NFL Chargers will move to a "high school" stadium. How can that be?

[wave97]

Yeah, Winwave, we were winning national championships when we played in a world class facility, now we suck because we play in Yulman. That's how it is, no doubt. Yeah you right.

Finished #7. But hey you obviously enjoy the losing so keep on.

Once in the 34 years we played there. And 16 seasons before moving back on campus, where we draw 5-10x what we ACTUALLY put into the Dome. We were down below 1000 attendees for many games our last 10 years there. That includes a homecoming game against Army where you could count the fans EASILY.

But you want to bury your head in the sand, fine. We should move back to the Dome and solve all our problems. The coach that brought us into the top 10 is available, and his top assistant will be too. No worries, we'll be top 10 perennially, just go back in time. All problems solved.

We paid 12K a game for the dome. When we won we filled the dome between the 20's, 35k to 50k. We paid 80 million dollars for 26,000 seat stadium. 80 million dollars can build you spectacular training facilities. I was completely on board with the boutique stadium until I actually saw it in person. Underwhelming! That stink won't come off until we manage to win in spite of the stadium and/or raise the money for Yulman Stadium/Benson Field/(Random Donor) West Tier.

[winwave]

Yeah, Winwave, we were winning national championships when we played in a world class facility, now we suck because we play in Yulman. That's how it is, no doubt. Yeah you right.

Finished #7. But hey you obviously enjoy the losing so keep on.

Once in the 34 years we played there. And 16 seasons before moving back on campus, where we draw 5-10x what we ACTUALLY put into the Dome. We were down below 1000 attendees for many games our last 10 years there. That includes a homecoming game against Army where you could count the fans EASILY.

But you want to bury your head in the sand, fine. We should move back to the Dome and solve all our problems. The coach that brought us into the top 10 is available, and his top assistant will be too. No worries, we'll be top 10 perennially, just go back in time. All problems solved.

Our actual attendance now is 5,000 or so for most games and close to half of that are fans of the other team. Many here complained all season about having to sit w/opposing fans. so yea just bury your head in the sand while the losing continues.

Or 4,000 more than we put into the Dome. Yeah all our problems recruiting are tied to the stadium. That's the ticket. Sure. Ok, easy fix. Go back to the Dome and wins will follow. RIGHT!

bullsh*t. We had one documented game under 1,000. Our usual actual was around 5,000. Once again you go saying things no one ever said. IT IS AN ISSUE.

We ANNOUNCED crowds of 5000. I know for a fact that we had plenty of games of less than 1000 through the turnstyles.

But if you want to blame losing on Yulman, go ahead. Yulman isn't the problem, it's a symptom of the problem. MOVE ON, we're not going back to the dome in our lifetime. If you like the warm fuzzy feeling you get pissing into the wind, then enjoy doing so.

We didn't announce crowds of 5,000. Please provide your proof.

There you go again making up shit that no one said. I never said move back. I said it's part of the problem and it needs to be fixed. But like you say don't change anything but we'll just start winning. Brilliant.

[DfromCT]

Who is putting words in the others mouth? Winwave, you need to open your mouth wide enough to take your foot out. End of conversation on my part, it's hard to argue with someone that insists on being ignorant.

I'll tell you my source for the MANY games of under 1000 through the turnstyles when you come out of the closet and let everyone know your name. Why do you hide behind the computer screen and spew BS?

[winwave]

Who is putting words in the others mouth? Winwave, you need to open your mouth wide enough to take your foot out. End of conversation on my part, it's hard to argue with someone that insists on being ignorant.

I'll tell you my source for the MANY games of under 1000 through the turnstyles when you come out of the closet and let everyone know your name. Why do you hide behind the computer screen and spew BS?

In other words you have no proof. Thanks for the answer.

99 % of posters do so anonymously. Don't like it create your own site where everybody says what you want to hear.

[RobertM320]

Other than Boise you cited a few schools that very few would consider successful football programs. Your data was worthless. Tulane's recruiting results speak volumes on the topic.

