NCAAbbs

Rick Dickson is in S'port, as part of their promotion tour of N. La., and was asked by local reporters to comment on CUSA expansion. Dickson said that he personally preferred the idea of remaining at 11, but thinks the league will expand to 12, so in that case, Tulane is definitely supporting Tech as the 12th member.

FWIW.

It' called being nice.

They might support Tech at this point. Regardless, if they were publically anti-Tech, it would be a ridiculously stupid political move.

its called, reality check Paul Drake

It might be - and if it is, it is also called one vote.

And if it is it is for non-athletic reasons as a western team in c-usa kills tulane and tulane has never had any interest in playing tech in tiddly winks.

Still, I must snicker at tech fans talking about reality- still bringing the INdy Bowl LOL

Hopefully, the other c-usa schools can save us from the consequences of our necessary political moves----starting down the slippery slope into the din of the sunbelt.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<a href='http://www.shreveporttimes.com/sports/html/820871B0-61EE-49C8-BE6E-F29E292CFE40.shtml' target='_blank'>http://www.shreveporttimes.com/sports/html...E292CFE40.shtml</a>

Tulane AD supports Tech’s C–USA bid
April 21, 2004
By Brian Vernellis

bvernellis@gannett.com

A year ago, Tulane Athletic Director Rick Dickson was fighting to keep his athletic department stable. So this year, when the news is focused on Conference USA expanding, he's more than happy to talk about it.

Dickson, football coach Chris Scelfo and women's basketball coach Lisa Stockton continued their state-wide tour on Tuesday, stopping in Shreveport to meet with alumni and supporters.

Just last year, the Green Wave's athletic program was in jeopardy and considering abandoning Division I for Division III. But the school's board of trustees elected to keep the status quo and Tulane unveiled a massive fundraising drive.

"The support has been evident by people across the state and across the country," Scelfo said. "More and more people are stepping forward so it's really not an issue that we're dealing with like we were last time."

The athletic department is on a $65 million campaign, half of which will support an endowment to ensure the department's long-term stability. The remaining portion is a mixture of increasing annual funding and season ticket sales.

"It's been a greater awareness out there from what we went through," Dickson said. "It got the alumni's attention and they've been more receptive."

The recent issue confronting Tulane is the possible expansion of its conference -- Conference USA.

Conference athletic directors are split on the matter, some favoring the current 11 teams while others wish to add a 12th team -- most likely either Texas-El Paso or Louisiana Tech. Dickson said the conference is probably leaning toward adding that 12th team.

"Personally, I liked the idea of 11 teams," Dickson said. "One of the reasons being with the additions we already got, we got at least three more schools with similiarities to Tulane in Tulsa, SMU and Rice.

"If we stayed at 11 we'd be all right with it, but if we're going to add a 12th, we've already made it clear that we support the state school, Louisiana Tech."

©The Shreveport Times
April 21, 2004

What he means is, of course we publicly support the state school - we're not idiots - we're here in Shreveport as part of our efforts to raise $65,000,000. In terms of the conference, however, the A.D.'s are privately on record as recommending UTEP, an absolute no-brainer given the alternatives.

I have yet to see a single reputable source or attributable source that backs up your claim about the AD's recommendation. NOT ONE!! There are several public statements such as the Tulane AD's that indicate no recommendation was made.

Just a point in fact... that doesn't mean it was unanimous. Dickson is probably sincere in his support for La Tech.

(in this case, I have more of a rooting interest in Dickson than La Tech. Dickson was the AD here at Tulsa for a few years. Very well respected here to this day)

Have no fear, PD, your friends at Southern Miss will be glad to take the fall and do the "dirty work" for you.

That's what I'm counting on

You need to keep UAB in line, however.
Not worried about anyone else

The west is a lost cause

:rofl: :roflup: :roflup: :roflup: :rofl:

UAB will do whatever Southern Miss and Memphis tells them to do. Have no fear.

Let me paraphrase...

"We'd rather stay at 11 than take Tech."

ok ok...bashing aside, Tech might be a good choice for Tulane with USM moving to the East. La Tech would provide a close-proximity natural rival.

I've almost stopped caring about any western additions. UCF will only see them every other year in football.

what a bunch of garbage..."down the slippery slope to the sunbelt." No addition to CUSA would put us in that position. In the first place we are talking about one team out of twelve. Secondly, the Sunbelt has a set of problems quite distinct from ours in CUSA.

