Future OOC Games

The main discussion board for everything Tulane athletics related.
User avatar
nawlinspete
Swell
Posts: 1675
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:43 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:49 am

Correct. Vanderbilt offers virtually nothing. When we were in the SEC Vandy games had our lowest attendance and were dubbed "toilet bowl" games.

We need to schedule football schools, play all over the country (Stanford, Northwestern, FloridaState, Ole Miss, Oklahoma, TCU, Michigan, Notre Dame, Illinois, Kansas, Clemson, et al) and as required take a 1 for 2 or a payday where we cannot get a 1 for 1 or 2 for 2.

The Wave must strive for a tidal wave, not a Louisiana Lafayette splash.


Once and Again, With Smart Choices and a Bit Of Patience
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 6417
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 12:17 pm

winwave wrote:
DfromCT wrote:I think we're all in favor of one football "power" on the schedule every year or two. If we schedule too many of these type of schools our scheduling will get very tricky because we're not going to get many 1 for 1 contracts, and the more lopsided contracts we get into the tougher it becomes to schedule our own home games without return games available to offer.

The "peer" Universities many of us would like to see scheduled, would, IMHO, be Vanderbilt, Wake/Duke/GaTech, Northwestern, etc. in place of Army, USM, GaStat, etc. I wouldn't mind if Fritz wanted to give a home and home to GSU but in a couple of years time. Last time I checked Emory, Millsaps and Sewanee weren't putting D1 teams on the gridiron.
Agree that we should be having one of these a year. Again despite the year the conference had last year, and remember some of those teams sort of faded at the end, it's not a demanding conference schedule. So we need to get one of those power schools that the masses are interested in every year. We disagree that many want peer schools . There is no mass interest in that. For Tulane to build the crowds they need to sustain a successful top 25 program you are trying to draw in the masses and those are locals who didn't go to Tulane but adopted it as the home town team. As for drawing students and alumni attention you'll get a whole lot more of it playing and beating the teams I and others here suggest rather than supposed peer schools. Like I said above that small time peer mentality went out w/ SC/RD. It's way past time to think large.
Win, it really seems like you're responding to part of my post without reading the whole thing. I think we should play a power program every year or so, but we'll never get all of our OOC games against the power programs. Rather than scheduling the remaining games against USM, Army, GaState, etc., why not a peer institution in a P5 conference? I hardly think that's "small time peer mentality thinking that went out with SC/RD." I think it's adding more recognizable names to the schedule that happen to share a lot of what Tulane struggles to compete against. Private ACADEMIC institutions that are playing in conferences we aspire to join. If our OOC schedule has OU, Vanderbilt, UL-L and a top rated FCS program, I would think it's much more attractive than having OU, USM, Army and the same FCS program. And not for nothing but there are small, private Universities that are perennial top 15 programs. I'm not against payday games and bringing in the power programs. I just know that, realistically, that leaves 3 more OOC games that I'd rather see filled with peer institutions than giving some tier 5 school a payday.
" 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: 12649
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 12:49 pm

DfromCT wrote:
winwave wrote:
DfromCT wrote:I think we're all in favor of one football "power" on the schedule every year or two. If we schedule too many of these type of schools our scheduling will get very tricky because we're not going to get many 1 for 1 contracts, and the more lopsided contracts we get into the tougher it becomes to schedule our own home games without return games available to offer.

