UNLV

Forget SHSU. Have you been to katfan site. They should rename it we-are-obsessed-with-hating-on-Lamar.com. 90 percent of the non-SHSU post are hate Lamar post. Seriously, there are more post on Lamar there than on this site. 

[quote name="AggiesAreWe" post="1258600" timestamp="1346558027"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=100286.msg1258595#msg1258595 date=1346557727] [quote author=oldbuc77 link=topic=100286.msg1258561#msg1258561 date=1346556025] According to this site: [Hidden Content] it was about 13.3 million. Based on the USA Today information (provided by the various schools) the Sun Belt and WAC are the only two conferences in FBS that Lamar could hope to compete in financially. While the budget would compete with the bottom (financially) of the conferences they would be nowhere near the top. Lamar wouldn't have the smallest budget in FBS but they would be near the bottom. To legitimatly go FBS and hope to really compete financially and on the field, Lamar would need to at least double and preferably triple its budget. The highest percentge subsidies of athletic budgets are in FBC, but on average the largest $ amount subsidies are FBS schools in nonautomatic BCS qualifying conferences (USA Today). Lamar's subsidy is already at 70%+. That could only get higher. I'm all for going FBS if it makes sense, but we need to find a chunk of money somewhere first. Being a dreg in the FBS gets you no more respect than being in the FCS and the SLC. The only reason for a move to FBS at this point would be a vain attempt to sooth feelings of FCS/SLC inadequacy. If you know where Lamar could pick up another $20 mil a year then lets go for it ... [/quote]Lamar does not need $20 million to compete in the lower FBS conferences; CUSA, SBC, or MWC.Although $20 million would be nice...Lamar only need an extra $4 million for SBC or 7-10 million to compete regularly in a CUSA or MWC. Ark st is doing fine in the SBC with only a 15 million budget. [b]Also, in the case of the MWC, this move would benefit Lamar basketball far more than football.[/b] [/quote] True, but football is the driving force in just about everyone's athletic budget. [/quote]Lamar does not need to follow other schools. Lamar football is so bad, basketball needs to lead until football catches up.

[quote name="oldbuc77" post="1258561" timestamp="1346556025"] According to this site: [Hidden Content] it was about 13.3 million. Based on the USA Today information (provided by the various schools) the Sun Belt and WAC are the only two conferences in FBS that Lamar could hope to compete in financially. While the budget would compete with the bottom (financially) of the conferences they would be nowhere near the top. Lamar wouldn't have the smallest budget in FBS but they would be near the bottom. To legitimatly go FBS and hope to really compete financially and on the field, Lamar would need to at least double and preferably triple its budget. The highest percentge subsidies of athletic budgets are in FBC, but on average the largest $ amount subsidies are FBS schools in nonautomatic BCS qualifying conferences (USA Today). Lamar's subsidy is already at 70%+. That could only get higher. I'm all for going FBS if it makes sense, but we need to find a chunk of money somewhere first. Being a dreg in the FBS gets you no more respect than being in the FCS and the SLC. The only reason for a move to FBS at this point would be a vain attempt to sooth feelings of FCS/SLC inadequacy. If you know where Lamar could pick up another $20 mil a year then lets go for it ... [/quote]Lamar does not need $20 million to compete in the lower FBS conferences; CUSA, SBC, or MWC.Although $20 million would be nice...Lamar only need an extra $4 million for SBC or 7-10 million to compete regularly in a CUSA or MWC. Ark st is doing fine in the SBC with only a 15 million budget. Also, in the case of the MWC, this move would benefit Lamar basketball far more than football.

[quote name="jdcurran235" post="1258551" timestamp="1346555166"] [quote author=coachacola link=topic=102423.msg1258504#msg1258504 date=1346552471] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=102423.msg1258465#msg1258465 date=1346550817] If Lamar can't compete in football, change the coach. But don't punish Pat Knight and Tidwell and other teams  by not going MWC.  Roc and Woodard, geeez. I told yall about both. [/quote] I do agree with you on that!! [/quote] I'm with ya [/quote]If Lamar can't put up a decent fight again Hawaii in 2 weeks, Woodard needs to go.

Texas st 30 Houston 13.....Texas st is looking very good to the MWC.

Texas st is beating Houston. If they can hold on for the win, the MWC will have them on the phone.

