Ed Daniels

The main discussion board for everything Tulane athletics related.
User avatar
Bigschtick
Swell
Posts: 2348
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:57 am
Location: Tucson, Az.
Status: Offline

Thu Oct 20, 2011 9:56 pm

We are not going to improve anything until first Dickson is forced out then Cowen. Two fools doing their best to destroy Tulane in athletics and academics. It can be done. We succeeded in pushing Toledo out. It would never have happened without the pressure from us "naysayers, toxic fans
" etc.


Speak softly but carry a bigschtick!
sader24
Tsunami
Posts: 5498
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:35 pm
Status: Offline

Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:54 am

It would've never happened without this website.
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 18082
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:24 pm

Ed was on WIST today with Eric Asher. He reported that he spoke to one of the potential coaching candidates after he interviewed and he was told in no way will Tulane ever compromise it's academic image when it comes to athletics. Ed didn't know what that meant but he said it sounds about like business as usual for Tulane. He also mentioned that Tulane is flying out commercial to Hawaii instead of chartering their own plane. The team will fly out in two separate airplanes. I guess that must be a big money saver :lol: . He said could you ever even imagine LSU doing that.
Last edited by tpstulane on Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
User avatar
OUG
Riptide
Posts: 2673
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:59 am
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:46 pm

tpstulane wrote:Ed was on WIST today with Eric Asher. He reported that he spoke to one of the potential coaching candidates after he interviewed and he was told in no way will Tulane ever compromise it's academic image when it comes to athletics. Ed didn't know what that meant but he said it sounds about like business as usual for Tulane. He also mentioned that Tulane is flying out commercial to Hawaii instead of chartering their own plane. The team will fly out in two separate airplanes. I guess that must be a big money saver :lol: . He said could you ever even image LSU doing that.
To Hawaii! It probably actually is a significant money saver. And we're not LSU, we don't rake in $3million in gate and concessions each homegame, and have a $30 million dollar conference payout annually. So that's a silly comparison. Hawaii is probably subsidizing or compensating our travel, in fact.

Further, the academics-athletics dichotomy is a hobby horse for Ed. He writes every article from that perspective. I mean every article. This is his gestalt. Its the lens through which he sees everything at Tulane. That's a bias that he brings to every conversation about Tulane, and why its led him to excuse horrible coaching performances consistantly.

My guess is that any conversation he had with a potential coaching candidate (and let's face it, you just know it was Curtis Johnson) went along the following lines:

Ed: Has Tulane expressed to you that they are willing to do whatever it takes to compete, including sacrificing its academic stances?
Curtis: I didn't ask whether they would cut corners on academics, Ed. But Tulane is proud of its academic tradition and that is their primary mission. I don't think they're going to cut corners just to win football games.
Ed: Gotcha.

Then Ed writes that up as: Coaching candidate says that Tulane will never compromise academic image, therefore we get the same ol' same ol'.

The reason I point this out is that unless you get really specific about the actual academic policies in question, you can have the same conversation with two entirely different perceptions about it. Ed has never specified what exactly our higher standards are, because he doesn't know. He suspects that we have them, but if he knew how many "exceptions" we were allowed to give vs. how many we sought, he would report on that. Frankly, nobody knows. But its a nice narrative for him, its a good hook. So when some coach or athletic director or official gives some boilerplate statement about how "At Tulane, academics are very important to us and we don't believe you have to compromise to be successful." He takes that and runs with it based on his assumptions. At most schools, boilerplate statements like that are made all the time and are not interpreted that way by the local press.

I just don't like Daniels. He's a one trick pony when it comes to Tulane. He's completely lazy, and has an agenda: seeing his assumptions proven right. Because nobody knows the specifics of our "academic standards" and likely never will, he can use it as a hook forever and nobody will question it.

Tommy Bowden went undefeated with allegedly harsher academic policies than we have now. This is a ludicrous narrative promoted by hack reporters and terrible coaches who aren't interested in accountability or excellence. If I'm wrong, then do some investigative reporting and show me the damn numbers.
Jaxwave
Surge
Posts: 928
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 8:14 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:58 pm

This doesn'tbother even skeptical me. No university even LSU and Penn State can take no other position than "We won't compromise on our academic standards." Although it is a lot easier to not compromise their lower standards.
superwavefan
High Tide
Posts: 340
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:23 am
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 5:03 pm

Eric Asher said on his show a few weeks ago after Toledo was let go that he doesn't bother to do any investigating about Tulane on his own, he relies solely on Ed Daniels to feed him his info. I almost had to pull over my car.

I knew Eric Asher was a complete mo-mo, and this really just cemented that for me.