The "peer" Universities many of us would like to see scheduled, would, IMHO, be Vanderbilt, Wake/Duke/GaTech, Northwestern, etc. in place of Army, USM, GaStat, etc. I wouldn't mind if Fritz wanted to give a home and home to GSU but in a couple of years time. Last time I checked Emory, Millsaps and Sewanee weren't putting D1 teams on the gridiron.
Agree that we should be having one of these a year. Again despite the year the conference had last year, and remember some of those teams sort of faded at the end, it's not a demanding conference schedule. So we need to get one of those power schools that the masses are interested in every year. We disagree that many want peer schools . There is no mass interest in that. For Tulane to build the crowds they need to sustain a successful top 25 program you are trying to draw in the masses and those are locals who didn't go to Tulane but adopted it as the home town team. As for drawing students and alumni attention you'll get a whole lot more of it playing and beating the teams I and others here suggest rather than supposed peer schools. Like I said above that small time peer mentality went out w/ SC/RD. It's way past time to think large.
Win, it really seems like you're responding to part of my post without reading the whole thing. I think we should play a power program every year or so, but we'll never get all of our OOC games against the power programs. Rather than scheduling the remaining games against USM, Army, GaState, etc., why not a peer institution in a P5 conference? I hardly think that's "small time peer mentality thinking that went out with SC/RD." I think it's adding more recognizable names to the schedule that happen to share a lot of what Tulane struggles to compete against. Private ACADEMIC institutions that are playing in conferences we aspire to join. If our OOC schedule has OU, Vanderbilt, UL-L and a top rated FCS program, I would think it's much more attractive than having OU, USM, Army and the same FCS program. And not for nothing but there are small, private Universities that are perennial top 15 programs. I'm not against payday games and bringing in the power programs. I just know that, realistically, that leaves 3 more OOC games that I'd rather see filled with peer institutions than giving some tier 5 school a payday.
I read it all I just think something is getting lost in the translation. As I said we agree it should be one true P5 a year. I'm not, and I don't think anyone is, saying all 4 should be. As for peer institutions there is just no mass interest in the likes of Rice. You nor any other alums are coming in for that type of game. Fans that are actually going to go would much prefer USM to Rice. No one has any interest in Army especially now that we have Navy every year. That was a Dickson thing and will be gone once any remaining schedules games are completed. There should be no more FCS after the first couple of seasons of the new regime.
High School Stadium Gets You High School Football
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 5217
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 12:56 pm

winwave wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
winwave wrote:
DfromCT wrote:I think we're all in favor of one football "power" on the schedule every year or two. If we schedule too many of these type of schools our scheduling will get very tricky because we're not going to get many 1 for 1 contracts, and the more lopsided contracts we get into the tougher it becomes to schedule our own home games without return games available to offer.

The "peer" Universities many of us would like to see scheduled, would, IMHO, be Vanderbilt, Wake/Duke/GaTech, Northwestern, etc. in place of Army, USM, GaStat, etc. I wouldn't mind if Fritz wanted to give a home and home to GSU but in a couple of years time. Last time I checked Emory, Millsaps and Sewanee weren't putting D1 teams on the gridiron.
Agree that we should be having one of these a year. Again despite the year the conference had last year, and remember some of those teams sort of faded at the end, it's not a demanding conference schedule. So we need to get one of those power schools that the masses are interested in every year. We disagree that many want peer schools . There is no mass interest in that. For Tulane to build the crowds they need to sustain a successful top 25 program you are trying to draw in the masses and those are locals who didn't go to Tulane but adopted it as the home town team. As for drawing students and alumni attention you'll get a whole lot more of it playing and beating the teams I and others here suggest rather than supposed peer schools. Like I said above that small time peer mentality went out w/ SC/RD. It's way past time to think large.
Win, it really seems like you're responding to part of my post without reading the whole thing. I think we should play a power program every year or so, but we'll never get all of our OOC games against the power programs. Rather than scheduling the remaining games against USM, Army, GaState, etc., why not a peer institution in a P5 conference? I hardly think that's "small time peer mentality thinking that went out with SC/RD." I think it's adding more recognizable names to the schedule that happen to share a lot of what Tulane struggles to compete against. Private ACADEMIC institutions that are playing in conferences we aspire to join. If our OOC schedule has OU, Vanderbilt, UL-L and a top rated FCS program, I would think it's much more attractive than having OU, USM, Army and the same FCS program. And not for nothing but there are small, private Universities that are perennial top 15 programs. I'm not against payday games and bringing in the power programs. I just know that, realistically, that leaves 3 more OOC games that I'd rather see filled with peer institutions than giving some tier 5 school a payday.
I read it all I just think something is getting lost in the translation. As I said we agree it should be one true P5 a year. I'm not, and I don't think anyone is, saying all 4 should be. As for peer institutions there is just no mass interest in the likes of Rice. You nor any other alums are coming in for that type of game. Fans that are actually going to go would much prefer USM to Rice. No one has any interest in Army especially now that we have Navy every year. That was a Dickson thing and will be gone once any remaining schedules games are completed. There should be no more FCS after the first couple of seasons of the new regime.
I agree fan interest is much bigger for USM over Rice. Also playing big time FBall schools over Vandy or Northwestern is preferred, I just don't think it is reasonable right now without loading up on 2-1's. These elite D1 privates seem to think there is value in playing each other and at least we would have a shot with a 1-1 with Vandy. IDK. The fact is we need to right this ship and then weigh our options, which is exactly what TD might be doing....
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 8124
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:17 pm

