DrBox wrote:Yall realize that these guys, while they support your position of no stadium, do NOT support your position of "Big Time Football", don't you? You really think it's a good thing for long term viability to publish 592 or whatever it is? You think that they will take that information and then conclude that, yes, the problem with the stadium is that it's too small? Now Cowen and Dickson will have to defend the investment in football at all, because only the diehards like us will agree that if we win we will draw.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are several division-3 wolves in sheep's clothing on this board.
Yes, because as you note Tulane currently doesn't support the position of "big time football" either. The only difference is that once $60M and physical plant is spent, it will be infinitely harder or impossible to reverse course. What's needed is competent leadership and publishing the number 592 is irrefutable evidence of incompetent and failed leadership. Anyone involved in a position of leadership that still thinks D3 is a viable route given the education bubble needs to be outed because they are dangerous to Tulane's future. 592 isn't an excuse to drop to D3, it's evidence that the current policy is failed.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
The fact is that NIMBYs or no, "big time football" probably requires staying in the Dome, but certainly nothing with 38' walls.