From now on Scott Kushner is the only reporter allowed to cover the Tulane Greenwave. Period. and, sadly, the Baton Rouge Advocate, since they are THE ONLY Louisiana paper that I've read in the past 4 years that prints decent stories about Tulane. If they print something: it is factually correct and free of snark.
Fred Dowler
Riptide
Posts: 4716
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:33 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:25 pm

Of course there are two sides to this.

It seems that a whole lot of folks want desperately to convince themselves that it doesn't matter if Tulane does not a Phys. Ed. or some such academic major program where the athletes can comfortably matriculate and that it doesn't matter if Tulane only has a limited number of "special admission" slots for athletes and that Ed Daniels is wrong.

That's what the people who operate that other forum always insist.

Also, it seems like that there's a widespread belief that all that needs to be done is to hire Rich Rodriguez and, presto, the kind of difficulties that the Tulane program makes for itself that Ed Daniels will magically be overcome.

I don't buy that at all.

As long as Tulane insists on going its own way on this, on placing its desire to maintain the academics-first policy and mindset, to place having a super squeaky-clean program above winning, the commitment to winning consistently has to considered as limited. Ed Daniels is therefore completely on the mark in his perception and the The Tulane Model lives.

Of course, Tulane does not discuss its academics policies as relates to athletes.

But, are Tulane's policies remotely close to Houston's or Southern Miss's?

Of course not, and as long as there is a difference the Tulane program will still be at a disadvantage.

The disadvantage is because building the depth and breadth of talent on the roster that you need to have in order to win consistently and be able to go toe to toe consistently against solid opposition -- let's be honest and admit that 1998 was a once-in-a-blue moon creampuff-laden schedule and also that there was a tremendous amount of luck in the absence of season-ender injuries to key personnel -- is that much more difficult to do.

Good coaches still have to have the talent and depth to work with.

Look, if Rodriguez felt like he just had to get away from West Virginia, his own home state, because he felt like he just couldn't trust his superiors, how on earth is he not going to be wondering with the Tulane leadership and especially after being passed over whether he can trust them and whether they have really and truly made some kind of 180-degree change as far as the commitment to winning.

You bet he's still looking around and trying to see what other opportunities open up.

You can also bet that there's no strong money-driven desire to get back into the routine. It's more about being back in the limelight and certainly making another push to see if he can be somewhere and with a program contending for national honors and of course where he wants the most to be is where the commitment to winning is the strongest.

People are making a big deal out of what Tulane is supposed to be offering in salary to a head football coach but while that may well be a major story it's only a part of the whole story with the academics issues being at least as important.

"We don't want to cut corners in order to win" actually means "we like winning but it's not as important as other things."

Ed Daniels has been calling out the Tulane administration and their apologists for years on this and they can't stand him -- precisely because he's been totally correct in that Tulane's commitment to win has been a very limited one -- and because willing to "tell the truth about the emperor's clothes" instead of just kising up -- and I'd hope that if Tulane this time is yet again a whole lot more about talk than about substance as far as really changing that he would keep on calling it just like he sees it.
Tulane sports: small football stadium, very small basketball arena, w̶i̶n̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶g̶r̶a̶m̶s̶, h̶o̶n̶e̶s̶t̶y̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶o̶u̶n̶t̶a̶b̶i̶l̶i̶t̶y̶ , but, hey, now there's tailgating.
DrBox
Riptide
Posts: 3120
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:40 pm

Fred Dowler wrote:Of course there are two sides to this.

It seems that a whole lot of folks want desperately to convince themselves that it doesn't matter if Tulane does not a Phys. Ed. or some such academic major program where the athletes can comfortably matriculate and that it doesn't matter if Tulane only has a limited number of "special admission" slots for athletes and that Ed Daniels is wrong.
No. We just disagree that the lack of a Phys Ed Major means that we have no hope and there is no commitment.
User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1254
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:46 pm

I agree with you, Fred.

The Bowden success was also a function of a offensive mind in RR who revolutionized college football. Nobody had seen his offense and nobody knew how to prepare for it.

When the rest of the conference caught up with it, which they have now done, we would no longer be able to rely on innovative scheme but would be back to athletes and depth, both a function of recruiting. We will always be at a disadvantage there as long at the model is in place.

CUSA is now a spread conference and has been for some time. You're not going to catch defenses off guard anymore. One way or the other we have to be able to get athletes in here and keep them eligible. If the impediments to that are not removed or at least mitigated, we're spinning our wheels. And that doesn't mean "sacrificing academic integrity."

