jdcurran235 Posted May 18, 2011 Posted May 18, 2011 That is exactly what I was thinking, but I just don't think the SBC wants to expand unless they are forced to. But it would not take me completely off gaurd if LU got an SBC invite considering the prior history with the conference.
jdcurran235 Posted May 19, 2011 Posted May 19, 2011 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/333371-the-sun-belt-conference-after-the-dominoes-fall Interesting article from last year.
Guest CardAmbassador Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 Are Sam and LU a package deal already? Go to 15:50 and listen. I'm pretty sure those two schools are LU and SHSU and maybe he is indicating they are a package deal? Idaho can't hold out forever fortunately. http://www.kidoam.com/common/global_audio/210/29605.mp3
jdcurran235 Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 Do you think that you can give me a rundown of what it said. I am having trouble loading it on my computer.
jdcurran235 Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 I got it to work. I dont think it is package deal. I think we are applying seperately.
coachacola Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 The WAC board has a nice summary of what was said in the interview. Not sure what to make of things now. http://forums.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=451&f=2368&t=7533221
Guest CardAmbassador Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 The WAC board has a nice summary of what was said in the interview. Not sure what to make of things now. http://forums.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=451&f=2368&t=7533221 Remember this is IDAHO'S AD speaking. He may not want more southeast schools in the WAC but its not his decision alone to make. Once Utsa and txst join they are going to want any western schools to be offset by eastern additions. An important thing to keep in mind is that the WAC may not be able to get to 12 with western schools alone since the big sky schools are attempting to move their entire conference to fbs.
jdcurran235 Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 I keep wondering if LU to WAC is truly dead. I halfway wonder if there is posturing going on and things might change at the last second and LU does get an invite. I work with a couple of vandals up on the north slope and I get the feeling they are not to happy with thier AD. They would rather be in a stable conference than to not invite LU. Dont get me wrong, I don't see us getting invited this year with the AD's attitude. But you have to admit, conference realignment has been anything but predictable.
coachacola Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 I think the Vandals AD wants to make sure there's more western teams in the WAC, and don't forget, he just gets one vote on expansion. Didn't he say he'd like to see a 14 team WAC? Joining the WAC in 2012 was probably pushing it for Lamar, now there's more time to prepare, and the WAC wasn't Lamar's preferred destination anyway. I think Lamar will get invited in a year or two, maybe even with SHSU, when some western schools say yes, and we'll see a 14 team WAC. That would be good on travel and paves the way for a split and Lamar becomes part of a new southwest conference.
jdcurran235 Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 That is what I think also coach with one exception and that is if realignment hits the SBC hard. I could see us ending up there. But I still can't help but wonder if the WAC doesn't go and surprise everyone with an invite to a football playing school because of pressure coming from fans / boosters. Like I said, I work with a lot of Vandals up here on the slope and a lot of them are not happy that the AD taking the position he is. They are afraid with conference realignment going the way it is LU might not be available and the western schools may never really want to move up.
Bearkat25 Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 I know some of you guys are having a hard time getting the link so here is what Idaho AD had to say: Starting at 16:02 “The biggest concern for me is finding that other football playing school out west… There are two schools down south that want to join the WAC in a heartbeat and I’ll be honest I’ve opposed those discussions during our meetings because I do not want to see the WAC add two more schools from Texas. I think we need to focus our efforts on the west.” Starting at 19:38 “[We may] try to create a conference that is beyond 12 teams maybe even 14 teams” Starting at 24:14 Host: Was it Lamar and Sam Houston State or were there other schools that you didn’t want in the league. Idaho AD: "There were a couple of Texas schools, a school from Kentucky mentioned and of course another school from Louisiana… That is not the best interest for the University of Idaho."
Guest CardAmbassador Posted May 23, 2011 Posted May 23, 2011 Idaho cannot block us forever. Honestly I'm going to be quite surprised if the WAC plucks a western football school this year. I don't see anyone lining up, there would be a leak of information if one were imminent. Seattle is likely the only school this year. Lamar has a better than 50/50 shot of being added next year. As always things could change but I almost like our chances of getting in next year more than I ever did this past year.
