budget able to handle a better staff should the current one not prove successful? What about travel - can your budget sustain the travel to Idaho? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CardAmbassador Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Envy of this and we have yet to play football or softball in the SLC. http://www.southland.org/fls/18400/pdf/10-11_all-sports.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=18400 I don't want to get caught up in a shouting match about who's Athletic Department is better but I will add that those numbers are as of March 21st. Since then our women's tennis and women's golf teams have both finished 2nd in the SLC, TxSt did not finish higher than third in either of these sports. If you add our men's tennis, and men's golf I believe LU will be ahead of TxSt in the commissioners cup. I believe by the most current count LU was in third. UTSA is in first and McNeese is in second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CardAmbassador Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 The biggest difference in the WAC and the Southland is the fact the WAC competes in the Bowl Subdivision. Thus, football facilities are the ones looked at the most when a school is coming from a Championship Subdivision. LOL you come on to this board and because there are a couple of comments you don't like you want to start some type of pissing match about TxSt and how great it is? No one here is trashing your school! Do you have little man issues? LU's had the highest paid basketball coach in the SLC since Roc was hired. Txst - San Marcos didn't upgrade it's stadium or coaching staff until AFTER they got invited to the WAC. Please make a stronger case for why you think LU is inadequate material for the WAC. We have an $11 million dollar budget without football, without gaurantee games, without knowing we are in the FBS and without even half the maximum student fee. (ours is 8.25 per credit hour/ San Marcos is $20 per credit hour which is the maximum allowed by the state of texas) So yes if LU got called up to go FBS we could pay for it. Why are you insinuating otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.88e0b900f1aa353dc4be09303a3550aa.png)
Recommended Posts