NSD 2019

The main discussion board for everything Tulane athletics related.
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1805
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:07 pm

winwave wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:02 am
First off your claim of second best ever comes with a big asterisk. It's second best in the 247 ratings era. I have been following Tulane for 6 decades. So it's not the second best ever. Also I go by Rivals where it's the third best in the rankings era. Not a big difference but just pointing it out.

Maybe I'm being too hard on this class. After the uptick last year I was hopeful the staff had found their footing and things would have a steady trend up. I don't like any step back especially after a winning season. Though last year luck had some say in it. If that doctor doesn't misdiagnose a player like Johnson we have no chance at him. I like some of the players in this class at the skill positions. I think Jackson and Spears will be good for us.

Another reason that has me disappointed is something you noted yourself. The others around us improved their recruiting which set us back. We can't let that continue to happen. And of course it's very disappointing not to be a clear #2 in recruiting among the in-state schools.

What I want and expect from this program is to be the best G5 program. We obviously need better recruiting to do that. I'm hopeful with the staff changes on offense that we can really start to make some noise and really build this thing up.
The early signing day may have hurt some as well. Because the early signing day is during bowl season, G5 teams like Tulane cannot really capitalize on a big bowl result by having time to really leverage it the way that it could have in previous seasons. If Tulane had 30 days plus to market the ULL win, there is a reasonable chance that it could have persuaded some prospects to leave ULL, LaTech, etc. and come over to Tulane. It will be impossible to know for certain as to whether or not that is the case, but if Tulane wins 8+ in the regular season and the recruiting notably improves, it would lend support to that theory.

That being said, Tulane does need to establish itself as #2 in Louisiana and in the top half of the AAC on a consistent basis, which would put it somewhere in the 60/70 range.


User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6980
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:27 pm

Obviously I meant in the rankings era, which is roughly two decades now. I have also been following Tulane for a half century, and there's no way you can compare this to what we recruited 40 years ago. We're not a major independent like many schools were back then. We don't have the pull of a P5. We're recruiting with one hand tied behind our back compared to the 70's.

As for year to year fluctuations, I don't think a drop from .8265 to .8172 is catastrophic. If so, Clemson fans must be about to jump off a tall building, despite winning a NC last month. Their class dropped from .9435 to .8976. But I'm sure that was as much a factor of only signing 17 players as anything. Personally, I'd like to see us be in the upper 82 to mid 83 range every year. I believe that would be enough to bring sustained success, meaning multiple consecutive bowl seasons and a few AACCG appearances..

Beyond that, it gets really tough. Heck Syracuse only has an .8485 this year, which is ranked #50. Boise had a .8552, but they also got 4 of their top 9 all time commits in this one class. Will be interesting to see if they're capable of building on that success.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6980
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:34 pm

Aberzombie, I'm not sure being in the top half of AAC would consistently get a 60-70 ranking. This season, there's only three G5 schools in the top 65. The P5/G5 branding has hurt recruiting pretty much to the point that all 62 of the P5 classes get rated higher than any of the G5 classes regardless. There's a few outliers every year, but its never more than 4-5 schools. Using that same #65 ranking as the cutoff (Kansas), there's only three P5s rated lower - Texas Tech (#67), Oregon St (#68), and Louisville (#73). No G5 is going to be able to pull in classes in the 40s-50s ever again. Their plan to create the haves and have nots is almost complete.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:40 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:07 pm
winwave wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:02 am
First off your claim of second best ever comes with a big asterisk. It's second best in the 247 ratings era. I have been following Tulane for 6 decades. So it's not the second best ever. Also I go by Rivals where it's the third best in the rankings era. Not a big difference but just pointing it out.

Maybe I'm being too hard on this class. After the uptick last year I was hopeful the staff had found their footing and things would have a steady trend up. I don't like any step back especially after a winning season. Though last year luck had some say in it. If that doctor doesn't misdiagnose a player like Johnson we have no chance at him. I like some of the players in this class at the skill positions. I think Jackson and Spears will be good for us.

Another reason that has me disappointed is something you noted yourself. The others around us improved their recruiting which set us back. We can't let that continue to happen. And of course it's very disappointing not to be a clear #2 in recruiting among the in-state schools.