mbawavefan12 wrote:
winwave wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
winwave wrote:
DfromCT wrote:I think we're all in favor of one football "power" on the schedule every year or two. If we schedule too many of these type of schools our scheduling will get very tricky because we're not going to get many 1 for 1 contracts, and the more lopsided contracts we get into the tougher it becomes to schedule our own home games without return games available to offer.

The "peer" Universities many of us would like to see scheduled, would, IMHO, be Vanderbilt, Wake/Duke/GaTech, Northwestern, etc. in place of Army, USM, GaStat, etc. I wouldn't mind if Fritz wanted to give a home and home to GSU but in a couple of years time. Last time I checked Emory, Millsaps and Sewanee weren't putting D1 teams on the gridiron.
Agree that we should be having one of these a year. Again despite the year the conference had last year, and remember some of those teams sort of faded at the end, it's not a demanding conference schedule. So we need to get one of those power schools that the masses are interested in every year. We disagree that many want peer schools . There is no mass interest in that. For Tulane to build the crowds they need to sustain a successful top 25 program you are trying to draw in the masses and those are locals who didn't go to Tulane but adopted it as the home town team. As for drawing students and alumni attention you'll get a whole lot more of it playing and beating the teams I and others here suggest rather than supposed peer schools. Like I said above that small time peer mentality went out w/ SC/RD. It's way past time to think large.
Win, it really seems like you're responding to part of my post without reading the whole thing. I think we should play a power program every year or so, but we'll never get all of our OOC games against the power programs. Rather than scheduling the remaining games against USM, Army, GaState, etc., why not a peer institution in a P5 conference? I hardly think that's "small time peer mentality thinking that went out with SC/RD." I think it's adding more recognizable names to the schedule that happen to share a lot of what Tulane struggles to compete against. Private ACADEMIC institutions that are playing in conferences we aspire to join. If our OOC schedule has OU, Vanderbilt, UL-L and a top rated FCS program, I would think it's much more attractive than having OU, USM, Army and the same FCS program. And not for nothing but there are small, private Universities that are perennial top 15 programs. I'm not against payday games and bringing in the power programs. I just know that, realistically, that leaves 3 more OOC games that I'd rather see filled with peer institutions than giving some tier 5 school a payday.
I read it all I just think something is getting lost in the translation. As I said we agree it should be one true P5 a year. I'm not, and I don't think anyone is, saying all 4 should be. As for peer institutions there is just no mass interest in the likes of Rice. You nor any other alums are coming in for that type of game. Fans that are actually going to go would much prefer USM to Rice. No one has any interest in Army especially now that we have Navy every year. That was a Dickson thing and will be gone once any remaining schedules games are completed. There should be no more FCS after the first couple of seasons of the new regime.
I agree fan interest is much bigger for USM over Rice. Also playing big time FBall schools over Vandy or Northwestern is preferred, I just don't think it is reasonable right now without loading up on 2-1's. These elite D1 privates seem to think there is value in playing each other and at least we would have a shot with a 1-1 with Vandy. IDK. The fact is we need to right this ship and then weigh our options, which is exactly what TD might be doing....
two questions...why is Georgia Tech a "peer" institution ?....and what the hell is wrong with playing Northwestern ?
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 !
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1742
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:07 pm

DfromCT wrote:
winwave wrote:
DfromCT wrote:I think we're all in favor of one football "power" on the schedule every year or two. If we schedule too many of these type of schools our scheduling will get very tricky because we're not going to get many 1 for 1 contracts, and the more lopsided contracts we get into the tougher it becomes to schedule our own home games without return games available to offer.