How is that data worthless? If by successful you mean winning national championships, then no they wouldn't be considered successful. Then again, neither would 100+ other FBS programs. How do you measure success? Obviously not what Tulane has accomplished. But lets take a closer look at Toledo, for example. They've had seven CONSECUTIVE winning seasons (when was the last time Tulane did that, if ever. The 30's?) They've been to six bowl games in the past seven years, and 11 this century. We've been to twelve TOTAL, IF you count the 1910 Bacardi Bowl against the Havana Athletic Club in Cuba.

If Tulane had accomplished exactly what they've done the past 7 years, you'd still say we weren't successful? Heck, if we had accomplished what they have, we'd probably be in a P5 league.

[winwave]

Other than Boise you cited a few schools that very few would consider successful football programs. Your data was worthless. Tulane's recruiting results speak volumes on the topic.

How is that data worthless? If by successful you mean winning national championships, then no they wouldn't be considered successful. Then again, neither would 100+ other FBS programs. How do you measure success? Obviously not what Tulane has accomplished. But lets take a closer look at Toledo, for example. They've had seven CONSECUTIVE winning seasons (when was the last time Tulane did that, if ever. The 30's?) They've been to six bowl games in the past seven years, and 11 this century. We've been to twelve TOTAL, IF you count the 1910 Bacardi Bowl against the Havana Athletic Club in Cuba.

If Tulane had accomplished exactly what they've done the past 7 years, you'd still say we weren't successful? Heck, if we had accomplished what they have, we'd probably be in a P5 league.

I don't think anyone wants to just go 7-5 and minor bowling every year. That's where you start for a couple of years and then move on. I have said from the beginning that at the level we play we need to be striving for 10 regular season wins and conference championships on a very regular basis. What is your standard?

[RobertM320]

Other than Boise you cited a few schools that very few would consider successful football programs. Your data was worthless. Tulane's recruiting results speak volumes on the topic.

How is that data worthless? If by successful you mean winning national championships, then no they wouldn't be considered successful. Then again, neither would 100+ other FBS programs. How do you measure success? Obviously not what Tulane has accomplished. But lets take a closer look at Toledo, for example. They've had seven CONSECUTIVE winning seasons (when was the last time Tulane did that, if ever. The 30's?) They've been to six bowl games in the past seven years, and 11 this century. We've been to twelve TOTAL, IF you count the 1910 Bacardi Bowl against the Havana Athletic Club in Cuba.

If Tulane had accomplished exactly what they've done the past 7 years, you'd still say we weren't successful? Heck, if we had accomplished what they have, we'd probably be in a P5 league.

I don't think anyone wants to just go 7-5 and minor bowling every year. That's where you start for a couple of years and then move on. I have said from the beginning that at the level we play we need to be striving for 10 regular season wins and conference championships on a very regular basis. What is your standard?

Again you didn't look. Since the turn of the century, 17 seasons, Toledo has has three 10 win seasons and seven 9 win seasons. They only had 4 losing seasons in those 17, and 3 of those were 5-7. My point was, they obviously get better players than we do or we'd be winning more games. And they recruit to a 26,000 seat stadium that was built in 1936.

Are you really going to tell me that you wouldn't consider us successful if we were to have ten 9-win seasons in the next 17 years? Its one thing to set lofty goals and aspire for more, but you're pushing fantasyland if those numbers aren't acceptable. And if we were to do that, we'd get better bowls than what Toledo gets.

[winwave]

Other than Boise you cited a few schools that very few would consider successful football programs. Your data was worthless. Tulane's recruiting results speak volumes on the topic.

How is that data worthless? If by successful you mean winning national championships, then no they wouldn't be considered successful. Then again, neither would 100+ other FBS programs. How do you measure success? Obviously not what Tulane has accomplished. But lets take a closer look at Toledo, for example. They've had seven CONSECUTIVE winning seasons (when was the last time Tulane did that, if ever. The 30's?) They've been to six bowl games in the past seven years, and 11 this century. We've been to twelve TOTAL, IF you count the 1910 Bacardi Bowl against the Havana Athletic Club in Cuba.

If Tulane had accomplished exactly what they've done the past 7 years, you'd still say we weren't successful? Heck, if we had accomplished what they have, we'd probably be in a P5 league.