What I want and expect from this program is to be the best G5 program. We obviously need better recruiting to do that. I'm hopeful with the staff changes on offense that we can really start to make some noise and really build this thing up.
The early signing day may have hurt some as well. Because the early signing day is during bowl season, G5 teams like Tulane cannot really capitalize on a big bowl result by having time to really leverage it the way that it could have in previous seasons. If Tulane had 30 days plus to market the ULL win, there is a reasonable chance that it could have persuaded some prospects to leave ULL, LaTech, etc. and come over to Tulane. It will be impossible to know for certain as to whether or not that is the case, but if Tulane wins 8+ in the regular season and the recruiting notably improves, it would lend support to that theory.

That being said, Tulane does need to establish itself as #2 in Louisiana and in the top half of the AAC on a consistent basis, which would put it somewhere in the 60/70 range.
Fritz was originally against the early signing date and then when things turned out ok last year he changed his mind. We should have been able to build on that. Top half of the AAC doesn't cut it. We need to be the dominant program.
Let's Roll !
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:45 pm

RobertM320 wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:27 pm
Obviously I meant in the rankings era, which is roughly two decades now. I have also been following Tulane for a half century, and there's no way you can compare this to what we recruited 40 years ago. We're not a major independent like many schools were back then. We don't have the pull of a P5. We're recruiting with one hand tied behind our back compared to the 70's.

As for year to year fluctuations, I don't think a drop from .8265 to .8172 is catastrophic. If so, Clemson fans must be about to jump off a tall building, despite winning a NC last month. Their class dropped from .9435 to .8976. But I'm sure that was as much a factor of only signing 17 players as anything. Personally, I'd like to see us be in the upper 82 to mid 83 range every year. I believe that would be enough to bring sustained success, meaning multiple consecutive bowl seasons and a few AACCG appearances..

Beyond that, it gets really tough. Heck Syracuse only has an .8485 this year, which is ranked #50. Boise had a .8552, but they also got 4 of their top 9 all time commits in this one class. Will be interesting to see if they're capable of building on that success.
Most teams back then were in conferences. We were handicapped back then by de-emphasis. People complain now about academics being a huge obstacle to our recruiting. It's nothing compared to back then.

I never said the drop off was catastrophic. Quit being a drama queen. Being in the 82-83 range won't cut it. Classic low bar syndrome.

If you want to throw the towel in fine. I won't.
Let's Roll !
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 5343
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:06 am

winwave wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:40 pm
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:07 pm
winwave wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:02 am
First off your claim of second best ever comes with a big asterisk. It's second best in the 247 ratings era. I have been following Tulane for 6 decades. So it's not the second best ever. Also I go by Rivals where it's the third best in the rankings era. Not a big difference but just pointing it out.

Maybe I'm being too hard on this class. After the uptick last year I was hopeful the staff had found their footing and things would have a steady trend up. I don't like any step back especially after a winning season. Though last year luck had some say in it. If that doctor doesn't misdiagnose a player like Johnson we have no chance at him. I like some of the players in this class at the skill positions. I think Jackson and Spears will be good for us.

Another reason that has me disappointed is something you noted yourself. The others around us improved their recruiting which set us back. We can't let that continue to happen. And of course it's very disappointing not to be a clear #2 in recruiting among the in-state schools.

What I want and expect from this program is to be the best G5 program. We obviously need better recruiting to do that. I'm hopeful with the staff changes on offense that we can really start to make some noise and really build this thing up.
The early signing day may have hurt some as well. Because the early signing day is during bowl season, G5 teams like Tulane cannot really capitalize on a big bowl result by having time to really leverage it the way that it could have in previous seasons. If Tulane had 30 days plus to market the ULL win, there is a reasonable chance that it could have persuaded some prospects to leave ULL, LaTech, etc. and come over to Tulane. It will be impossible to know for certain as to whether or not that is the case, but if Tulane wins 8+ in the regular season and the recruiting notably improves, it would lend support to that theory.