The "peer" Universities many of us would like to see scheduled, would, IMHO, be Vanderbilt, Wake/Duke/GaTech, Northwestern, etc. in place of Army, USM, GaStat, etc. I wouldn't mind if Fritz wanted to give a home and home to GSU but in a couple of years time. Last time I checked Emory, Millsaps and Sewanee weren't putting D1 teams on the gridiron.
Agree that we should be having one of these a year. Again despite the year the conference had last year, and remember some of those teams sort of faded at the end, it's not a demanding conference schedule. So we need to get one of those power schools that the masses are interested in every year. We disagree that many want peer schools . There is no mass interest in that. For Tulane to build the crowds they need to sustain a successful top 25 program you are trying to draw in the masses and those are locals who didn't go to Tulane but adopted it as the home town team. As for drawing students and alumni attention you'll get a whole lot more of it playing and beating the teams I and others here suggest rather than supposed peer schools. Like I said above that small time peer mentality went out w/ SC/RD. It's way past time to think large.
Win, it really seems like you're responding to part of my post without reading the whole thing. I think we should play a power program every year or so, but we'll never get all of our OOC games against the power programs. Rather than scheduling the remaining games against USM, Army, GaState, etc., why not a peer institution in a P5 conference? I hardly think that's "small time peer mentality thinking that went out with SC/RD." I think it's adding more recognizable names to the schedule that happen to share a lot of what Tulane struggles to compete against. Private ACADEMIC institutions that are playing in conferences we aspire to join. If our OOC schedule has OU, Vanderbilt, UL-L and a top rated FCS program, I would think it's much more attractive than having OU, USM, Army and the same FCS program. And not for nothing but there are small, private Universities that are perennial top 15 programs. I'm not against payday games and bringing in the power programs. I just know that, realistically, that leaves 3 more OOC games that I'd rather see filled with peer institutions than giving some tier 5 school a payday.
I hear you on the Schedule, but still there are logistical issues. Ideally, every year our OOC should be two P5s, local (Southern/Southeastern/Jackson State/Sam Houston) or Academic (Ivy League) FCS, and a regional G5 (from one of LA/TX/TN/MS/AL/GA). The problem is, we have difficulty getting 1 for 1s with P5s. In theory, we could try to get 1 for 0s with P5s just to have them on the schedule, but that would mean that our G5 game would always have to be a home game, and I'm not sure we can afford to pay G5 programs for those 1 for 0s since it's unclear how much money the athletic department makes at each home game and we are already paying an FCS team for a home game. Of course, the two P5 pay days per year would help with that.

The major downside to that approach would probably be a restless fanbase that would want high profile programs to come Yulman.
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 6417
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:35 pm

Aberzombie, you put into words a lot of what I was trying to express. Not sure we can pull off 2 P5 OOC games and keep our schedule available for at least half of our OOC games to be at home. If we did, it would mean 1 FCS school getting a payday every year, and an eventual ball and chain of road P5 games. The "peer" P5 schools are much more likely to give us 1 for 1 contracts, which are much better for our longer term scheduling abilities. We don't have to play Army, UMass, USM, and Rice to get 1 for 1's. Although Rice does fall into the peer category, I would only want to play them 2x/decade, max.
" 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: 1675
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:43 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 8:46 pm

It is time for our AD Dannen to speak up; if he understands our recent past he knows how debilitating Tulane's "Cone Of Silence" has been in fans' minds and in eventual announcements.
Once and Again, With Smart Choices and a Bit Of Patience
User avatar
Show Me
Riptide
Posts: 2900
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:24 pm
Location: Saint Bernard
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:01 pm

Troll Pete has the Cowen/ Dickson Stockholm syndrome.
User avatar
nawlinspete
Swell
Posts: 1675
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:43 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:02 pm

nawlinspete wrote:It is time for our AD Dannen to speak up; if he understands our recent past he knows how debilitating Tulane's "Cone Of Silence" has been in fans' minds and in eventual announcements.
In January Dannen said he'd have a Facilities Master Plan ready in June; Mr Dannen what is your timetable for formulating Tulane's scheduling strategies for OOC FB, MBB an WBB ?
Once and Again, With Smart Choices and a Bit Of Patience
User avatar
Show Me
Riptide
Posts: 2900
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:24 pm
Location: Saint Bernard
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:48 pm

nawlinspete wrote:
nawlinspete wrote:It is time for our AD Dannen to speak up; if he understands our recent past he knows how debilitating Tulane's "Cone Of Silence" has been in fans' minds and in eventual announcements.
In January Dannen said he'd have a Facilities Master Plan ready in June; Mr Dannen what is your timetable for formulating Tulane's scheduling strategies for OOC FB, MBB an WBB ?
Haha Pete quoting Pete to back his point. Where's your other alias Jonathan been?
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6630
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Mon Apr 25, 2016 10:07 pm