I don't think anyone wants to just go 7-5 and minor bowling every year. That's where you start for a couple of years and then move on. I have said from the beginning that at the level we play we need to be striving for 10 regular season wins and conference championships on a very regular basis. What is your standard?

Again you didn't look. Since the turn of the century, 17 seasons, Toledo has has three 10 win seasons and seven 9 win seasons. They only had 4 losing seasons in those 17, and 3 of those were 5-7. My point was, they obviously get better players than we do or we'd be winning more games. And they recruit to a 26,000 seat stadium that was built in 1936.

Are you really going to tell me that you wouldn't consider us successful if we were to have ten 9-win seasons in the next 17 years? Its one thing to set lofty goals and aspire for more, but you're pushing fantasyland if those numbers aren't acceptable. And if we were to do that, we'd get better bowls than what Toledo gets.

Go back and read what I wrote. I said strive for 10 wins on a regular basis. I'd point out too that you are talking about a MAC team. They are not competing at this level. What is your standard for Tulane football?

[RobertM320]

I know they're not competing at this level. And we're not competing at the level of Alabama and LSU either, are we? And I ask, if we turn in the same numbers Toledo is doing, you wouldn't consider that we're reached reasonable standards? Because at that level, I'm willing to bet there's not 20 teams in the country that get 10 wins on a regular basis, and probably not 5 that aren't P5. I understand the concept of not setting too low a bar, but that doesn't mean go off the deep end and set unreasonable expectations either. Expecting 10 wins on a regular basis is unreasonable in my opinion.

[DfromCT]

Again you didn't look. Since the turn of the century, 17 seasons, Toledo has has three 10 win seasons and seven 9 win seasons. They only had 4 losing seasons in those 17, and 3 of those were 5-7. My point was, they obviously get better players than we do or we'd be winning more games. And they recruit to a 26,000 seat stadium that was built in 1936.

Are you really going to tell me that you wouldn't consider us successful if we were to have ten 9-win seasons in the next 17 years? Its one thing to set lofty goals and aspire for more, but you're pushing fantasyland if those numbers aren't acceptable. And if we were to do that, we'd get better bowls than what Toledo gets.

I'd say that's damned successful, and better than any string of seasons Tulane has put together in any of our lifetimes. I'd be very, very happy if Tulane had 3 ten win seasons and 7 nine win seasons between now and 2034. We'd at least be accepted as competitive, rather than being dismissed as irrelevant.

The stadium is not the issue. It's a symptom, not the disease. It's not going away, and we're not going to expand it any time too soon. Live with it.

[winwave]

Again you didn't look. Since the turn of the century, 17 seasons, Toledo has has three 10 win seasons and seven 9 win seasons. They only had 4 losing seasons in those 17, and 3 of those were 5-7. My point was, they obviously get better players than we do or we'd be winning more games. And they recruit to a 26,000 seat stadium that was built in 1936.

Are you really going to tell me that you wouldn't consider us successful if we were to have ten 9-win seasons in the next 17 years? Its one thing to set lofty goals and aspire for more, but you're pushing fantasyland if those numbers aren't acceptable. And if we were to do that, we'd get better bowls than what Toledo gets.

I'd say that's damned successful, and better than any string of seasons Tulane has put together in any of our lifetimes. I'd be very, very happy if Tulane had 3 ten win seasons and 7 nine win seasons between now and 2034. We'd at least be accepted as competitive, rather than being dismissed as irrelevant.

The stadium is not the issue. It's a symptom, not the disease. It's not going away, and we're not going to expand it any time too soon. Live with it.

Your reading things into it that aren't there. I clearly would be happy w/9 and 10 win seasons on our level. Toledo can do what they do on their level in that facility. It's clearly a lower level. So to say we can do the same w/what is actually a smaller stadium just doesn't ring true. Theirs seats 5k more and has a capacity of over 10,000 more as they have had crowds of 36k just to make the numbers clear. If they were in the AAC and competing for the quality of players AAC teams go after they wouldn't be winning those many games every year b/c their recruiting wouldn't hold up w/that facility.That's the point. For arguments sake say I spotted you Toledo your up to a whopping two.

The stadium is a big issue and is a large part of the problem. It needs to be addressed ASAP.