Gotta tip my cap to the LT people after reading that article and Rick Dickson's quotes therein; I mean what unqualified support for La Tech! I'd rather stay at 11 but we'll support the in state school IF we go to 12. Whew! That Gov Blanco sure can pull strings.
When Dickson's presence in Monroe was mentioned by the LT people on this board yesterday they did not add, possibly not realizing, that it was a scheduled Tulane event. Some Dogs no doubt preferred it that way as they could spin a tale about smoke filled rooms where Green arms are twisted. This reinforces my impression that Tulane doesn't want Tech.

added on edit: as has been pointed out elsewhere, RD said these things in NLa. He would have likely expressed himself just a little differently elsewhere. I also think that when his statements, lukewarm though they are, filter into the mainstream media back in NOLA, he'll catch a little hell from some alumni who won't care if he was being politic.

it is so funny that what seemed like a sure shot has some of you jerks shaking in your shorts that once again,you might have the take the blue eyed monster from n Louisiana.It might be time to get out the staple gun boys.It's could be tstacle stapleing time.HAAAAAA.If you had any to start with

I'm the only one reacting to this.

Algiers and Long see it for what it is- speak from an AD who is too smart to step on toes.

Had this interview been to a NO paper, it would be meaningful

Tulane may support tech- but other than for political concerns, it has no logical basis

common Drake,you know it's got you a little concerned again.Don't worry,I don't see Tech getting in unless it is completely satisfactory to the terms that all of you are worried about.Tech will not get in on Ruston assets alone.They will have to do alot better than that.And if they do,believe me Shreveport is a great place for a weekend game and guess what you can drive there.

Has LT played a game in Shreveport while playing in the WAC? ..I dont know the answer...I'm just curious.

Played UTEP in shreveport in 2002 5,000 people in attendance half from UTEP
Played Miami there last year in front of about 35,000 pro miami crowd

LOL!! well thanx for the answer Minerfanatic

Yep, Sometimes people leave out Important Parts of the Puzzle

I said it does- I also said that more level-headed persons than me, see it for what it is.

Still no reputable or attributable sources out there for an AD recommendation to take UTEP. Convenient that its a "private" recommendation. Come on all you Tech bashers show me the source......... The fat lady ain't singing yet!!

I'm admittedly failing to see your contention, 81...

I fail to see why the reports that came out of Orlando and Charleston WV are considered fallacious...

Those reports were made by normally credible beat reporters/columnists who have historically shown that they can reap off-the-record conclusions from local ADs--who, in turn, are the only first-hand eyewitnesses that can testify to what went on.

I know you're hoping against hope... frankly Marshall fans have been there, too... we were knocking on CUSA's door for football-only a couple of years ago, and were seeminglythisclose... except for the Horizon League's decision to not accept us for other sports.

But as there was for us... there comes a point where it's difficult to argue with the indications in front of you, and you open yourself to some embarrassment to be so determined to rebut what unbiased third-parties have asserted to be factual.

Fanatic---

35,000 and it was a 'pro miami' crowd. Dude, get real.

The UTEP game was embarssing, that I will agree with, but again, 'half of the crowd was from UTEP' is also a joke. Pass whatever you are smoking this way.

By the way you left out SMU, and Oklahoma State out of the games played at Independence Stadium during the three years Tech has been in the WAC....

01- SMU (win)
02- Oklahoma State (win)
02- UTEP (win)
03- Miami, Florida (loss)

04- TBA (probably Fresno State)
05- Kansas State

GO DAWGS!!

Sorry you can't see, but when I look at the published reports in their totality, I just don't think it's a slam dunk for UTEP. Not a single AD is on record saying the group vote was for UTEP, while there are AD's on record saying no decision was made. If I've missed something let me know. I'll be glad to read it. And I didn't say the reports were fallacious just unsubstantiated or attributable.

You said "reputable," actually. And I guess it's just a matter of the level of convincing you need to call something reputable.

I don't think I need to get the Orlando or Charleston, WV accounts for you... you've read those, right?

And in fact, those weren't even the first ones to break the news... for Marshall fans, that came by way of a contact that GreenSteve has with someone who definitely should have a clue, though admittedly he hasn't been right 100% of the time. The strong indication of that original post was that the packet sent out by BB's office to the ADs for their review contained documents and reports that favored inviting UTEP.

Unsubstantiated? To some degree. But I personally know GS, and I know who the contact is, and fwiw to you and other LaTech fans... you should be very prepared to learn for a fact that this is all as it is being laid out to be.