[quote name="AggiesAreWe" post="1258472" timestamp="1346551262"] Final Lamar          0 ULL            40 Scoreless 2nd half for both teams. Good news, bad news. Lamar held ULL 2nd team scoreless, but Lamar could not score on ULL 2nd team defense. [/quote]We fans need to email ULL to thank them for not buffooning Lamar more, or as SFA did Lamar. I wonder if Benson called ULL and told them to stop the stomping?

If Lamar can't compete in football, change the coach. But don't punish Pat Knight and Tidwell and other teams  by not going MWC.  Roc and Woodard, geeez. I told yall about both.

This move already cost us a lot of points.Low snap, high snap, wild snap...,.,geeez

[quote name="puddin tane" post="1258138" timestamp="1346532009"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=101078.msg1256952#msg1256952 date=1346465417] Oh wait, puddin tane would rather go to Monroe. [/quote] ...last year you had us in the WAC.. ::) ::) ::) [/quote]And it almost happened. Lamar has a better shot at the MWC than with the WAC last year. SBC is nervous so we could see a SBC invite once its clear Lamar can't make the FCS playoffs.

[quote name="jdcurran235" post="1256970" timestamp="1346465631"] Besides I see two things happening next year. We either go with TxSt to the MWC or we end up in the SBC as a TxSt replacement. Either scenario is better than being in the SLC. [/quote]I doubt Texas st goes MWC without Lamar. Unless there is a surprise regional school. If not, Lamar will bridge Texas st to the SBC. None of those cheap-o's wants NMSU in the SBC.  No conference wants NMSU. I wonder what they will do. BTW, FAU beat Wagner 7-3. SBC sucks. Lamar could play in the SBC now.

Oh wait, puddin tane would rather go to Monroe.

[quote name="jdcurran235" post="1256514" timestamp="1346459038"] I actually agree with UNLV.  I think the MWC with a TxSt or the SBC are a good fit.  I would rather play Utah St. Than MTSU.  ULL is the only team I really care about in the sunbelt.  I think there are more interesting match ups in the MWC actually. [/quote]All day on the SBC forum fans were saying how SBC schools will stop playing schools like Mcneese and look to play SWAC schools. Talk about loser mentality. Play weaker teams to make your school look better. Do you really want Lamar to get caught up with those losers. Wyoming and my Running Rebels have big stadium plans. "A proposed new 40,000-seat domed football stadium at UNLV would sit between the Thomas & Mack Center on campus and Paradise Road, said James Dean Leavitt, chairman of the higher education system's Board of Regents. If it is ever built, the stadium complex would include a hotel, campus housing, restaurants and retail space, he said. A portion of Swenson Street would be removed under the proposal, he said. "It will eventually develop into a town square concept," Leavitt said. [Hidden Content] Imaging grabbing one of those $120 Southwest specials for a Lamar vs UNLV games. I could show you all my old dorm.

[quote name="puddin tane" post="1256432" timestamp="1346454929"] aside from UNLV...nobody in setexas gives a rats arse about football in utah,new mex, nevada, etc...........big whoop [/quote]Small minds think small. Bigger whoop. MWC gives Lamar fbs and top 8 basketball on ESPN. SBC give Lamar UL-Monroe and Troy basketball. Nicholl st could be them.

[quote name="jdcurran235" post="1256792" timestamp="1346462574"] We are doing pretty good budget wise. [/quote]Someone correct me, but I think it is over 15 million.

[quote name="coachacola" post="1255849" timestamp="1346424854"] Future SBC member Georgia State got killed at home by a so-so South Carolina State team.  I read that the SLC's vast majority of FBS wins are against SBC teams. Back to the MWC, looks like the Big East may try to get Navy for it's 14th football team which would leave the MWC untouched.  If Navy goes BE then does the MWC stay put for a while at 10 schools?  Maybe go to 12 with a combo of Texas State and New Mexico State and Lamar could take Texas State's spot in the Sun Belt.  Still many possibilities over the next few years. [/quote]Knock Knock Knock Cola, you mean BYU. LOL. Navy is already in the BE for 2015. If the MWC goes untouched, it could still be Lamar and Texas st. NMSU is not close enough to travel partner with Texas st. MWC is still saying no to NMSU.MWC taking Texas st and Lamar would shut SBC out of Texas football. This would be the goal. Texas st is still an island in the SBC, keep that in mind.

