[From the class of 09]

My vote is we use our influence to increase the airport size here so we don't have to bus to Roanoke to charter team planes.

While we don't need a bigger airport for the teams. Some flights going anywhere but Charlotte would be amazing for the rest of us.

[Purple Haize]

FYI. Money does not equal success. There are several schools who spend a lot less and would be considered more successful then we are.
Also, there will always be the philosophical argument about how much is too much for a Christian Univ to spend on athletics.
How exactly do we fit in the MAC foot print?
The Sasser Cup is sorta like kissing your sister.

09. Ain't that the truth! Although i do like Charlottes Airport I wish we had a flight or 2 going north.

[sporter]

Thanks Logic - very interesting. Really surprised where we stood relative to several FBS schools. I guess when you are spending $26M, another million of increased travel expenses is not a huge deal compared to what you are ultimately attempting to gain with the upgrade.

[logic]

FYI. Money does not equal success. There are several schools who spend a lot less and would be considered more successful then we are.
Also, there will always be the philosophical argument about how much is too much for a Christian Univ to spend on athletics.
How exactly do we fit in the MAC foot print?
The Sasser Cup is sorta like kissing your sister.

09. Ain't that the truth! Although i do like Charlottes Airport I wish we had a flight or 2 going north.

Ok Haize, one by one -


Money - Money does equal success. Not 100% of the time obviously, but for the most part it does. More resources = better of everything. Better of everything = better recruits and better coaches which equals better programs. You can look at that list and pick a few schools to prove your argument, sure. Look at it generally. For the most part the schools at the top are successful, those at the bottom are not across the entire Division I spectrum.

Take a look at the Big South Sasser Cup final standings from 2010 -

2009-10 Sasser Cup Standings

1. 11.75 - Liberty
2. 11.28 - Coastal Carolina
3. 9.26 - Winthrop
4. 8.36 - High Point
5. 8.03 - Radford
6. 7.98 - Charleston Southern
7. 7.02 - VMI
8. 5.57 - Gardner-Webb
9. 5.36 - UNC Asheville
10. 2.30 - Presbyterian College

Now take a look at total expenditures for the departments in 2010 -

1. Liberty 26.4
2. Coastal 15.6
3. Gardner Webb 11
4. Campbell 10.3
5. Presby 10.3
6. VMI 9.8
7. Winthrop 9.7
8. Radford 8.5
9. C.S. 7.8
10. High Point 5.5
11. Asheville 3.4


Now take a look at the previous Sasser Cup Winners -

Sasser Cup Champions

2010-11 -- Liberty
2009-10 -- Liberty
2008-09 -- Liberty
2007-08 -- Liberty
2006-07 -- Coastal Carolina
2005-06 -- Coastal Carolina
2004-05 -- Coastal Carolina
2003-04 -- Coastal Carolina
2002-03 -- Liberty
2001-02 -- Liberty
2000-01 -- Coastal Carolina
1999-00 -- Liberty
1998-99 -- Liberty
1997-98 -- Liberty


How are you going to spin this one Haize? I may be "just a college kid" but logical I am. This to me is logical. You spend more, you succeed more. Don't you think Coastal and Liberty have proven this? Haize, the last ACC National Champion in football was FSU in 1999, and my guess is the ACC won't win another one soon as they simply are not keeping up with the arms race in college football. If they do, my money is on FSU or Tech as they SPEND THE MOST MONEY in the conference. The SEC has won the past how many BCS national championships? You don't think money has anything to do with it?

(2005 - Texas)
2006 - Florida
2007 - LSU
2008 - Florida
2009 - Bama
2010 - Auburn

Are you surprised that they rank this way in total expenditures?