That being said, Tulane does need to establish itself as #2 in Louisiana and in the top half of the AAC on a consistent basis, which would put it somewhere in the 60/70 range.
Fritz was originally against the early signing date and then when things turned out ok last year he changed his mind. We should have been able to build on that. Top half of the AAC doesn't cut it. We need to be the dominant program.
Dominant program? You kidding me. That is literally a decade min away from reality. Most were happy to just make a bowl after a last second drive and 2 pt conversation. I suppose
I repect ur goals but your sense of realistic goals is way off
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6980
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:36 am

winwave wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:45 pm
RobertM320 wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:27 pm
Obviously I meant in the rankings era, which is roughly two decades now. I have also been following Tulane for a half century, and there's no way you can compare this to what we recruited 40 years ago. We're not a major independent like many schools were back then. We don't have the pull of a P5. We're recruiting with one hand tied behind our back compared to the 70's.

As for year to year fluctuations, I don't think a drop from .8265 to .8172 is catastrophic. If so, Clemson fans must be about to jump off a tall building, despite winning a NC last month. Their class dropped from .9435 to .8976. But I'm sure that was as much a factor of only signing 17 players as anything. Personally, I'd like to see us be in the upper 82 to mid 83 range every year. I believe that would be enough to bring sustained success, meaning multiple consecutive bowl seasons and a few AACCG appearances..

Beyond that, it gets really tough. Heck Syracuse only has an .8485 this year, which is ranked #50. Boise had a .8552, but they also got 4 of their top 9 all time commits in this one class. Will be interesting to see if they're capable of building on that success.

Most teams back then were in conferences.
We were handicapped back then by de-emphasis. People complain now about academics being a huge obstacle to our recruiting. It's nothing compared to back then.

I never said the drop off was catastrophic. Quit being a drama queen. Being in the 82-83 range won't cut it. Classic low bar syndrome.

If you want to throw the towel in fine. I won't.
Really?
1975 - we played Syracuse, West Virginia, Boston College, Georgia Tech, Air Force. All independents
1976 - we played West Virginia, Army, Cincinnati, Boston College, Syracuse, Ga Tech, Memphis, Rutgers. All independents
1977 - we played Memphis, Pitt, Boston College, Cincinnati, Ga Tech, Miami (FL), Rutgers. All independents.
1978 - we played Pitt, Ga Tech, Boston College, Memphis, and Miami (FL). All independents.
1979 - we played Southern Miss, West Virginia, Georgia Tech, Boston College and Penn State. All independents.

So back in the 70s, we were on a level playing field with these schools, and all you had to do was win to be competitive. Now, you've got the P5/G5 branding that has us seen as an inferior institution. If you don't think that affects our ability to recruit, you're blind. You chastise others for low bar syndrome, yet you set expectations that are unreachable. UCF just won EVERY game for two years. Their class is in the 84 range. If we were to accomplish the exact same thing, you somehow think that all of a sudden people will become aware of our past glory days and elevate us to some category above all the rest of the G5s. What you call low bar syndrome, I call reasonable expectations. Doesn't mean you don't try, just means you're realistic about what your ceiling is.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:01 am

mbawavefan12 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:06 am
winwave wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:40 pm
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:07 pm
winwave wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:02 am
First off your claim of second best ever comes with a big asterisk. It's second best in the 247 ratings era. I have been following Tulane for 6 decades. So it's not the second best ever. Also I go by Rivals where it's the third best in the rankings era. Not a big difference but just pointing it out.

Maybe I'm being too hard on this class. After the uptick last year I was hopeful the staff had found their footing and things would have a steady trend up. I don't like any step back especially after a winning season. Though last year luck had some say in it. If that doctor doesn't misdiagnose a player like Johnson we have no chance at him. I like some of the players in this class at the skill positions. I think Jackson and Spears will be good for us.

Another reason that has me disappointed is something you noted yourself. The others around us improved their recruiting which set us back. We can't let that continue to happen. And of course it's very disappointing not to be a clear #2 in recruiting among the in-state schools.

What I want and expect from this program is to be the best G5 program. We obviously need better recruiting to do that. I'm hopeful with the staff changes on offense that we can really start to make some noise and really build this thing up.
The early signing day may have hurt some as well. Because the early signing day is during bowl season, G5 teams like Tulane cannot really capitalize on a big bowl result by having time to really leverage it the way that it could have in previous seasons. If Tulane had 30 days plus to market the ULL win, there is a reasonable chance that it could have persuaded some prospects to leave ULL, LaTech, etc. and come over to Tulane. It will be impossible to know for certain as to whether or not that is the case, but if Tulane wins 8+ in the regular season and the recruiting notably improves, it would lend support to that theory.