Jonathan hasn't posted since January, just around the time that Pete's post numbers started to rise.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
User avatar
wave97
Swell
Posts: 1339
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:08 pm
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:20 am

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
winwave wrote:
DfromCT wrote:I think we're all in favor of one football "power" on the schedule every year or two. If we schedule too many of these type of schools our scheduling will get very tricky because we're not going to get many 1 for 1 contracts, and the more lopsided contracts we get into the tougher it becomes to schedule our own home games without return games available to offer.

The "peer" Universities many of us would like to see scheduled, would, IMHO, be Vanderbilt, Wake/Duke/GaTech, Northwestern, etc. in place of Army, USM, GaStat, etc. I wouldn't mind if Fritz wanted to give a home and home to GSU but in a couple of years time. Last time I checked Emory, Millsaps and Sewanee weren't putting D1 teams on the gridiron.
Agree that we should be having one of these a year. Again despite the year the conference had last year, and remember some of those teams sort of faded at the end, it's not a demanding conference schedule. So we need to get one of those power schools that the masses are interested in every year. We disagree that many want peer schools . There is no mass interest in that. For Tulane to build the crowds they need to sustain a successful top 25 program you are trying to draw in the masses and those are locals who didn't go to Tulane but adopted it as the home town team. As for drawing students and alumni attention you'll get a whole lot more of it playing and beating the teams I and others here suggest rather than supposed peer schools. Like I said above that small time peer mentality went out w/ SC/RD. It's way past time to think large.
Win, it really seems like you're responding to part of my post without reading the whole thing. I think we should play a power program every year or so, but we'll never get all of our OOC games against the power programs. Rather than scheduling the remaining games against USM, Army, GaState, etc., why not a peer institution in a P5 conference? I hardly think that's "small time peer mentality thinking that went out with SC/RD." I think it's adding more recognizable names to the schedule that happen to share a lot of what Tulane struggles to compete against. Private ACADEMIC institutions that are playing in conferences we aspire to join. If our OOC schedule has OU, Vanderbilt, UL-L and a top rated FCS program, I would think it's much more attractive than having OU, USM, Army and the same FCS program. And not for nothing but there are small, private Universities that are perennial top 15 programs. I'm not against payday games and bringing in the power programs. I just know that, realistically, that leaves 3 more OOC games that I'd rather see filled with peer institutions than giving some tier 5 school a payday.
I hear you on the Schedule, but still there are logistical issues. Ideally, every year our OOC should be two P5s, local (Southern/Southeastern/Jackson State/Sam Houston) or Academic (Ivy League) FCS, and a regional G5 (from one of LA/TX/TN/MS/AL/GA). The problem is, we have difficulty getting 1 for 1s with P5s. In theory, we could try to get 1 for 0s with P5s just to have them on the schedule, but that would mean that our G5 game would always have to be a home game, and I'm not sure we can afford to pay G5 programs for those 1 for 0s since it's unclear how much money the athletic department makes at each home game and we are already paying an FCS team for a home game. Of course, the two P5 pay days per year would help with that.

The major downside to that approach would probably be a restless fanbase that would want high profile programs to come Yulman.
Rent out the Dome for State, Ole Miss, TAMU ect... (take a 1-2 if necessary). They'll travel with 20k to 30k. Re-discover our former fan base and prospect for new fans by showing that we belong to be on the field with SEC teams. Five years from now we'll be adding 20K+ to Yulman.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 12649
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:44 am