[Aberzombie1892]

Again you didn't look. Since the turn of the century, 17 seasons, Toledo has has three 10 win seasons and seven 9 win seasons. They only had 4 losing seasons in those 17, and 3 of those were 5-7. My point was, they obviously get better players than we do or we'd be winning more games. And they recruit to a 26,000 seat stadium that was built in 1936.

Are you really going to tell me that you wouldn't consider us successful if we were to have ten 9-win seasons in the next 17 years? Its one thing to set lofty goals and aspire for more, but you're pushing fantasyland if those numbers aren't acceptable. And if we were to do that, we'd get better bowls than what Toledo gets.

I'd say that's damned successful, and better than any string of seasons Tulane has put together in any of our lifetimes. I'd be very, very happy if Tulane had 3 ten win seasons and 7 nine win seasons between now and 2034. We'd at least be accepted as competitive, rather than being dismissed as irrelevant.

The stadium is not the issue. It's a symptom, not the disease. It's not going away, and we're not going to expand it any time too soon. Live with it.

Your reading things into it that aren't there. I clearly would be happy w/9 and 10 win seasons on our level. Toledo can do what they do on their level in that facility. It's clearly a lower level. So to say we can do the same w/what is actually a smaller stadium just doesn't ring true. Theirs seats 5k more and has a capacity of over 10,000 more as they have had crowds of 36k just to make the numbers clear. If they were in the AAC and competing for the quality of players AAC teams go after they wouldn't be winning those many games every year b/c their recruiting wouldn't hold up w/that facility.That's the point. For arguments sake say I spotted you Toledo your up to a whopping two.

The stadium is a big issue and is a large part of the problem. It needs to be addressed ASAP.

For the record, Toledo's stadium has a seating capacity of 26,250, and that's pretty comparable to Yulman.

[winwave]

Again you didn't look. Since the turn of the century, 17 seasons, Toledo has has three 10 win seasons and seven 9 win seasons. They only had 4 losing seasons in those 17, and 3 of those were 5-7. My point was, they obviously get better players than we do or we'd be winning more games. And they recruit to a 26,000 seat stadium that was built in 1936.

Are you really going to tell me that you wouldn't consider us successful if we were to have ten 9-win seasons in the next 17 years? Its one thing to set lofty goals and aspire for more, but you're pushing fantasyland if those numbers aren't acceptable. And if we were to do that, we'd get better bowls than what Toledo gets.

I'd say that's damned successful, and better than any string of seasons Tulane has put together in any of our lifetimes. I'd be very, very happy if Tulane had 3 ten win seasons and 7 nine win seasons between now and 2034. We'd at least be accepted as competitive, rather than being dismissed as irrelevant.

The stadium is not the issue. It's a symptom, not the disease. It's not going away, and we're not going to expand it any time too soon. Live with it.

Your reading things into it that aren't there. I clearly would be happy w/9 and 10 win seasons on our level. Toledo can do what they do on their level in that facility. It's clearly a lower level. So to say we can do the same w/what is actually a smaller stadium just doesn't ring true. Theirs seats 5k more and has a capacity of over 10,000 more as they have had crowds of 36k just to make the numbers clear. If they were in the AAC and competing for the quality of players AAC teams go after they wouldn't be winning those many games every year b/c their recruiting wouldn't hold up w/that facility.That's the point. For arguments sake say I spotted you Toledo your up to a whopping two.

The stadium is a big issue and is a large part of the problem. It needs to be addressed ASAP.

For the record, Toledo's stadium has a seating capacity of 26,250, and that's pretty comparable to Yulman.

I said in my post it seats 5k more but has a capacity that is 10k more. I also said it's a poor comparison. You can compete in the MAC w/those type of facilities. You won't compete in the AAC w/that.

[RobertM320]

So a three star athlete will look at Toledo's stadium and say its ok, because its the MAC, but the same kid will look at our stadium and say it sucks because we're in the AAC? A kid is a kid, and a 3 star is a three star. My guess is, if you look at past recruiting, Toledo's classes have rated higher than ours, and those ratings don't take into account what conference you're in. It just flat out means their players are better.