(1. Texas 113 million)
2. Florida 105 million
4. LSU 102 million
6. Auburn 90 million
9. Alabama 85 million



Philosophical - The answer is as much as it takes to win NCAA D1 titles in every sport. The answer is as much as it takes to rival the best academic and athletic facilities in the country. The answer is enough to have the best academic programs in the nation. If it (whatever it is) can help the mission of the university it is a good thing, including spending 75 million dollars a year on athletics if it ever comes to that. Also, at some point the athletic department will start to generate more of its own revenue, and the school will have to subsidize less and less. At that point, when athletics is spending its own money, who are you to start debating how much is spent and where? If they are getting results on the field it is money well spent. It is cliche...but if it is Christian, it ought to be better, right? I hate the money argument when considering Christian schools. Should we not spend money just because we're Christian? Do we want better students, facilities, etc? Should the library be a 20 million dollar building instead of 50, just because we're Christian? Where is the logic in that? Should we take all of our student's tuition dollars and ship them overseas, or should we put them back into OUR university? I would be happy to start our own thread and debate money and Christianity as it relates to Liberty University ad nauseam. Would Art Williams' 90 million dollar "saving" of the university have been better spent in Uganda? Christian and money means you spend it wisely, with the mission in mind, but if it helps the mission you spend and do not feel guilty for doing so. You do not waste it as it is God's money, and if it provides a benefit that helps to Train Champions for Christ you do it. We're making 200 million a year, Haize. Why would we not put that money back into the university in the form of scholarships, need based aid, facilities, labor, athletics, endowment, etc? Thankfully our Chancellor follow this same logic. From what I hear he is a prudent leader who will not waste money but is also not afraid to spend it on WORTHY causes that reflect the mission of the university and spend it in a BIG way. 50 million for this new library will do A LOT for this university, and I for one am very happy and thankful it is 50 million and not 25!


MAC - You talk about my critical reading skills...

"We fit in very well with the MAC and CUSA, making me think we can compete in those conferences immediately. "

I talked nothing of geography or footprint. I was referring to budgets, obviously. Our budget would be the largest in the MAC if we moved in tomorrow, hence my compete right away comment.


Sasser Cup - You're correct, winning the Big South isn't exactly something to brag about, hence why I said we need to prove ourselves against better competition. That was a plug to jump to the FBS and a better conference.


I like you Haize, but sometimes I wonder if you're on board with the mission of the university or not. Do you want for Liberty what Texas has for football and UNC/Duke have for basketball? There are 12 year old boys in Oregon wearing Duke basketball T-Shirts and have never been to North Carolina. Haize, do you want this list for Liberty? I do -

http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/22/most-v ... tball.html

Imagine what a "Texas-like" brand could do for this university and in turn for the mission of the school. Oh, the dreams of youth Haize! Your vision has been corrupted by years, my friend!

[BJWilliams]

yup...he's jumped the shark...quite a few actually

[Purple Haize]

yup...he's jumped the shark...quite a few actually

And it's not even Shark week!

logic. You missed the philosophical aspect of the argument by a mile. Actually a kilometer, because you are not even on the same continent.
I do not define success by the number of Sasser Cups we win. They are absolutely nice to have and i am happy we have them. The SEC is not the best athletic conference in the country. They ARE the best football conference in the country. All you have to do is walk to the Vines and The Bill and see that money does not equal success. why? Because by your 'logic' we should have 2xs the amount of Play off appearances and wins in football and at least that much in Men's Basketball. Check the record books and get back to me.
As for the MAC you flaunt your ignorance. Over and over again we have discussed geographical foot print in regards to 'fit'. Pull out an atlas, or use mapquest, and see if we fit in with the MAC.

You may doubt my vision but based on what you type, you are the one who needs to take off the rose colored glasses.

[logic]

5. We fit in very well with the MAC and CUSA, making me think we can compete in those conferences immediately.

yup...he's jumped the shark...quite a few actually

As for the MAC you flaunt your ignorance. Over and over again we have discussed geographical foot print in regards to 'fit'. Pull out an atlas, or use mapquest, and see if we fit in with the MAC.

You may doubt my vision but based on what you type, you are the one who needs to take off the rose colored glasses.

I am tired Haize. Clearly "fit" in regards to my original post meant BUDGETS. We were talking about budgets Haize. The whole post I made was about budgets. We fit in well budget wise. I never mentioned anything about footprint or geography. Everyone knows I was talking about budgets. Sporter got it - why can you not grasp the fact that I was talking about budgets? We fit in well with the MAC and CUSA from a budget standpoint, obviously not geographically.