Don't stay stuck in Tulane's loser past. In the past we couldn't get 1 for 1's b/c the program was a national laughingstock and our AD didn't know what he was doing. Going forward we will have a respected program and an aggressive AD. We have the draw of New Orleans and fertile recruiting ground. We have the Dome for these games. There won't be any outcry for them to be played on campus . Once the program is doing well people will want to see us play quality teams and they'll understand that trying to force that issue will be a deal breaker for these schools that will want to bring 20,000 fans. Things are changing for the better. Enjoy it.
High School Stadium Gets You High School Football
lurker123
Swell
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 9:01 pm
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:55 am

winwave wrote:Don't stay stuck in Tulane's loser past. In the past we couldn't get 1 for 1's b/c the program was a national laughingstock and our AD didn't know what he was doing. Going forward we will have a respected program and an aggressive AD. We have the draw of New Orleans and fertile recruiting ground. We have the Dome for these games. There won't be any outcry for them to be played on campus . Once the program is doing well people will want to see us play quality teams and they'll understand that trying to force that issue will be a deal breaker for these schools that will want to bring 20,000 fans. Things are changing for the better. Enjoy it.
It's fairly apparent that the previous admin did not pursue P5 1-for-1's because it believed that the AAC schedule was "difficult enough." Recent examples of this in action was the unsuccessful effort to blow up the GT series and the successful effort to torpedo the MSU one. P5 teams can and will come to Yulman if Tulane is willing to make the needed effort.

Numbers above look initially appealing on paper but we have to think of the Superdome as at best a neutral site. Not saying Tulane will never play there again but the vibe will be more like the last N.O. Bowl with TU and ULL. Fun atmosphere but when the visitors can bring 20,000+ fans to a game, it's not a home venue and you lose the advantage.

Think of Yulman as the SD without the Terrace and some of the Loge. Why give up the true home game atmosphere of Yulman so that more supporters of TU's opponents can attend the game?

No, Yulman and Devlin are not keeping us out of a P5. It's the chronic losing before empty stands.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 12649
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:10 am

lurker123 wrote:
winwave wrote:Don't stay stuck in Tulane's loser past. In the past we couldn't get 1 for 1's b/c the program was a national laughingstock and our AD didn't know what he was doing. Going forward we will have a respected program and an aggressive AD. We have the draw of New Orleans and fertile recruiting ground. We have the Dome for these games. There won't be any outcry for them to be played on campus . Once the program is doing well people will want to see us play quality teams and they'll understand that trying to force that issue will be a deal breaker for these schools that will want to bring 20,000 fans. Things are changing for the better. Enjoy it.
It's fairly apparent that the previous admin did not pursue P5 1-for-1's because it believed that the AAC schedule was "difficult enough." Recent examples of this in action was the unsuccessful effort to blow up the GT series and the successful effort to torpedo the MSU one. P5 teams can and will come to Yulman if Tulane is willing to make the needed effort.

Numbers above look initially appealing on paper but we have to think of the Superdome as at best a neutral site. Not saying Tulane will never play there again but the vibe will be more like the last N.O. Bowl with TU and ULL. Fun atmosphere but when the visitors can bring 20,000+ fans to a game, it's not a home venue and you lose the advantage.

Think of Yulman as the SD without the Terrace and some of the Loge. Why give up the true home game atmosphere of Yulman so that more supporters of TU's opponents can attend the game?

No, Yulman and Devlin are not keeping us out of a P5. It's the chronic losing before empty stands.
We'll have to agree to disagree on the affect the stadium has on the possibilities. As I said above people need to leave behind the memories of the losing past. If we attract those 1 for 1's it will be b/c we now have a program our fans want to see. Thus an Ole Miss game in the Dome would be 40,000 Tulane fans and 20 k for them. we have the advantage. Otherwise the game doesn't happen. In fact the only way an Ole Miss game gets played in Yulman is if we suck and they get their hands on 20,000 tickets and we get our 2,000 die -hards. ( Talking about the already scheduled game. The media got the contract and it did not specify the stadium. )As for basketball as I noted in another thread we never lost home court advantage by playing big games in the Dome. We need to face the reality that these two facilities are vastly undersized for big time games.
High School Stadium Gets You High School Football
User avatar
wave97
Swell
Posts: 1339
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:08 pm
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:27 am