Or the SBC football is only a minimum step up from SLC. I have been saying this for the longest to those who say Lamar should stay in the SLC because Lamar could never compete with the big boys of FBS SBC.

Mcneese is stomping MTSU.....

[quote name="jdcurran235" post="1255092" timestamp="1346370585"] 31-28 Cardinals.  Cause I have faith!!! [/quote]Thank You....Me too....

[quote name="WOS95" post="1255059" timestamp="1346369126"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=101078.msg1255023#msg1255023 date=1346366977] No No No, you guys got it wrong....AGAIN. The SBC is a regional fit for Lamar, and it would be nice to renew old rivalries. But the SBC over all sports is only slightly better than the SLC. The only benefit in going to the SBC is FBS. OTOH, the MWC also offer FBS but only slightly better than the SBC. However the MWC basketball is ranked 8th among 32 conferences with the 3 worse MWC MBB schools leaving. The SBC is ranked 19th, SLC 28th. MWC is ranked very slightly below the A-10 and PAC 12 for the 6th spot. The exposure for Lamar would be huge. Top 25 teams coming to Beaumont, ESPN highlights regularly, and at least 3-4 ESPN./ESPN2 late games per season. In the SBC, ZERO ESPN/.ESPN2 games. In the SLC, Pat Knight stays for a few successful seasons. In the MWC, Knight stays a long time. Lamar would be crazy insane to choose the SBC over the MWC. [/quote] unlv..u make it sound so simple....if only it were so... [/quote]It is simple. Just accept the invite if offered. It would help if Lamar released an artist drawing of what an expanded stadium would look like nudge nudge. Lamar vs UNLV.....my heart is torn...lol

No No No, you guys got it wrong....AGAIN. The SBC is a regional fit for Lamar, and it would be nice to renew old rivalries. But the SBC over all sports is only slightly better than the SLC. The only benefit in going to the SBC is FBS. OTOH, the MWC also offer FBS but only slightly better than the SBC. However the MWC basketball is ranked 8th among 32 conferences with the 3 worse MWC MBB schools leaving. The SBC is ranked 19th, SLC 28th. MWC is ranked very slightly below the A-10 and PAC 12 for the 6th spot. The exposure for Lamar would be huge. Top 25 teams coming to Beaumont, ESPN highlights regularly, and at least 3-4 ESPN./ESPN2 late games per season. In the SBC, ZERO ESPN/.ESPN2 games. In the SLC, Pat Knight stays for a few successful seasons. In the MWC, Knight stays a long time. Lamar would be crazy insane to choose the SBC over the MWC.

[quote name="WOS95" post="1254564" timestamp="1346333222"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=101078.msg1254323#msg1254323 date=1346293125] [quote author=WOS95 link=topic=101078.msg1253883#msg1253883 date=1346253836] i know this is off topic..and if we change conferences im ok with that..as most fans probably will be ..but i think attendance is down some because of the 50-0 beatdowns we had to endure last year...im just not under the impression that SETX cant fill a 16000 seat stadium, regardless of opponent, unless the team is really terrible...i made every home game last year..and the team just wasnt very good... [/quote]Flawed logic. Texas st has Texas Tech at their home, UL-Monroe has Baylor. Do you honestly think Lamar would be having attendance drops if Texas Tech and Baylor was coming to Beaumont instead of Langston and Mcmury?  honestly? [/quote] if we had those games on the schedule great and attendance probably would be high, so i agree with you there...but thats only 2 games out of 6 home games...what about the other 4 home games..do u honestly think that if our team is not good more people will attend just because we played baylor and texas tech? [/quote]Yes. If Lamar stinks but is playing a Baylor or Tech at home, more people will attend than if Lamar was good but playing Langston.

[quote name="WOS95" post="1253883" timestamp="1346253836"] i know this is off topic..and if we change conferences im ok with that..as most fans probably will be ..but i think attendance is down some because of the 50-0 beatdowns we had to endure last year...im just not under the impression that SETX cant fill a 16000 seat stadium, regardless of opponent, unless the team is really terrible...i made every home game last year..and the team just wasnt very good... [/quote]Flawed logic. Texas st has Texas Tech at their home, UL-Monroe has Baylor. Do you honestly think Lamar would be having attendance drops if Texas Tech and Baylor was coming to Beaumont instead of Langston and Mcmury?  honestly?