[BJWilliams]

If you were referring to budgets, wouldnt you have done well to back it up with the numbers from MAC schools? or CUSA schools?

[Purple Haize]

If you were referring to budgets, wouldnt you have done well to back it up with the numbers from MAC schools? or CUSA schools?

He just assumed we all had the numbers at are finger tips. Geez! And that we'd be able to discern his definition of 'fit' when we have talked about a whole bunch of factors that determine a 'fit'! The caliber of student Liberty brings in now is truly astounding!

[logic]

BJ, Haize


But I did give you the numbers, right at your fingertips. Check the original post and the link. Clearly you guys skipped right over it. You can sort budgets by conference. You need to start reading my posts before you respond to them. Notice Sporter's reply compared to yours. He actually clicked the link. From beginning to end the entire post was about budgets. I gave you the numbers. Do us all a favor and read thoroughly before replying. Notice no one else is confused.

[Purple Haize]

SPORTERs post specifically mentioned expenses. You mentioned fit. Had you said 'fit with financiaL expenditures' you would have a point. It's ok to admit you are not a good communicator. If you notice most of the kufluffles that you get into are because you make blanket assumptions, and then get called out on them. Saying what you mean is a good way to avoid that. Plus it gives you the added bonus of not having to get all defensive.
The thread is about Realignment. We have discussed everything from expenses to exposure to footprint to 747's. Had this thread been about MONEY you would have a much better argument.

[logic]

Like most, I would love the move to one of the previously mentioned FBS conferences, but I am really curious as to what the difference in athletic expenses would be. Travel costs for all of the sports when they start flying around the country as compared to driving locally has to be very substantial. Add that to other expenses that I know I am not thinking of (maybe increased recruiting budget) and it has to be fairly substantial.

Maybe there would be increased revenue from the conference. Being a numbers guy I would love to see a breakdown one day or have one of the FF experts give some thoughts.

Sporter - Here you go. Entire expenditures for athletic departments in 2010.

http://www.bbstate.com/info/schools-budget


We are ranked 89th out of 326 schools, having spent 26 million in 2010.

Of note -

1. Texas. Wow. Would love to see a breakdown of how they spend 113 million every year.
2. Only 1 ACC school in the top 20. IMHO they will never reach the football greatness of the SEC/Big10/Pac10 until they start spending more money.
3. We want to be Notre Dame..we need to spend a lot more money to get there as the Irish are 16th, spending 75 million.
4. Only one non-BCS school in the top 50....UNLV at 35th
5. We fit in very well with the MAC and CUSA, making me think we can compete in those conferences immediately.
6. We have the 5th highest total FCS budget behind Yale, Delaware, Penn, and JMU
7. We are the highest in the Big South by almost 11 million

My conclusion - We're way ahead of everyone else in the Big South. We've won the Sasser cup 4 years in a row now, and with that budget we should never lose it. I believe AS A SCHOOL we are ready for a bigger challenge. There are some people who complain that we spend too much on athletics. In reality we aren't spending much at all when you consider the big boys and where we eventually want to go.

Sporter was talking of course, about the MAC, Sunbelt, CUSA, etc. I started my reply TO HIM specifically mentioning EXPENSES. He UNDERSTOOD my post. The ENTIRE reply to him was about expenses.

I am done with this thread Haize, clearly you have a problem with admitting when you're wrong, or when you do not understand. You need to work on that. BJ is the only one who also didn't understand the post....doesn't that tell you something old boy?

[BJWilliams]

I understand just fine...but are you really expecting us to pore through a list of 326 schools and pick out all the MAC, WAC and CUSA schools one by one? Youd of made it much easier on yourself if you had made the list of those conferences and their memberships and then listed us in comparison to them. Its a little bit of extra work but youd have made a much better point if you had done that instead of just posting a link.

[logic]

BJ, Haize


But I did give you the numbers, right at your fingertips. Check the original post and the link. Clearly you guys skipped right over it. You can sort budgets by conference. You need to start reading my posts before you respond to them. Notice Sporter's reply compared to yours. He actually clicked the link. From beginning to end the entire post was about budgets. I gave you the numbers. Do us all a favor and read thoroughly before replying. Notice no one else is confused.

