A Sea Of Red

Rumors coming around that with Big East looking to add 6 more schools for football in their conference, the MAC, and CUSA could be looking to replace teams that leave their leagues.

Also a possibility that JMU, Richmond, or W&M moves to MAC or CUSA as a replacement which could make the Colonial look to add a replacement of its own.

not to be snarky: we have multiple threads going on this. check "NON-LU SPORTS" but there are many around.

kinda been the topic du jour around here for 5 years.

Also I'd think we'd be much more attractice for FBS then W&M and Richmond.

From the class of 09 wrote:Also I'd think we'd be much more attractice for FBS then W&M and Richmond.

Yes. Because of our long history of football excellence.

Purple Haize wrote:

From the class of 09 wrote:Also I'd think we'd be much more attractice for FBS then W&M and Richmond.

Yes. Because of our long history of football excellence.

That or because of our size. 12k on campus 60k online compared to somewhere around 5k for Richmond and W&M. I mean have you seen Richmonds new stadium? Doesn't it just scream FBS?

Obviously they've had more success at the FCS level but they aren't trying to grow and we already are 2 to 14 times larger then these schools (depending on who you include).

Purple Haize wrote:

From the class of 09 wrote:Also I'd think we'd be much more attractice for FBS then W&M and Richmond.

Yes. Because of our long history of football excellence.

On and off the field, Haize . Not only that, but in sports like Field Hockey and Men's Basketball, we've been above the fray for the longest time.

From the class of 09 wrote:

Purple Haize wrote:

From the class of 09 wrote:Also I'd think we'd be much more attractice for FBS then W&M and Richmond.

Yes. Because of our long history of football excellence.

That or because of our size. 12k on campus 60k online compared to somewhere around 5k for Richmond and W&M. I mean have you seen Richmonds new stadium? Doesn't it just scream FBS?

Obviously they've had more success at the FCS level but they aren't trying to grow and we already are 2 to 14 times larger then these schools (depending on who you include).

I agree. North Texas has about 40,000 resident students and they're pretty good at football. Well, okay, 10 years ago

Size has nothing to do with it. Wake has pretty good athletics for a very small school.

jbock13 wrote:
I agree. North Texas has about 40,000 resident students and they're pretty good at football. Well, okay, 10 years ago

These are called exceptions

jbock13 wrote: Size has nothing to do with it.

First try at a response: no, that's too easy

2nd attempt: Since when does potential revenue not matter? You sound like you need to join your friends on Wall Street.

jbock13 wrote: Wake has pretty good athletics for a very small school.

For a small school agree...but for the ACC they are at or below average

+ what BYD said

From the class of 09 wrote:

jbock13 wrote:
I agree. North Texas has about 40,000 resident students and they're pretty good at football. Well, okay, 10 years ago

These are called exceptions

jbock13 wrote: Size has nothing to do with it.

First try at a response: no, that's too easy

2nd attempt: Since when does potential revenue not matter? You sound like you need to join your friends on Wall Street.

jbock13 wrote: Wake has pretty good athletics for a very small school.

For a small school agree...but for the ACC they are at or below average

+ what BYD said

First of all, I never said revenue doesn't matter. And if it does, sounds to me a mark against LU.

Second, Wake has always had an okay football team, and a pretty good basketball team (I know recently they've had troubles ever since their one coach passed away).

jbock13 wrote:
First of all, I never said revenue doesn't matter. And if it does, sounds to me a mark against LU.

Second, Wake has always had an okay football team, and a pretty good basketball team (I know recently they've had troubles ever since their one coach passed away).

You think Richmond and W&M have more revenue potential then LU

Nope. Once again you're comparing things I never even said. First time, I didn't say anything about revenue. Second time, I never said anything about WM or Richmond.

Calm down my friend. I know we disagree but just stick to what I've said if you want to argue about it.

From the class of 09 wrote:

jbock13 wrote: Wake has pretty good athletics for a very small school.

For a small school agree...but for the ACC they are at or below average

Florida State disagrees this week ...

jbock13 wrote:Nope. Once again you're comparing things I never even said. First time, I didn't say anything about revenue. Second time, I never said anything about WM or Richmond.

Calm down my friend. I know we disagree but just stick to what I've said if you want to argue about it.

revenue=size

From the class of 09 wrote:

jbock13 wrote:Nope. Once again you're comparing things I never even said. First time, I didn't say anything about revenue. Second time, I never said anything about WM or Richmond.

Calm down my friend. I know we disagree but just stick to what I've said if you want to argue about it.

revenue=size

Pretty sure the "size" of a school is its current enrollees...