_sturt_,

Thanks for the correction. But do please point me in the direction of a single AD on record saying that UTEP was the group's choice and/or recommendation. I've not seen it. My contention is simply that there are AD's on record saying a decision wasn't made. Am I wrong?

'81

Because they disagree with his position.

Tulane's AD was in Monroe, LA the evening of 4/19. He said that the CUSA AD's forwarded three possible moves to the presidents:

1. Stay at 11
2. Add La Tech
3. Add Utep

He said that some schools wanted to stay at 11, some schools want us and some schools want utep. There was no majority decision.

All three suggetions, with the pros and cons, have been forwarded to the presidents.

He firmly stated that in NO WAY is Tech out of the running and NOTHING has been decided.

The Orlando story sounds more and more like a complete fabrication.

My only point is that there seems to be quite a few contradictions to the original "UTEP is in" theory. Explain why the Tulane AD would go on record with his comments about the process if they were fabrications. I've not heard any other AD's on record contradicting his statements. Sorry if you don't want to consider that the UTEP bandwagon may have a broken wheel or at least a leaky tire. I do hope for Tech to get the invite and I believe we'd make a great addition to CUSA. At least a loyal, grateful one.

81, no you are not wrong... in fact, no AD to my knowledge has openly said that he recommended UTEP.

Which begs the question, why wouldn't they acknowledge it openly when there are reasons to conclude that at least two acknowledged it "off the record" (vis-a-vis, the earlier newspaper stories)...???

But which, in turn, begs the question, why would they? What advantage is there to saying it publicly? What disadvantage is there to saying it publicly?

There is no advantage to saying it publicly.

There is a disadvantage, though, and that is that either the presidents could decide not to follow the recommendation or the school to be invited could, in the interim, have a change of heart.

And that said, there is an advantage to those who endorse La Tech to say so publicly, and to do so now before it becomes official... ie, so they avoid being lambasted in the press for not supporting schools they "should have" supported.

So, as I've contended from the start... begin to get over the denial process early, 81... it can't hurt... and if somehow someway, we're all wrong... it's just that much better a surprise to you and the rest. Just better for your mental health all the way around.

Why is this so hard to understand? It has been explained to you ad nauseum. When asked by a specific reporter in Shreveport if he supports LT, at the point when the decision has already been passed from his hands, of course he is going to say yes. What is he going to do, go to a fundraising event full of Shreveport luminaries and tell a reporter there that he doesn't support the local university?

Its already out of his hands. He gives an indication of that in his statement when he says, "well, I would rather stay at 11, but we are probably going to 12."

Thats his subtle way of telling people that the his opinions don't mean anything at this point. So he has nothing to lose by saying he supports La Tech, and everything to gain by saying he does even though his time for input has passed.

Dawg, I supported La Tech's membership as much as anyone, but its going to be UTEP or nobody. If you look at this statement from Dickson objectively, you will understand that.

There are confirmed reports from sources on background in multiple papers saying it will be UTEP. Background sources do have credibility. The source isn't anonymous, its just anonymous to us. The reporters had to have spoken to multiple AD's to confirm it.

Its over man. Im sorry.

FWIW, WVU's AD publicly said he would back Marshall for BE inclusion.... didn't happen did it?

Okay..... all you Tulane fans........altogether now...."HOGDAWG TOLD US SO!". HAHA!

I told you people 2 days ago that the Governors office placed a call to Tulane and that we would have NO MORE TROUBLE out of Tulane.

The defense rest.

HD

That's 4 votes for Louisiana Tech:
1. Tulsa
2. SMU
3. Rice
4. Tulane

As stated before, look for U. of Houston to be #5 for LA Tech.

And you were talking trash just like you were talking trash about the I bowl- complete mythology. Complete desparation. The governor getting involved- what a way to use her equity.

You don't live in La, you have zero contacts in La, and even less with Tech. You've been right on nothing.

Tech is finished- out of the running.

That kind of language is uncalled for Paul. Just take the guy at face value or disregard what he says....its as simple as that.

i.e. agree with tech fans or hold your tongue.

I'll pass on your advice, thank you.

Here's some advice- don't put a team you don't root for in your handle.

I edited to accomodate your sensitivities.

Half from UTEP????? hah, now that is funny! UTEP??? That is the single most ridiculous statement ever made on Al Gore's invention.

If there were 20 people there from UTEP I'd be surprised.

:rofl:

And a pro-Miami crowd???? You are an a$$! Yep, all 1,000 Canes fans in attendance made a 40K crowd theirs.

Tell me, is this how UTEP counts its home crowds too? Perhaps someone should look a little closer....