[winwave]

We get three stars. Everyone gets some 3 stars. Hell we've had that and 4 stars like Monroe. Where'd that get us? 7-6 and a NOLA Bowl loss. So you're saying Toledo could step right into the AAC and still be winning 9-10 games? Or maybe you are saying the Big Ten is about to scoop them up? BTW, in addition to having a capacity of over 10,000 more they also have an IPF and a football operations building. We need to fix our stadium and get those type of facilities.

[golfnut69]

when the new baseball turf was installed, it should have been on the land located on Jeff Hwy....the largest cost would have been the cost of Utilities... the current stadium could have been unbolted and moved, along with the fake brick !!!...the baseball field could have a football IPF, weight and meeting rooms....I am still a proponent of an inflatable, retractable roof for Yulman, this solves the IPF issue, and noise for the NIMBY's

on a side note, if Tulane is not going to utilize the Jeff Hwy property...SELL IT !!!...land is the one thing NOLA does not have enuff of..maybe a Sands Night Club could be built on the property or a Barkers Dept Store....or a Golf Practice Range

[Aberzombie1892]

We get three stars. Everyone gets some 3 stars. Hell we've had that and 4 stars like Monroe. Where'd that get us? 7-6 and a NOLA Bowl loss. So you're saying Toledo could step right into the AAC and still be winning 9-10 games? Or maybe you are saying the Big Ten is about to scoop them up? BTW, in addition to having a capacity of over 10,000 more they also have an IPF and a football operations building. We need to fix our stadium and get those type of facilities.

The original issue was that programs with similarly sized stadiums as Yulman have pulled in much better recruiting classes than Tulane over the last few years so it seems unlikely that the stadium itself is a major issue in that regard.

As for Toledo, one of the programs that I used as an example of successful G5 programs with similarly sized stadiums, it has had notable success over the last 10 years or so it would probably be just fine in the AAC. It's not like it didn't defeat AAC East champ Temple in 2015.

[winwave]

We get three stars. Everyone gets some 3 stars. Hell we've had that and 4 stars like Monroe. Where'd that get us? 7-6 and a NOLA Bowl loss. So you're saying Toledo could step right into the AAC and still be winning 9-10 games? Or maybe you are saying the Big Ten is about to scoop them up? BTW, in addition to having a capacity of over 10,000 more they also have an IPF and a football operations building. We need to fix our stadium and get those type of facilities.

The original issue was that programs with similarly sized stadiums as Yulman have pulled in much better recruiting classes than Tulane over the last few years so it seems unlikely that the stadium itself is a major issue in that regard.

As for Toledo, one of the programs that I used as an example of successful G5 programs with similarly sized stadiums, it has had notable success over the last 10 years or so it would probably be just fine in the AAC. It's not like it didn't defeat AAC East champ Temple in 2015.

No that wasn't the original issue. Toledo has a stadium that has a capacity that is 10,000 larger. It also has an IPF and football operations building. The issue is can a school w/a 22,660 seat stadium and no IPF or football operations building be successful in the AAC. The stadium is an issue. To ignore it is to be part of the problem.

Toledo has not had notable success. It has won at it's level. It has better facilities than Tulane. It would not win 9-10 games a year in the AAC.

[Aberzombie1892]

We get three stars. Everyone gets some 3 stars. Hell we've had that and 4 stars like Monroe. Where'd that get us? 7-6 and a NOLA Bowl loss. So you're saying Toledo could step right into the AAC and still be winning 9-10 games? Or maybe you are saying the Big Ten is about to scoop them up? BTW, in addition to having a capacity of over 10,000 more they also have an IPF and a football operations building. We need to fix our stadium and get those type of facilities.

The original issue was that programs with similarly sized stadiums as Yulman have pulled in much better recruiting classes than Tulane over the last few years so it seems unlikely that the stadium itself is a major issue in that regard.

As for Toledo, one of the programs that I used as an example of successful G5 programs with similarly sized stadiums, it has had notable success over the last 10 years or so it would probably be just fine in the AAC. It's not like it didn't defeat AAC East champ Temple in 2015.