That being said, Tulane does need to establish itself as #2 in Louisiana and in the top half of the AAC on a consistent basis, which would put it somewhere in the 60/70 range.
Fritz was originally against the early signing date and then when things turned out ok last year he changed his mind. We should have been able to build on that. Top half of the AAC doesn't cut it. We need to be the dominant program.
Dominant program? You kidding me. That is literally a decade min away from reality. Most were happy to just make a bowl after a last second drive and 2 pt conversation. I suppose
I repect ur goals but your sense of realistic goals is way off
We'll have to agree to disagree. People were happy that we broke through and finally got a Bowl and that was mainly because it beat having the same thing happen to us again as it did at SMU the season before. However if you go back and read the threads there were people expecting more. No one in this conference is unbeatable. We've been down for so long it's hard for people to imagine us truly being good. But at our level it's not some insurmountable goal. If we were still in the SEC and I said we should be the dominant program that would be unrealistic. We're not.
Let's Roll !
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:09 am

RobertM320 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:36 am
winwave wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:45 pm
RobertM320 wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:27 pm
Obviously I meant in the rankings era, which is roughly two decades now. I have also been following Tulane for a half century, and there's no way you can compare this to what we recruited 40 years ago. We're not a major independent like many schools were back then. We don't have the pull of a P5. We're recruiting with one hand tied behind our back compared to the 70's.

As for year to year fluctuations, I don't think a drop from .8265 to .8172 is catastrophic. If so, Clemson fans must be about to jump off a tall building, despite winning a NC last month. Their class dropped from .9435 to .8976. But I'm sure that was as much a factor of only signing 17 players as anything. Personally, I'd like to see us be in the upper 82 to mid 83 range every year. I believe that would be enough to bring sustained success, meaning multiple consecutive bowl seasons and a few AACCG appearances..

Beyond that, it gets really tough. Heck Syracuse only has an .8485 this year, which is ranked #50. Boise had a .8552, but they also got 4 of their top 9 all time commits in this one class. Will be interesting to see if they're capable of building on that success.

Most teams back then were in conferences.
We were handicapped back then by de-emphasis. People complain now about academics being a huge obstacle to our recruiting. It's nothing compared to back then.

I never said the drop off was catastrophic. Quit being a drama queen. Being in the 82-83 range won't cut it. Classic low bar syndrome.

If you want to throw the towel in fine. I won't.
Really?
1975 - we played Syracuse, West Virginia, Boston College, Georgia Tech, Air Force. All independents
1976 - we played West Virginia, Army, Cincinnati, Boston College, Syracuse, Ga Tech, Memphis, Rutgers. All independents
1977 - we played Memphis, Pitt, Boston College, Cincinnati, Ga Tech, Miami (FL), Rutgers. All independents.
1978 - we played Pitt, Ga Tech, Boston College, Memphis, and Miami (FL). All independents.
1979 - we played Southern Miss, West Virginia, Georgia Tech, Boston College and Penn State. All independents.

So back in the 70s, we were on a level playing field with these schools, and all you had to do was win to be competitive. Now, you've got the P5/G5 branding that has us seen as an inferior institution. If you don't think that affects our ability to recruit, you're blind. You chastise others for low bar syndrome, yet you set expectations that are unreachable. UCF just won EVERY game for two years. Their class is in the 84 range. If we were to accomplish the exact same thing, you somehow think that all of a sudden people will become aware of our past glory days and elevate us to some category above all the rest of the G5s. What you call low bar syndrome, I call reasonable expectations. Doesn't mean you don't try, just means you're realistic about what your ceiling is.
You do realize how many overall teams they had back then. We weren't a major independent. We were just an independent. Those schools hadn't deemphasized. All but one , Ga. Tech , hadn't quit their conference because they were so bad they couldn't compete. Now branding does exist and makes it harder overall. However what I am talking about is within the G5 and I believe it's attainable. I think it's very realistic and I think others do too. More importantly I strongly believe that as a fan base we need to make it clear to the administration that that is our expectation of the program. Otherwise we'll muddle along winning 6-8 games a year which won't really move the needle at all for our fan base. I want more than that and I think most of our fan base does too.
Let's Roll !
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 7134
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:43 am

I'll chime in without quoting 5 other posts!