lurker123 wrote:
winwave wrote:Don't stay stuck in Tulane's loser past. In the past we couldn't get 1 for 1's b/c the program was a national laughingstock and our AD didn't know what he was doing. Going forward we will have a respected program and an aggressive AD. We have the draw of New Orleans and fertile recruiting ground. We have the Dome for these games. There won't be any outcry for them to be played on campus . Once the program is doing well people will want to see us play quality teams and they'll understand that trying to force that issue will be a deal breaker for these schools that will want to bring 20,000 fans. Things are changing for the better. Enjoy it.
It's fairly apparent that the previous admin did not pursue P5 1-for-1's because it believed that the AAC schedule was "difficult enough." Recent examples of this in action was the unsuccessful effort to blow up the GT series and the successful effort to torpedo the MSU one. P5 teams can and will come to Yulman if Tulane is willing to make the needed effort.

Numbers above look initially appealing on paper but we have to think of the Superdome as at best a neutral site. Not saying Tulane will never play there again but the vibe will be more like the last N.O. Bowl with TU and ULL. Fun atmosphere but when the visitors can bring 20,000+ fans to a game, it's not a home venue and you lose the advantage.

Think of Yulman as the SD without the Terrace and some of the Loge. Why give up the true home game atmosphere of Yulman so that more supporters of TU's opponents can attend the game?

No, Yulman and Devlin are not keeping us out of a P5. It's the chronic losing before empty stands.
When we used to play Clemson, FSU, Florida, LSU in the Dome, I promise you that having 30,000 opposing fans in the building was not a deterrent for team performance. It was the opposite. There tended to be a party atmosphere among the opposing fan base where parents, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, girlfriends tagged along and stayed in the same hotel as the players. Opposing players had to deal with issues that had nothing to do with on the field performance (tickets, dinner reservations, transportation, visiting relatives prior to the game). As a team, we loved it when the opposing team ran out on the field as if it were a home game for them, we had no problem focusing our attention on the task at hand.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 12649
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:39 am

I'll add that playing LSU at Zephyr never lost us home field advantage. When we are good and play big games at big time venues we still have the advantage.
High School Stadium Gets You High School Football
lurker123
Swell
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 9:01 pm
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 12:45 pm

winwave wrote:I'll add that playing LSU at Zephyr never lost us home field advantage. When we are good and play big games at big time venues we still have the advantage.
I enjoyed as much as anyone all the big games played in SD from all major sports decades ago. Since then we have lost two full generations of fans in football, 1.5 in MBB and perhaps a half in baseball. With continued success by Pierce we should return to pre-Katrina vibe in baseball in say two years.

With a couple of good players and Dunleavy succeeding and staying, perhaps we regain 90's buzz in MBB by 2020 but that's only in Devlin. I don't see us ever being able to consistently draw 10,000+ in Smoothie King.

Football success under WF can put us on track to expand Yulman to say 40,000 and that's it.

Look at Miami. They only draw big crowds for the instate rival games and ND in the pro stadium and only when Miami is competing for NCs. Their program would be much better off with an oncampus stadium that seats say 40,000 to 45,000. UC and Temple have come to the same conclusion. USC is the only exception to this rule and I expect that even there the return of the RAMS (and then Raiders?) will put a noticeable dent in its Coliseum attendance.

We need to focus on college vibe and college experience and that won't/can't happen downtown because Tulane left the SEC, had inconsistent to poor athletic management and coaching for decades and the student body changed from local/regional to national. Add a dollop of TOPS making LSU basically tuition free and we don't have enough young fans. Also LSU is smart enough to keep all "true" professional teams out of BR which would compete with it. (BR is the largest city in the U.S. without even a minor league team in any sport.)

Let's succeed on campus and start winning national championships like Rice in baseball and Villanova in MBB and at least making it to New Year's Bowls in football and then maybe we'll have a renewed fan base in twenty years that can survive downtown. I'm over with the igloo experience on Poydras. Just my two cents.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 12649
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:08 pm

Like I said we'll have to agree to disagree. As I also said don't be stuck in Tulane's losing past. We still have fans and they will come again if these coaches are as good as all of believe they are and w/TD doing the scheduling. The only good atmosphere is a winning atmosphere. It didn't take long at Yulman for the crowds to dwindle to just a few thousand. Focus on the future and what the programs will become.
High School Stadium Gets You High School Football
HoustonWave
Swell
Posts: 1706
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:27 pm
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:10 pm

lurker123 wrote:
winwave wrote:I'll add that playing LSU at Zephyr never lost us home field advantage. When we are good and play big games at big time venues we still have the advantage.
I enjoyed as much as anyone all the big games played in SD from all major sports decades ago. Since then we have lost two full generations of fans in football, 1.5 in MBB and perhaps a half in baseball. With continued success by Pierce we should return to pre-Katrina vibe in baseball in say two years.