No that wasn't the original issue. Toledo has a stadium that has a capacity that is 10,000 larger. It also has an IPF and football operations building. The issue is can a school w/a 22,660 seat stadium and no IPF or football operations building be successful in the AAC. The stadium is an issue. To ignore it is to be part of the problem.

Toledo has not had notable success. It has won at it's level. It has better facilities than Tulane. It would not win 9-10 games a year in the AAC.

That was the original issue - that there is a significant amount of evidence that G5 programs with stadiums that are similar in size to Yulman can bring in good classes by G5 standards, so it seems unlikely that the stadium is what is preventing Tulane from signing better recruits.

As for Toledo's stadium, the argument that Toledo's stadium is in a different class than Yulman because it has ~6,000 more capacity (~36,000 vs. Yulman's ~30,000) doesn't make sense if for no other reason than a 6,000 capacity difference between is negligible.

As for Toledo's hypothetical AAC performance, none of the members of the AAC that have been members of the AAC for more than 2 seasons (i.e. not Navy) have consistently won 9+ games every year, so it's unclear how 9+ games would make sense as being the benchmark for Toledo.

[winwave]

We get three stars. Everyone gets some 3 stars. Hell we've had that and 4 stars like Monroe. Where'd that get us? 7-6 and a NOLA Bowl loss. So you're saying Toledo could step right into the AAC and still be winning 9-10 games? Or maybe you are saying the Big Ten is about to scoop them up? BTW, in addition to having a capacity of over 10,000 more they also have an IPF and a football operations building. We need to fix our stadium and get those type of facilities.

The original issue was that programs with similarly sized stadiums as Yulman have pulled in much better recruiting classes than Tulane over the last few years so it seems unlikely that the stadium itself is a major issue in that regard.

As for Toledo, one of the programs that I used as an example of successful G5 programs with similarly sized stadiums, it has had notable success over the last 10 years or so it would probably be just fine in the AAC. It's not like it didn't defeat AAC East champ Temple in 2015.

No that wasn't the original issue. Toledo has a stadium that has a capacity that is 10,000 larger. It also has an IPF and football operations building. The issue is can a school w/a 22,660 seat stadium and no IPF or football operations building be successful in the AAC. The stadium is an issue. To ignore it is to be part of the problem.

Toledo has not had notable success. It has won at it's level. It has better facilities than Tulane. It would not win 9-10 games a year in the AAC.

That was the original issue - that there is a significant amount of evidence that G5 programs with stadiums that are similar in size to Yulman can bring in good classes by G5 standards, so it seems unlikely that the stadium is what is preventing Tulane from signing better recruits.

As for Toledo's stadium, the argument that Toledo's stadium is in a different class than Yulman because it has ~6,000 more capacity (~36,000 vs. Yulman's ~30,000) doesn't make sense if for no other reason than a 6,000 capacity difference between is negligible.

As for Toledo's hypothetical AAC performance, none of the members of the AAC that have been members of the AAC for more than 2 seasons (i.e. not Navy) have consistently won 9+ games every year, so it's unclear how 9+ games would make sense as being the benchmark for Toledo.

LOL. There was not significant evidence. You named 4 schools. They have bigger stadiums and other necessary facilities. The actual capacity of Yulman is 24,000. Toledo has a capacity of 36k. Nine was used b/c people were trying to say that what they have been doing would slide right over to the AAC.

You constantly post how bad our recruiting is . I've simply pointed out that our lack of facilities is an issue. Those stats you constantly post showing us at the bottom of the rankings supports that.

[RobertM320]

I NEVER said that their 9 would slide right over to the AAC. Maybe you need to flip the question. Would the Tulane teams of the past 7 years have had all those 9 and 10 seasons if they were in the MAC? I'd be willing to bet NO in a heartbeat. Which implies that Toledo has better talent than we do. So if they can recruit better talent than us to a similar sized stadium, then its not the small stadium that's hurting us. Now, if you want to bring up other facilities, than just say its the lack of other facilities that is hurting us. But don't put it on the stadium.

NOTE: Lack of facilities and size of Yulman are two different issues. Keep that in mind.

[winwave]

What I have said in all the various threads on this is that we had poor facilities and then we added a tiny stadium on top of them thus cementing in people's minds that we aren't serious.