BigRedTrack Posted May 24, 2011 Posted May 24, 2011 I think the Idaho AD is finding himself between a rock and a hard place. He seemed concerned about Utah St. and/or LaTech leaving the WAC soon, especially when the ESPN contract expires. He seems very concerned about the WAC generating enough revenue to stay a viable/desirable conference. He seems to know what he wants for the WAC, but can't find a way to get there. I still see LaTech going to the SBC at some point because it makes to much sense. My question is if LaTech bolts to the SBC, ULM stays, that would set up the SBC to have an East/West format with the addition of schools from Texas & Florida/Georgia. I personally prefer the SBC because of the rivalry with ULL & LaTech being rekindled.
Guest CardAmbassador Posted May 24, 2011 Posted May 24, 2011 I still see LaTech going to the SBC at some point because it makes to much sense. My question is if LaTech bolts to the SBC, ULM stays, that would set up the SBC to have an East/West format with the addition of schools from Texas & Florida/Georgia. I personally prefer the SBC because of the rivalry with ULL & LaTech being rekindled. I don't see La Tech to the Sun Belt unless, SJSU and Utah State leave for the Mountain West. I also don't see Lamar ending up in the Sun Belt without the belt being poached by a larger conference first. What does Lamar provide for the WAC? The possibility of getting to divisional play and a travel partner for La Tech and survival. What does LU do for the Sun Belt? All we do is decrease each SBC school's share of the conference pie.
jdcurran235 Posted May 24, 2011 Posted May 24, 2011 Jack is now saying that seattle might not be a lock?
TexGator Posted May 24, 2011 Posted May 24, 2011 I still see LaTech going to the SBC at some point because it makes to much sense. My question is if LaTech bolts to the SBC, ULM stays, that would set up the SBC to have an East/West format with the addition of schools from Texas & Florida/Georgia. I personally prefer the SBC because of the rivalry with ULL & LaTech being rekindled. I don't see La Tech to the Sun Belt unless, SJSU and Utah State leave for the Mountain West. I also don't see Lamar ending up in the Sun Belt without the belt being poached by a larger conference first. What does Lamar provide for the WAC? The possibility of getting to divisional play and a travel partner for La Tech and survival. What does LU do for the Sun Belt? All we do is decrease each SBC school's share of the conference pie. Currently, Lamar provides three pluses for any conference: (1) Football Attendance (2) Men's Basketball Attendnace (3) Adding another school, putting the conference closer to 12 (the magic conference title game number) We don't really provide a media market for any FBS conference unless we're brought in with SHSU (giving a presence in Houston, but not really delivering the market). Neither the Sun Belt nor the WAC really deliver many big media markets (unlike CUSA), so Lamar being the 9th (or 10th, or 11th) school in a conference is the most we're currently bringing since we don't have a marketable team in any money sport.
D301Bhoys Posted May 27, 2011 Posted May 27, 2011 I think this entire conversation is premature. Lamar would be in the bottom half of either the WAC or the Sun Belt in terms of enrollment, endowment, and football facilities. Perhaps my opinion is too colored by LU's previous attempt to move up the athletics food chain, but I would think the prudent decision is to stay FCS until we've experienced success at this level and are better positioned for a jump during the next conference realignment. I think it makes sense for schools with larger enrollments, say 25,000+, but LU is relatively small. I'd rather be the big fish in a small pond for a little while and then jump than end up bye week fodder like Western Kentucky or New Mexico State.