I do think it's achievable to become ONE OF THE dominant players in the G5. I don't think it happens in a season or two. You have to tip your hat to Scott Frost and UCF for a quick turn around, but if you look at what George O'Leary did before he quit on the team (but continued to collect a paycheck) they were in much better shape than when Willie Fritz took over Tulane Football.

This is a process. we have to compete AGAIN for the division crown, and then show we can win the AAC. It's not a quick turn around. And not for nothing, but, despite athletics-friendly degree programs, academics do haunt recruiting. How many of CJ's in-state recruits graduated from Tulane?

The program is on the upswing, and I'm hoping for another step forward this year. Like most of the board posters, I'm excited about the change in OC, and hope we keep our new OC for at least two years (and Willie Fritz until he retires!) But we cannot expect miracles when the program has undergone a complete transformation in philosophies, which is what I've been saying since Willie Fritz got here. 2020, IMHO, is the year we win the AAC. But we need a QB to do so, and our OC to stay a couple of years.
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
User avatar
nawlinspete
Swell
Posts: 1882
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:43 pm
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:47 am

But with a stadium that seats 23,690 we will never approach greatness, even at the G5 level. We do miss Tulane Stadium and the SEC and schedules like those 1970`s schedules....
Once and Again, With Smart Choices and a Bit Of Patience
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 8598
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:59 am

nawlinspete wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:47 am
But with a stadium that seats 23,690 we will never approach greatness, even at the G5 level. We do miss Tulane Stadium and the SEC and schedules like those 1970`s schedules....
the 16th hole at the Waste Managment Phoenix Open sits about the same amount of people as Yulman....sad indeed
https://www.tripsavvy.com/16th-hole-was ... en-2683121

https://wmphoenixopen.com/skybox-hole-16/

https://wmphoenixopen.com/skybox-hole-16/
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
User avatar
wave97
Swell
Posts: 1418
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:08 pm
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:17 am

golfnut69 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:59 am
nawlinspete wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:47 am
But with a stadium that seats 23,690 we will never approach greatness, even at the G5 level. We do miss Tulane Stadium and the SEC and schedules like those 1970`s schedules....
the 16th hole at the Waste Managment Phoenix Open sits about the same amount of people as Yulman....sad indeed
https://www.tripsavvy.com/16th-hole-was ... en-2683121

https://wmphoenixopen.com/skybox-hole-16/

https://wmphoenixopen.com/skybox-hole-16/
Is the West side seating aluminum bleachers? If so, that can be remedied in no time
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:14 pm

DfromCT wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:43 am
I'll chime in without quoting 5 other posts!

I do think it's achievable to become ONE OF THE dominant players in the G5. I don't think it happens in a season or two. You have to tip your hat to Scott Frost and UCF for a quick turn around, but if you look at what George O'Leary did before he quit on the team (but continued to collect a paycheck) they were in much better shape than when Willie Fritz took over Tulane Football.

This is a process. we have to compete AGAIN for the division crown, and then show we can win the AAC. It's not a quick turn around. And not for nothing, but, despite athletics-friendly degree programs, academics do haunt recruiting. How many of CJ's in-state recruits graduated from Tulane?

The program is on the upswing, and I'm hoping for another step forward this year. Like most of the board posters, I'm excited about the change in OC, and hope we keep our new OC for at least two years (and Willie Fritz until he retires!) But we cannot expect miracles when the program has undergone a complete transformation in philosophies, which is what I've been saying since Willie Fritz got here. 2020, IMHO, is the year we win the AAC. But we need a QB to do so, and our OC to stay a couple of years.
D- We aren't far apart here. No one said it can be done in a year or two. We are going into year 4. We did compete for the Division crown this year. Even if we go with your timetable of winning it in 2020 that's year 5. If we do win it we certainly then have the chance to win the Conference championship and winning that likely gets us the NY6 Bowl Game. It doesn't take a decade.