With a couple of good players and Dunleavy succeeding and staying, perhaps we regain 90's buzz in MBB by 2020 but that's only in Devlin. I don't see us ever being able to consistently draw 10,000+ in Smoothie King.

Football success under WF can put us on track to expand Yulman to say 40,000 and that's it.

Look at Miami. They only draw big crowds for the instate rival games and ND in the pro stadium and only when Miami is competing for NCs. Their program would be much better off with an oncampus stadium that seats say 40,000 to 45,000. UC and Temple have come to the same conclusion. USC is the only exception to this rule and I expect that even there the return of the RAMS (and then Raiders?) will put a noticeable dent in its Coliseum attendance.

We need to focus on college vibe and college experience and that won't/can't happen downtown because Tulane left the SEC, had inconsistent to poor athletic management and coaching for decades and the student body changed from local/regional to national. Add a dollop of TOPS making LSU basically tuition free and we don't have enough young fans. Also LSU is smart enough to keep all "true" professional teams out of BR which would compete with it. (BR is the largest city in the U.S. without even a minor league team in any sport.)

Let's succeed on campus and start winning national championships like Rice in baseball and Villanova in MBB and at least making it to New Year's Bowls in football and then maybe we'll have a renewed fan base in twenty years that can survive downtown. I'm over with the igloo experience on Poydras. Just my two cents.
Actually, USC is not an exception when you consider that the Coliseum is right across the street from their campus--essentially an on-campus stadium.
Tulane is the University of Louisiana
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 12649
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:11 pm

The Dome is a 5 minute drive. UCLA also plays off campus.
High School Stadium Gets You High School Football
User avatar
wave97
Swell
Posts: 1339
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:08 pm
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:18 pm

Years ago, when I heard rumors that the Saints were possibly moving to LA or San Antonio I was ecstatic.
What happened? Can they please move? Now!
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 6417
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:27 pm

winwave wrote:The Dome is a 5 minute drive. UCLA also plays off campus.

There's a big difference between playing in a stadium that has a HUGE parking lot versus the Dome. The Dome really doesn't lend itself to great tailgating, (though I've done so numerous times.) Nothing like the atmosphere on Campus. I've been to big college games at Giants stadium and because of the enormity of the parking lot, it was a huge party 3 hours before the game. I've been to Super Bowls in the Superdome that had much less pre-game atmosphere (though I do think EVERY Super Bowl should be played in New Orleans!) than some of those games.

When the Dome is packed, or at least 45k in attendance, it's a great venue once the game starts. But it's not a great venue for tailgating, and when it's empty it's a cold morgue. I'd love to have a team and a schedule to make this conversation meaningful. Right now we have a coach and expectations.
" 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: 12649
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:31 pm

DfromCT wrote:
winwave wrote:The Dome is a 5 minute drive. UCLA also plays off campus.

There's a big difference between playing in a stadium that has a HUGE parking lot versus the Dome. The Dome really doesn't lend itself to great tailgating, (though I've done so numerous times.) Nothing like the atmosphere on Campus. I've been to big college games at Giants stadium and because of the enormity of the parking lot, it was a huge party 3 hours before the game. I've been to Super Bowls in the Superdome that had much less pre-game atmosphere (though I do think EVERY Super Bowl should be played in New Orleans!) than some of those games.

When the Dome is packed, or at least 45k in attendance, it's a great venue once the game starts. But it's not a great venue for tailgating, and when it's empty it's a cold morgue. I'd love to have a team and a schedule to make this conversation meaningful. Right now we have a coach and expectations.
We tailgated just fine at the Dome. As I said above there is no atmosphere when we are losing no matter the venue. In a perfect world you play on campus but when the size is so limited you use what you have at your disposal and nothing is better than the Dome for a big game.
High School Stadium Gets You High School Football
Post Reply