From the class of 09 wrote:

jbock13 wrote:Nope. Once again you're comparing things I never even said. First time, I didn't say anything about revenue. Second time, I never said anything about WM or Richmond.

Calm down my friend. I know we disagree but just stick to what I've said if you want to argue about it.

revenue=size

You may want to rethink that. THE U isnt that big yet have a nice revenue stream. Duke does pretty well. There are slot of schools that would not be considered huge that have ice revenue streams. Also, are you talking on the athletic field or off or both? The Ivy schools and Stanford might have something to say about that. Finally, it is not really a legitimate argument to classify online students in the " enrollment " number. Otherwise The University of Phoenix would be one of the largest schools ever! Not dissing DLP just saying we aren't the only school with one. ( but it is a cash cow!)

Take a look at this article....I join the YEAs on the move up. It was Jerry's dream to play FBS football, I hopw it is sooneer than later...

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3824 ... dy-for-fbs

jbock13 wrote:

From the class of 09 wrote:

jbock13 wrote:Nope. Once again you're comparing things I never even said. First time, I didn't say anything about revenue. Second time, I never said anything about WM or Richmond.

Calm down my friend. I know we disagree but just stick to what I've said if you want to argue about it.

revenue=size

Pretty sure the "size" of a school is its current enrollees...

Ok, I assumed you could connect the size of of the school with revenue potential. My bad.

baso4 wrote:Take a look at this article....I join the YEAs on the move up. It was Jerry's dream to play FBS football, I hopw it is sooneer than later...

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3824 ... dy-for-fbs

So how many of those schools listed have National titles? How many of those schools have a long established records of success? Multiple conference championships? Strategic regional locations?
The most important analysis, IMO, was the statement about Richmond having having a difficult time because they were a Private Institution.
I did like the slide show and I'm glad to see we made the ' also rans" with the likes of Butler!

Purple Haize wrote: You may want to rethink that. THE U isnt that big yet have a nice revenue stream. Duke does pretty well. There are slot of schools that would not be considered huge that have ice revenue streams. Also, are you talking on the athletic field or off or both? The Ivy schools and Stanford might have something to say about that. Finally, it is not really a legitimate argument to classify online students in the " enrollment " number. Otherwise The University of Phoenix would be one of the largest schools ever! Not dissing DLP just saying we aren't the only school with one. ( but it is a cash cow!)

I'm pretty sure the U is well over 10k so it's decent size. The only revenue being looked at is football (with a small consideration to bball). If you don't want to use online numbers we are still over twice the size of these other schools mentioned. This was all I said. Richmond and W&M don't want to move up because they know they can't make it work being a small school but you and jbock want to say somehow that the schools are wrong. It just makes sence that we'd have more potential revenue with our larger numbers and this would make us more attractive.

It also wouldn't hurt to win something

Obviously any invite would involve a number of factors but if she is telling you size doesn't matter she is lying

Only those inferior say that size matters! It's how you use what you have that matters! And I have the satisfied customers to prove it! It's amazing how small medical devices have become.....
Be great with what you have and all will take care of itself. When we can start bragging about games we have won as opposed to "close loses against quality competition" THEN we should start looking to move up. 7-35 against ranked opponents is NOT being great with what you have!

I am sure Barber is all over this. If the Big East expands to 12, it could open up some possibilities for us in a non BCS FBS conference. CAA would even be a great landing spot for us. I wish someone would drop our name somewhere, but I know we will sit on it until time to announce our invitation.

The only numbers that matter with regards to moving up are not stats nor won loss records.

200 + million
20,000

200 million of course being revenue minus expenses, and 20,000 the eventual enrollment goal. When you have that kind of funding and that many students, FBS success is a logical and natural next step.

That is why we're more than ready to move up.

If Jerry and Jeff say we're ready, then darnit we're ready! Jerry has said it publicly many times!!

logic wrote: If Jerry and Jeff say we're ready, then darnit we're ready! Jerry has said it publicly many times!!

Have you noticed they haven't yet?

BuryYourDuke wrote:As per usual, bleacher report is utter garbage. One more time. Richmond has no desire to move up, doesn't have a facility or a fan base. Btw, they have the second largest endowment of any school in the country, so if they wanted to move up they could definitely make it happen. They just don't. They'd much rather look cool to the ivy league wannabe's from New England and have a track around the field in their small brick football stadium. Montana? They already declared their intention to stay FCS. Umass is already gone in reality. It's like he threw together a list of teams that he thinks are good and said, yeah they are ready for a move! I hate bleacher report.

Where did you get this info? I know they have a large endowment, but couldn't find any data that backed up them being #2.

They didn't make the top 10 for private schools here: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-co ... endowments

They were listed as #35 in 2009 here: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/ ... 10_372.asp