As to the academics they have eased and much more support staff is in place. As to the CJ era issues we are no longer taking that many from this area. It's really about the perception that's out there to recruits still thinking it's too hard. The winning will help us get over that hump locally. As for myself I'v never cared where our players in any sport come from. Just get good ones that can make us a winner.
Let's Roll !
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6980
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:48 pm

winwave wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:14 pm
DfromCT wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:43 am
I'll chime in without quoting 5 other posts!

I do think it's achievable to become ONE OF THE dominant players in the G5. I don't think it happens in a season or two. You have to tip your hat to Scott Frost and UCF for a quick turn around, but if you look at what George O'Leary did before he quit on the team (but continued to collect a paycheck) they were in much better shape than when Willie Fritz took over Tulane Football.

This is a process. we have to compete AGAIN for the division crown, and then show we can win the AAC. It's not a quick turn around. And not for nothing, but, despite athletics-friendly degree programs, academics do haunt recruiting. How many of CJ's in-state recruits graduated from Tulane?

The program is on the upswing, and I'm hoping for another step forward this year. Like most of the board posters, I'm excited about the change in OC, and hope we keep our new OC for at least two years (and Willie Fritz until he retires!) But we cannot expect miracles when the program has undergone a complete transformation in philosophies, which is what I've been saying since Willie Fritz got here. 2020, IMHO, is the year we win the AAC. But we need a QB to do so, and our OC to stay a couple of years.
D- We aren't far apart here. No one said it can be done in a year or two. We are going into year 4. We did compete for the Division crown this year. Even if we go with your timetable of winning it in 2020 that's year 5. If we do win it we certainly then have the chance to win the Conference championship and winning that likely gets us the NY6 Bowl Game. It doesn't take a decade.

As to the academics they have eased and much more support staff is in place. As to the CJ era issues we are no longer taking that many from this area. It's really about the perception that's out there to recruits still thinking it's too hard. The winning will help us get over that hump locally. As for myself I'v never cared where our players in any sport come from. Just get good ones that can make us a winner.
win,
if you noticed, I didn't refer AT ALL to academics or de-emphasis. My point was purely that lots of schools were independents, and therefore we were perceived as being similar. Sure, once a prospective athlete dug deeper, the academics may have been an issue. As proof, when you got the right players and coaches, you could win, 1979 being the proof. We went toe to toe with PENN STATE, 11 months after they had played for the NC in the Sugar Bowl.

In today's world, YES we could become ONE OF the dominant players in G5, as DfromCT said. But that STILL won't lift us into perennial top 25-3o recruiting classes and being able to compete with SEC/ACC schools on a week in and week out basis. BECAUSE, no matter WHAT happens, we'll still be perceived as inferior because of the G5 branding. Why do you think all the P5 fans look at UCF and say "they didn't play anyone"?
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 8598
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:04 pm

wave97 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:17 am
golfnut69 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:59 am
nawlinspete wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:47 am
But with a stadium that seats 23,690 we will never approach greatness, even at the G5 level. We do miss Tulane Stadium and the SEC and schedules like those 1970`s schedules....
the 16th hole at the Waste Managment Phoenix Open sits about the same amount of people as Yulman....sad indeed
https://www.tripsavvy.com/16th-hole-was ... en-2683121

https://wmphoenixopen.com/skybox-hole-16/

https://wmphoenixopen.com/skybox-hole-16/
Is the West side seating aluminum bleachers? If so, that can be remedied in no time
Ole 97...the remedy is easy, get rid of the damn NIMBY's....a second deck on the west side would make Yulman and entirely appearing venue....Tulane needs at least a 35,000 seat stadium for any conference to take them seriously....that said, The Dome can be rented and if Oklahoma does in fact come to NOLA, U can bet they will insisit on the game being played in the Dome
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 18469
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:09 pm

nawlinspete wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:47 am
But with a stadium that seats 23,690 we will never approach greatness, even at the G5 level. We do miss Tulane Stadium and the SEC and schedules like those 1970`s schedules....
It seats 27,962
Image
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
User avatar
wave97
Swell
Posts: 1418
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:08 pm
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:10 pm