[quote name="coachacola" post="1253817" timestamp="1346248381"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=101078.msg1253648#msg1253648 date=1346205798] I don't throw darts at a conference map then declare Lamar is going there. 6 months ago I would have said anyone is crazy to think Lamar is going to the MWC. Things have changed. All over the net they are saying the MWC is screwed. Consensus is Texas st and ? gets the invite. Nobody knows who the ? is. The clues are: 1. No Idaho 2. No NMSU 3. No non-football 4. Texas schools.  2 or more. I think the ? is Lamar. [/quote] If the MWC does lose some schools and they have to reload they can always pick up Idaho and/or NMSU.  Even though the MWC may want to get back into Texas, I doubt they'll chose Lamar just because they are in Texas.  The WAC needed 8 teams to survive and they still chose not to invite Lamar.  Rumor was the western schools didn't want another eastern football school in the WAC, now those schools (SJSU and Utah State) are in the MWC. [/quote]Totally different situation. The western WAC didn't invite Lamar last year for 2 reasons. 1. Inviting Lamar would have gave the eastern teams the voting majority. The western teams didn't want to give up the majority. 2. The western schools was delusional in thinking sac st, or portland, or the Montana's would join.,Then Lamar would be added. Those idiots thought they had 2 years to invite Lamar. MWC situation is different. 1. Adding Lamar and Texas st won't remove the western majority. 2. MWC knows their options are limited. Idaho, will not get the MWC invite. I see no scenario for them. Dome too small, no baseball, short drive to pac 12 school, no market, nothing. NMSU has a chance in my opinion even when MWC told them no. MWC first choice is Texas st,. Texas st is not going alone. MWC will need 3 football schools. Texas st, NMSU, and Lamar Who else?

[quote name="kingkat99" post="1253298" timestamp="1346178799"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=101078.msg1253202#msg1253202 date=1346171073] [quote author=kingkat99 link=topic=101078.msg1253173#msg1253173 date=1346167223] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=101078.msg1252884#msg1252884 date=1346108566] [quote author=kingkat99 link=topic=101078.msg1252625#msg1252625 date=1346089435] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=101078.msg1251434#msg1251434 date=1345950025] [quote author=coachacola link=topic=101078.msg1251139#msg1251139 date=1345924682] When Denver was in the Sun Belt they were sending their teams all the way to Florida.  I don't think it matter what conference they are in they still have to travel a lot.  I guess if the money if right then AFA could join the BE for football and put their other teams in PL.  I just think that's a long shot but you never know. But I still don't see the remaining MWC schools inviting Lamar, no matter what we think about it.  If they refuse to take New Mexico State then there's no way they want Lamar. [/quote]Ok since you want to use exact words. MWC commissioner said no to Idaho and NMSU. He also said no non-football schools and he will invite the Texas schools. Cola, who are the Football playing Texas schools? No CUSA, BE, SEC, or Big 12 football playing school in Texas will leave their conference to go to the MWC. So who are those Texas schools the MWC commissioner is targeting?  Can anyone tell me? [/quote] Texas State and North Texas. [/quote]Use a bit of common sense. North Texas will not leave conference games in San Antonio, Houston, Tulsa, and New Orleans to play in Fort Collins and Laramie. And pay a 5 million dollar exit fee. [/quote] And you think Texas State will???  They are both Sunbelt schools so there is as good a chance for NT as TXST.  Im not sure either would trade that for a MWC that has gotten so deperate they would be going after Lamar? [/quote]This is North Texas last season in the Sunbelt. Next year they will be playing in CUSA. You did know UNT was going to CUSA? Texas st would be as crazy as Lamar was for going back to the Southland to not go MWC. MWC still ranks higher than the SBC. Will you be happy for Lamar if the MWC invites Texas st and Lamar? [/quote] Honestly no I didnt as I only follow my university and the other members of its conference and dont really concern myself with everyone else and moving up on a daily basis. [/quote]I don't throw darts at a conference map then declare Lamar is going there. 6 months ago I would have said anyone is crazy to think Lamar is going to the MWC. Things have changed. All over the net they are saying the MWC is screwed. Consensus is Texas st and ? gets the invite. Nobody knows who the ? is. The clues are: 1. No Idaho 2. No NMSU 3. No non-football 4. Texas schools.  2 or more. I think the ? is Lamar.