As for Toledo their stadium holds over 10,000 more. Citing them is like when people bring up Forte when people say we can't succeed with two stars.

[Aberzombie1892]

We get three stars. Everyone gets some 3 stars. Hell we've had that and 4 stars like Monroe. Where'd that get us? 7-6 and a NOLA Bowl loss. So you're saying Toledo could step right into the AAC and still be winning 9-10 games? Or maybe you are saying the Big Ten is about to scoop them up? BTW, in addition to having a capacity of over 10,000 more they also have an IPF and a football operations building. We need to fix our stadium and get those type of facilities.

The original issue was that programs with similarly sized stadiums as Yulman have pulled in much better recruiting classes than Tulane over the last few years so it seems unlikely that the stadium itself is a major issue in that regard.

As for Toledo, one of the programs that I used as an example of successful G5 programs with similarly sized stadiums, it has had notable success over the last 10 years or so it would probably be just fine in the AAC. It's not like it didn't defeat AAC East champ Temple in 2015.

No that wasn't the original issue. Toledo has a stadium that has a capacity that is 10,000 larger. It also has an IPF and football operations building. The issue is can a school w/a 22,660 seat stadium and no IPF or football operations building be successful in the AAC. The stadium is an issue. To ignore it is to be part of the problem.

Toledo has not had notable success. It has won at it's level. It has better facilities than Tulane. It would not win 9-10 games a year in the AAC.

That was the original issue - that there is a significant amount of evidence that G5 programs with stadiums that are similar in size to Yulman can bring in good classes by G5 standards, so it seems unlikely that the stadium is what is preventing Tulane from signing better recruits.

As for Toledo's stadium, the argument that Toledo's stadium is in a different class than Yulman because it has ~6,000 more capacity (~36,000 vs. Yulman's ~30,000) doesn't make sense if for no other reason than a 6,000 capacity difference between is negligible.

As for Toledo's hypothetical AAC performance, none of the members of the AAC that have been members of the AAC for more than 2 seasons (i.e. not Navy) have consistently won 9+ games every year, so it's unclear how 9+ games would make sense as being the benchmark for Toledo.

LOL. There was not significant evidence. You named 4 schools. They have bigger stadiums and other necessary facilities. The actual capacity of Yulman is 24,000. Toledo has a capacity of 36k. Nine was used b/c people were trying to say that what they have been doing would slide right over to the AAC.

You constantly post how bad our recruiting is . I've simply pointed out that our lack of facilities is an issue. Those stats you constantly post showing us at the bottom of the rankings supports that.

As for Yulman, could you provide a source that supports the assertion that Yulman has less than 30k capacity? No source that I've seen claims that Yulman's capacity is less than 30k.

As for naming other programs that have similarly sized stadiums that have had success, you are aware that there aren't that many FBS programs that have similarly sized stadiums that have been at the FBS level for longer than a few years, right? Given that that is the case - which it is - the programs that I listed are more than sufficient (although there are others) to support my point and there hasn't been any evidence in this thread that would support otherwise.

Toledo's performance over the last decade or so would more than support an assertion that they would be fine in the AAC.

[winwave]

It seats 22,660. Each deck holds 200 so that's 23k. The place is built tight so maybe you could squeeze in another 1,000 in the student section.

Once again you offer hyperbole to try and support your weak assertion.

You want to go on how great the AAC is and how superior it is to other conferences and then want to say a MAC teams record would translate to the AAC.

[ajcalhoun]

It seats 22,660. Each deck holds 200 so that's 23k. The place is built tight so maybe you could squeeze in another 1,000 in the student section.

Everyone on this forum knows that. No one else GAF. The media has gone along with the 30,000 figure and it isn't important enough for them to question it.

I followed the UT and OU boards when the Big XII was considering expansion and the narrative was that Tulane had a brand-new 30,000 seat stadium and nobody questioned it.

The 30,000 figure has been sold lock, stock, and barrel.

Keep fighting it if you like, but your fight doesn't help Tulane one bit. If being right is more important to you than what is good for the University than keep on beating that dead horse.

You're like a kid whose Dad is trying sell a car saying "You can hardly tell that it's been wrecked!"

Sometimes it's better to just STFU.