Guest CardAmbassador Posted May 27, 2011 Posted May 27, 2011 I think this entire conversation is premature. Lamar would be in the bottom half of either the WAC or the Sun Belt in terms of enrollment, endowment, and football facilities. Perhaps my opinion is too colored by LU's previous attempt to move up the athletics food chain, but I would think the prudent decision is to stay FCS until we've experienced success at this level and are better positioned for a jump during the next conference realignment. I think it makes sense for schools with larger enrollments, say 25,000+, but LU is relatively small. I'd rather be the big fish in a small pond for a little while and then jump than end up bye week fodder like Western Kentucky or New Mexico State. D301Bhoys: Thanks for registering. Our enrollment we would be larger than La Tech and Idaho and also larger than several SBC teams too. Football facilities would be at the bottom but that is not because of the condition of our stadium but rather the amount of seats we currently have. It's true that our endowment would be third lowest in the 2012 WAC, but our endowment in the Sun Belt would be near the middle of the conference. All I'm pointing out is that we wouldn't be in last place in any of these categories which you have mentioned. I don't think we will be overwhelmed by any of these schools in terms of resources. It will strictly be the quality of our sports teams which must improve. I would say that waiting too long might hurt rather than help Lamar. If we move within the next few years, while football is new, we can keep the excitement up and parley the FBS tag into even more support, recognition and prestige. Financially Lamar is a much better position now than it was in the 80's early 90's. I understand if you still see it as a bad or premature move but I think we need to keep up the forward momentum. Here are the stats on the SBC and WAC endowments/enrollments: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Athletic_Conference#Current_members http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Belt_Conference#Current_members
D301Bhoys Posted May 27, 2011 Posted May 27, 2011 You're welcome. I'm glad to find a place to talk about Lamar, Cardinal football and the other sports. Lamar would be in the bottom half of both leagues in terms of endowment and enrollment. Yes, LU wouldn't be at the very bottom, but it's not far off. That's not the type of competitive disadvantage one wants. I was shocked (although, being in Georgia and knowing something of the low priority higher education has in the deep south, I'm not sure why) at the small enrollment of Troy given their competitiveness at their level. A smaller school can be competitive athletically, of course; but, I'm telling you this, I was at the LU-Georgia State game and I watch a lot of live college football. Lamar has a long way to go to be competitive in FCS, let along FBS. Losing at a higher level of competition (while burning through money like mad) is not going to keep the momentum going nor sustain a current level of financial security for athletics. And I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the type of trade-offs which would have to be made for Lamar to win at the FBS level. On the other hand, enrollment will continue to increase, because Texas is going to continue to produce increasingly more high school graduates well into the next decade. Conversely, Louisiana is going to see fewer college-eligible students in their pipeline. Making the jump soon might allow LU to attract "better" students or at least students looking for an experience which mirrors the "collegiate ideal." I think there are good reasons to jump and the "timing" reason is one which leadership will have to "feel" is right. And it certainly fits the pattern of decision-making of LU's leadership over the last decade (at least that of which I'm aware): building amenities, new residence halls, and adding football. There are all common responses by similar institutions chasing higher prestige. UTSA and South Alabama are moving fast. Georgia State wants to move up, too. But I don't see LU as similar to those schools which enroll more students and/or have significantly larger endowments. Lamar seems more like Georgia Southern or UT-Chattanooga or Sam or SFA to me. FCS and the SLC in particular seem (from my point of view way out here in Georgia) like good fits for LU. We're competing very well in non-revenue sports in SLC, we have good facilities for the league (my memories of the Montagne Center are that it's better than Stegman Coliseum at the University of Georgia), and it seems we're in a good place financially. I hope the administration doesn't over-react to UTSA and Texas State's move and jeopardize that stability. The costs are a lot higher for football in FBS than in FCS (see Appalachian State's hesitancy to move up) and traveling in the WAC will be very pricey across the athletic department. I've written too much, but here's one last thought. Six short years ago, UTEP decided to leave the WAC for C-USA. It's not that much larger than LU, but has double the endowment and the strength of the UT system behind it. And they left the WAC. We're 800+ miles east of El Paso. And the WAC is falling apart. It's literally a dead conference walking. I can see joining the Sun Belt, but going into a league with San Jose State, Utah State and Idaho is pretty crazy. If it doesn't make sense for Montana, I don't see how it can for Lamar. I look forward to seeing more discussion about this going forward. I'm not completely opposed, but I am skeptical. And I have a lot of concerns about what it means across the board for Lamar University: the non-revenue sports, academics (especially the liberal arts), our mission to serve students and families in southeast Texas. . . Still, if Lamar joined the WAC, I'd be up at midnight watching the games, I can assure you of that.