golfnut69 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:04 pm
wave97 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:17 am
golfnut69 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:59 am
nawlinspete wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:47 am
But with a stadium that seats 23,690 we will never approach greatness, even at the G5 level. We do miss Tulane Stadium and the SEC and schedules like those 1970`s schedules....
the 16th hole at the Waste Managment Phoenix Open sits about the same amount of people as Yulman....sad indeed
https://www.tripsavvy.com/16th-hole-was ... en-2683121

https://wmphoenixopen.com/skybox-hole-16/

https://wmphoenixopen.com/skybox-hole-16/
Is the West side seating aluminum bleachers? If so, that can be remedied in no time
Ole 97...the remedy is easy, get rid of the damn NIMBY's....a second deck on the west side would make Yulman and entirely appearing venue....Tulane needs at least a 35,000 seat stadium for any conference to take them seriously....that said, The Dome can be rented and if Oklahoma does in fact come to NOLA, U can bet they will insisit on the game being played in the Dome
It will be interesting to see if the seven to eight residents abutting Yulman on Audubon Blvd. will have the same success denying stadium expansion once Tulane Football establishes itself as a viable entertainment option for the locals. Fitts, Dannen and the Board may have a little more swag with City Council than in years past.
We will need to add a second tier to the west side and the north & south end zones if we want to host local SEC programs and P5 schools who will travel well to New Orleans. We can squeeze 40k into that footprint.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:44 pm

tpstulane wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:09 pm
nawlinspete wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:47 am
But with a stadium that seats 23,690 we will never approach greatness, even at the G5 level. We do miss Tulane Stadium and the SEC and schedules like those 1970`s schedules....
It seats 27,962
Image
Actually that list CAPACITY. As for seats a poster here counted it and it seats 22,660.
Let's Roll !
User avatar
nawlinspete
Swell
Posts: 1882
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:43 pm
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:51 pm

Alright , 27,962 is not enough to allow us to excel and to schedule quality opponents we locals want to see . And these quality opponents will not, consequently, schedule home and home with us and will continue to regard us as an easy win when we do get them to give us a payday ....
Unfortunately Cow/Dick have us in cement boots as we try not to fall off the plank....
Once and Again, With Smart Choices and a Bit Of Patience
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:52 pm

RobertM320 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:48 pm
winwave wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:14 pm
DfromCT wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:43 am
I'll chime in without quoting 5 other posts!

I do think it's achievable to become ONE OF THE dominant players in the G5. I don't think it happens in a season or two. You have to tip your hat to Scott Frost and UCF for a quick turn around, but if you look at what George O'Leary did before he quit on the team (but continued to collect a paycheck) they were in much better shape than when Willie Fritz took over Tulane Football.

This is a process. we have to compete AGAIN for the division crown, and then show we can win the AAC. It's not a quick turn around. And not for nothing, but, despite athletics-friendly degree programs, academics do haunt recruiting. How many of CJ's in-state recruits graduated from Tulane?

The program is on the upswing, and I'm hoping for another step forward this year. Like most of the board posters, I'm excited about the change in OC, and hope we keep our new OC for at least two years (and Willie Fritz until he retires!) But we cannot expect miracles when the program has undergone a complete transformation in philosophies, which is what I've been saying since Willie Fritz got here. 2020, IMHO, is the year we win the AAC. But we need a QB to do so, and our OC to stay a couple of years.
D- We aren't far apart here. No one said it can be done in a year or two. We are going into year 4. We did compete for the Division crown this year. Even if we go with your timetable of winning it in 2020 that's year 5. If we do win it we certainly then have the chance to win the Conference championship and winning that likely gets us the NY6 Bowl Game. It doesn't take a decade.

As to the academics they have eased and much more support staff is in place. As to the CJ era issues we are no longer taking that many from this area. It's really about the perception that's out there to recruits still thinking it's too hard. The winning will help us get over that hump locally. As for myself I'v never cared where our players in any sport come from. Just get good ones that can make us a winner.
win,
if you noticed, I didn't refer AT ALL to academics or de-emphasis. My point was purely that lots of schools were independents, and therefore we were perceived as being similar. Sure, once a prospective athlete dug deeper, the academics may have been an issue. As proof, when you got the right players and coaches, you could win, 1979 being the proof. We went toe to toe with PENN STATE, 11 months after they had played for the NC in the Sugar Bowl.