BJ....

[Purple Haize]

I thought logic was done with this thread. I even re read his last post and cross referenced it with the farmers almanac...

[ToTheLeft]

logic +1201201239

He/she's won this thread.

[thepostman]

I understand just fine...but are you really expecting us to pore through a list of 326 schools and pick out all the MAC, WAC and CUSA schools one by one? Youd of made it much easier on yourself if you had made the list of those conferences and their memberships and then listed us in comparison to them. Its a little bit of extra work but youd have made a much better point if you had done that instead of just posting a link.

BJ you look up the most random stats, please don't act like you are above poring through a list of 326 school...

[BJWilliams]

If you want something done right...

89 $26,404,860 Liberty Flames Lynchburg, VA Vines Center Dale Layer (since 2009) Site, Schedule, School

Conference USA

68 $36,951,364 Memphis Tigers Memphis, TN FedEX Forum Josh Pastner (since 2009) Site, Schedule, School
70 $36,034,264 Southern Methodist Mustangs Dallas, TX Moody Coliseum Matt Doherty (since 2006) Site, Schedule, School
72 $35,628,560 Central Florida Knights Orlando, FL UCF Arena Donnie Jones (since 2010) Site, Schedule, School
78 $31,564,286 Houston Cougars Houston, TX Hofheinz Pavillion James Dickey (since 2010) Site, Schedule, School
81 $29,432,270 Rice Owls Houston, TX Autry Court Ben Braun (since 2008) Site, Schedule, School
83 $29,294,952 East Carolina Pirates Greenville, NC Williams Arena Jeff Lebo (since 2010) Site, Schedule, School
90 $26,292,188 Tulsa Golden Hurricane Tulsa, OK Donald Reynolds Center Doug Wojcik (since 2005) Site, Schedule, School
97 $24,310,104 UAB Blazers Birmingham, AL Bartow Arena Mike Davis (since 2006) Site, Schedule, School
102 $23,256,700 Texas-El Paso Miners El Paso, TX Special Events Center Tim Floyd (since 2010) Site, Schedule, School
106 $22,949,720 Marshall Thundering Herd Huntington, WV Henderson Center Tom Herrion (since 2010) Site, Schedule, School
116 $21,309,000 Tulane Green Wave New Orleans, LA A. B. Fogelman Arena Ed Conroy (since 2010) Site, Schedule, School
129 $19,393,678 Southern Mississippi Golden Eagles Hattiesburg, MS Reed Green Coliseum Larry Eustachy (since 2004) Site, Schedule, School


(Unfortunately my attempts to get other lists were thwarted because you have to pay)

We'd be about 7th by 2010 numbers

[jcmanson]

I agree lefty. I had no problem understanding logics posts when I first read them. And I agreed with his points

[flamesfan30]

agreed. i knew exactly what he was takling about.

[R i]

It could be a while before the Big East is done adding teams. Airforce states that it will be at earliest January before they make any move.

[Liberty22]

I got to say I agreed with logic as well..... now moving on to a geographical standpoint, lest anyone get confused, again not speaking of expenditures/budgets, speaking purely of geographical standing to the MAC, does that really matter anymore? Look no further than the possibility of Air Force, BYU, Boise State to the Big East, doesn't exactly scream eastern schools, so i think we could fit in geographically to the Mac, or CUSA, or Sun Belt, or WAC

[LUconn]

this thread got interesting over the weekend. I've learned a lot.

[Sly Fox]

Geography only matters to us if it offers us leverage. Sure we'd rather be as close as possible to conference schools. But that is not a necessity before making our decision.

[Purple Haize]

I got to say I agreed with logic as well..... now moving on to a geographical standpoint, lest anyone get confused, again not speaking of expenditures/budgets, speaking purely of geographical standing to the MAC, does that really matter anymore? Look no further than the possibility of Air Force, BYU, Boise State to the Big East, doesn't exactly scream eastern schools, so i think we could fit in geographically to the Mac, or CUSA, or Sun Belt, or WAC

I think you make the case here are geographical considerations. I'm not sure if some or all of those western schools would make a jump to theBig East if notfor the others.