Mike Posted May 27, 2011 Posted May 27, 2011 You're welcome. I'm glad to find a place to talk about Lamar, Cardinal football and the other sports. Lamar would be in the bottom half of both leagues in terms of endowment and enrollment. Yes, LU wouldn't be at the very bottom, but it's not far off. That's not the type of competitive disadvantage one wants. I was shocked (although, being in Georgia and knowing something of the low priority higher education has in the deep south, I'm not sure why) at the small enrollment of Troy given their competitiveness at their level. A smaller school can be competitive athletically, of course; but, I'm telling you this, I was at the LU-Georgia State game and I watch a lot of live college football. Lamar has a long way to go to be competitive in FCS, let along FBS. Losing at a higher level of competition (while burning through money like mad) is not going to keep the momentum going nor sustain a current level of financial security for athletics. And I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the type of trade-offs which would have to be made for Lamar to win at the FBS level. On the other hand, enrollment will continue to increase, because Texas is going to continue to produce increasingly more high school graduates well into the next decade. Conversely, Louisiana is going to see fewer college-eligible students in their pipeline. Making the jump soon might allow LU to attract "better" students or at least students looking for an experience which mirrors the "collegiate ideal." I think there are good reasons to jump and the "timing" reason is one which leadership will have to "feel" is right. And it certainly fits the pattern of decision-making of LU's leadership over the last decade (at least that of which I'm aware): building amenities, new residence halls, and adding football. There are all common responses by similar institutions chasing higher prestige. UTSA and South Alabama are moving fast. Georgia State wants to move up, too. But I don't see LU as similar to those schools which enroll more students and/or have significantly larger endowments. Lamar seems more like Georgia Southern or UT-Chattanooga or Sam or SFA to me. FCS and the SLC in particular seem (from my point of view way out here in Georgia) like good fits for LU. We're competing very well in non-revenue sports in SLC, we have good facilities for the league (my memories of the Montagne Center are that it's better than Stegman Coliseum at the University of Georgia), and it seems we're in a good place financially. I hope the administration doesn't over-react to UTSA and Texas State's move and jeopardize that stability. The costs are a lot higher for football in FBS than in FCS (see Appalachian State's hesitancy to move up) and traveling in the WAC will be very pricey across the athletic department. I've written too much, but here's one last thought. Six short years ago, UTEP decided to leave the WAC for C-USA. It's not that much larger than LU, but has double the endowment and the strength of the UT system behind it. And they left the WAC. We're 800+ miles east of El Paso. And the WAC is falling apart. It's literally a dead conference walking. I can see joining the Sun Belt, but going into a league with San Jose State, Utah State and Idaho is pretty crazy. If it doesn't make sense for Montana, I don't see how it can for Lamar. I look forward to seeing more discussion about this going forward. I'm not completely opposed, but I am skeptical. And I have a lot of concerns about what it means across the board for Lamar University: the non-revenue sports, academics (especially the liberal arts), our mission to serve students and families in southeast Texas. . . Still, if Lamar joined the WAC, I'd be up at midnight watching the games, I can assure you of that. You make some good points D301 and I just want to echo thanking you for joining and contributing. I hope to see more post from you.
TexGator Posted May 27, 2011 Posted May 27, 2011 You're welcome. I'm glad to find a place to talk about Lamar, Cardinal football and the other sports. Lamar would be in the bottom half of both leagues in terms of endowment and enrollment. Yes, LU wouldn't be at the very bottom, but it's not far off. That's not the type of competitive disadvantage one wants. I was shocked (although, being in Georgia and knowing something of the low priority higher education has in the deep south, I'm not sure why) at the small enrollment of Troy given their competitiveness at their level. A smaller school can be competitive athletically, of course; but, I'm telling you this, I was at the LU-Georgia State game and I watch a lot of live college football. Lamar has a long way to go to be competitive in FCS, let along FBS. Losing at a higher level of competition (while burning through money like mad) is not going to keep the momentum going nor sustain a current level of financial security for athletics. And I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the type of trade-offs which would have to be made for Lamar to win at the FBS level. On the other hand, enrollment will continue to increase, because Texas is going to continue to produce increasingly more high school graduates well into the next decade. Conversely, Louisiana is going to see fewer college-eligible students in their pipeline. Making the jump soon might allow LU to attract "better" students or at least students looking for an experience which mirrors the "collegiate ideal." I think there are good reasons to