In today's world, YES we could become ONE OF the dominant players in G5, as DfromCT said. But that STILL won't lift us into perennial top 25-3o recruiting classes and being able to compete with SEC/ACC schools on a week in and week out basis. BECAUSE, no matter WHAT happens, we'll still be perceived as inferior because of the G5 branding. Why do you think all the P5 fans look at UCF and say "they didn't play anyone"?
There were more independents then than now but the great majority of teams were in conferences. D and I are saying the same thing- that we can be dominant in the G5. Due to the conference were in that gives a good chance to be the top G5 and grab the NY6 Bowl Bid that goes to that team every year. I've never said we have to have top 25-30 classes to get there. Get it consistently in the 50's-60's and you can do it. That's actually the advantage we have over lower level P5 schools in that they'll never be in a NY6 Bowl while we have a legit shot to do that.
Let's Roll !
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 7134
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 5:30 pm

Winning the AAC doesn't guarantee the champion a NY6 bowl bid. Doing it undefeated, or with one loss makes is probable. But the MWC and even C-USA could put a team in ahead of AAC if their champion is undefeated.

A two loss AAC Champion probably doesn't make the NY6 games, sorry but the conference is not that far above the other G5's.
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13510
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:13 pm

DfromCT wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 5:30 pm
Winning the AAC doesn't guarantee the champion a NY6 bowl bid. Doing it undefeated, or with one loss makes is probable. But the MWC and even C-USA could put a team in ahead of AAC if their champion is undefeated.

A two loss AAC Champion probably doesn't make the NY6 games, sorry but the conference is not that far above the other G5's.
I never said it guaranteed it. I simply said it gives us a good shot at it if we win it.
Let's Roll !
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6980
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:49 pm

winwave wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:52 pm

There were more independents then than now but the great majority of teams were in conferences. D and I are saying the same thing- that we can be dominant in the G5. Due to the conference were in that gives a good chance to be the top G5 and grab the NY6 Bowl Bid that goes to that team every year. I've never said we have to have top 25-30 classes to get there. Get it consistently in the 50's-60's and you can do it. That's actually the advantage we have over lower level P5 schools in that they'll never be in a NY6 Bowl while we have a legit shot to do that.
There were alot more independents that you realize, but that's irrelevant. I do agree with what you just posted. There is no doubt a top tier AAC team has a better shot at a NY6 bowl than the lower P5s do. But if schools like Cincy, Houston and UCF can't get their recruiting into the 50s-60s consistently, how can we do it? What huge advantage do we have over them that would make better recruits choose us over them (assuming we're winning consistently like they do)?
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
User avatar
wave97
Swell
Posts: 1418
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:08 pm
Status: Offline

Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:45 pm

RobertM320 wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:49 pm
winwave wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:52 pm

There were more independents then than now but the great majority of teams were in conferences. D and I are saying the same thing- that we can be dominant in the G5. Due to the conference were in that gives a good chance to be the top G5 and grab the NY6 Bowl Bid that goes to that team every year. I've never said we have to have top 25-30 classes to get there. Get it consistently in the 50's-60's and you can do it. That's actually the advantage we have over lower level P5 schools in that they'll never be in a NY6 Bowl while we have a legit shot to do that.
There were alot more independents that you realize, but that's irrelevant. I do agree with what you just posted. There is no doubt a top tier AAC team has a better shot at a NY6 bowl than the lower P5s do. But if schools like Cincy, Houston and UCF can't get their recruiting into the 50s-60s consistently, how can we do it? What huge advantage do we have over them that would make better recruits choose us over them (assuming we're winning consistently like they do)?
My irrelevant effort of Independents just off the top of my head:
Syracuse, Boston College, Temple, Penn State, Pitt. West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Cincinnati, Notre Dame, Louisville, Memphis, South Carolina (left ACC), ECU, Southern Miss, Tulane (left SEC), Georgia Tech (left SEC), Florida State, Miami, BYU, Army, Navy, Tulsa, UMass, Rutgers.
I have fond memories of the old Southern Independent Officiating crews entering our locker prior to a game with a split crew from a conference. It went something like this; "don't get too upset out there guys, we've got you covered'. If you have video from any of those games it is remarkable how quickly one suspect call was followed up by an equal, or worse call in the other direction.
Post Reply