jump and the "timing" reason is one which leadership will have to "feel" is right. And it certainly fits the pattern of decision-making of LU's leadership over the last decade (at least that of which I'm aware): building amenities, new residence halls, and adding football. There are all common responses by similar institutions chasing higher prestige. UTSA and South Alabama are moving fast. Georgia State wants to move up, too. But I don't see LU as similar to those schools which enroll more students and/or have significantly larger endowments. Lamar seems more like Georgia Southern or UT-Chattanooga or Sam or SFA to me. FCS and the SLC in particular seem (from my point of view way out here in Georgia) like good fits for LU. We're competing very well in non-revenue sports in SLC, we have good facilities for the league (my memories of the Montagne Center are that it's better than Stegman Coliseum at the University of Georgia), and it seems we're in a good place financially. I hope the administration doesn't over-react to UTSA and Texas State's move and jeopardize that stability. The costs are a lot higher for football in FBS than in FCS (see Appalachian State's hesitancy to move up) and traveling in the WAC will be very pricey across the athletic department. I've written too much, but here's one last thought. Six short years ago, UTEP decided to leave the WAC for C-USA. It's not that much larger than LU, but has double the endowment and the strength of the UT system behind it. And they left the WAC. We're 800+ miles east of El Paso. And the WAC is falling apart. It's literally a dead conference walking. I can see joining the Sun Belt, but going into a league with San Jose State, Utah State and Idaho is pretty crazy. If it doesn't make sense for Montana, I don't see how it can for Lamar. I look forward to seeing more discussion about this going forward. I'm not completely opposed, but I am skeptical. And I have a lot of concerns about what it means across the board for Lamar University: the non-revenue sports, academics (especially the liberal arts), our mission to serve students and families in southeast Texas. . . Still, if Lamar joined the WAC, I'd be up at midnight watching the games, I can assure you of that. I've seen the Sun Belt as a more logical partner in the future for a while. Western Athletic Conference - fly to most games - few existing rivalries - very spread out league - 8 schools and scrambling for viability (in the eyes of most) Sun Belt Conference - bus to most games - many old rivalries - comparatively more compact - 10 football schools, 10 baseball schools, 11 basketball schools (with rumors of UALR leaving for a conference w/o football... speaking of GA State, they wouldn't be a bad new member of the Sun Belt, since they're already in a wacky conference of the CAA)
coachacola Posted May 27, 2011 Posted May 27, 2011 Over on bobcatreport.com Jack thinks there's a possibly that La Tech, NM State, Texas State and UTSA will stick together for the next round of conference madness and present themselves as a package. If the Sun Belt and/or CUSA conferences lose a group of schools then I could see them jumping together. I could see Lamar part of that group if Lamar was in the WAC. As far as the Sun Belt goes, I'd like to see both UALR and UL-Monroe leave (to the SLC maybe?), which would bring the Sun Belt down to 9 schools. With 3 slots to fill Lamar might have a good chance of getting invited. I don't care much for the duo of FAU/FIU, so get rid of them and now there's 5 spots.
D301Bhoys Posted May 27, 2011 Posted May 27, 2011 I've seen the Sun Belt as a more logical partner in the future for a while. If LU wants to go FBS, then the SBC is the only place it really fits. If the Big East raids C-USA, then C-USA might reach into the Sun Belt and the provide an opportunity to move up. The real question is if LU fits in FBS. I read in the Beaumont Enterprise President Simmons quoted saying "If an invitation were forthcoming, Lamar University would give it serious consideration. Ultimately, it would be in our best interest to do so." He's only saying they would consider it and he's right. You have to think about it if a league wants you. The same article quotes WAC Commissioner Karl Benson: "Lamar is not being considered for membership in the WAC." They sort of have to want you first.
Guest NorthoftheBorder Posted May 27, 2011 Posted May 27, 2011 At the speed things are changing these days, LU has to work diligently to become FBS or risk being left out in the cold althogher in what will probably be a non D-1 classification as it is MHO that what is now FCS will ultimately become non D-1. As previously mentioned, prestige is exactly one of the main reasons to push forward on the FBS train.
D301Bhoys Posted May 27, 2011 Posted May 27, 2011 @ coachcola: That's an interesting take on the "packaging" of schools using the WAC as a way-station to another league. It's hard to believe how far the WAC has fallen in just a year and how it happened. Craig Thompson is cold-blooded. It's pretty rare that schools leave FBS and/or conferences unless they're moving up the prestige ladder. I wouldn't hold my breath on UL-M or, for that matter, FIU and FAU. What's not to like about the Florida schools? From a conference perspective, they're both big, fairly well funded and lie in a fertile area for football talent: every other team gets a chance to go down there once a year for a game and recruiting.
.png.88e0b900f1aa353dc4be09303a3550aa.png)
Recommended Posts