I'm not yet convinced that Tulane won't allow a coach to win even though that's pretty much been their track record, particularly under the present regime. I probably should know better but I'll wait to see what happens.
cajunwave
Ripple
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:47 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 7:37 pm

If the Tulane Model is not scraped it will not matter who the coach is. It has been the only consistent thing at Tulane for the last 61 years, that and losing. It has produced 13 winning seasons and 48 losing seasons since it was established in 1950. What more proof does someone need to see that this policy is a dismal failure. We don't have to cheat, just play by the same rules every body else plays by. If either RR or ML comes then i would think the Tulane Model is over, because i don't think either would come here otherwise. If Tulane does not change then Tulane football is dead.


Cajunwave
sader24
Tsunami
Posts: 5498
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:35 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:33 pm

I watched Ed interview Lionel Washington 2 sections from where I sit for the whole 1st half of the Tulane-Houston game last Thursday. Say what you want about Daniels, but a) He does research when it comes to Tulane b) he legitimately wants to see Tulane do well c) He's by far the most Pro-Tulane media guy out there right now that works for a major station.
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6756
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:43 pm

sader24 wrote:I watched Ed interview Lionel Washington 2 sections from where I sit for the whole 1st half of the Tulane-Houston game last Thursday. Say what you want about Daniels, but a) He does research when it comes to Tulane b) he legitimately wants to see Tulane do well c) He's by far the most Pro-Tulane media guy out there right now that works for a major station.
Which tells you two things:

1) How far our program has fallen, and

2) How pathetic our local sports media is.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6756
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:57 pm

Everyone talks about athlete-friendly majors, but what does that really mean?

If you're talking about things that athletes might be more attracted to majoring in, like sports management, sports broadcasting and media, etc, then that's fine. And putting a system in place that helps them actually graduate makes sense as well. But if, by "athlete-friendly" you mean easier, such as a P.E. major, then that's just double-speak for reducing academic standards, isn't it? I mean, we need to have some standards, don't we? Isn't that what differentiates us from LSU and the like?

Let me ask you this: how many of you have heard the radio commercial for Elevation Shoring that's done by a former LSU football and baseball player? You almost can't understand what he's saying. At least when guys like Matt Forte and Mewelde Moore get interviewed, you know they're not just "dumb jocks".

Are real football talent and academic intelligence as mutually exclusive as people seem to want to make them out to be? Of course not. We just need to make ourselves attractive to the same talented athletes that are currently choosing Stanford, USC, TCU, etc. And I'm sure they're not getting these players over us just because they offer a P.E. degree.

As long as they meet NCAA standards to get in school, and we have majors that are appealing (not just easy), it's the University's JOB to give them the tools necessary to succeed. Isn't that supposed to be what makes a Tulane degree so valuable?

Just my two cents.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
posse
Low Tide
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 10:59 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:14 pm

Whats so dishonorable about Tulane graduating future High School and/or College coaches? Your kind of holy than thou sentiment has prevented us from being competitive. PE major is just fine as long as the athlete is admitted and maintains the NCAA standards.......PE Major and the NCAA standard is not cheating, and as long as we are not cheating than PE major should be acceptable to all Tulane fans.
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6756
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:28 pm

posse wrote:Whats so dishonorable about Tulane graduating future High School and/or College coaches? Your kind of holy than thou sentiment has prevented us from being competitive. PE major is just fine as long as the athlete is admitted and maintains the NCAA standards.......PE Major and the NCAA standard is not cheating, and as long as we are not cheating than PE major should be acceptable to all Tulane fans.
I don't have a problem with graduating future coaches, if we in fact, actually teach them something they can use in that career field. I never said is was dishonorable, I never said it was cheating. But I would be curious to know, of all the really successful coaches, at any level, how many will tell you they became successful at their trade because of their P.E. degree?

Are we really in a situation where there's not enough good football players in this country that are capable of earning a degree in something other than P.E.? Is it really the lack of a P.E. degree that's keeping us from being successful? What you're basically saying is, there's a bunch of kids out there that want to be coaches after they get their shot (or don't) at the pros, and they're choosing not to come to Tulane because we don't offer a P.E. degree. Do you really believe that?
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
galvezwave
Surge
Posts: 728
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:37 pm

Tulane was a top 30 university while hot rod was there majoring in p.e. just saying. I believe this is a case where you could have your cake and eat it too. I know rods an extreme example, but he definitely didn't affect the schools rep as a top 30 during his tenure.
wavedat
Swell
Posts: 2156
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2011 9:29 am
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:58 pm

RobertM320 wrote:Everyone talks about athlete-friendly majors, but what does that really mean?

If you're talking about things that athletes might be more attracted to majoring in, like sports management, sports broadcasting and media, etc, then that's fine. And putting a system in place that helps them actually graduate makes sense as well. But if, by "athlete-friendly" you mean easier, such as a P.E. major, then that's just double-speak for reducing academic standards, isn't it? I mean, we need to have some standards, don't we? Isn't that what differentiates us from LSU and the like?

Let me ask you this: how many of you have heard the radio commercial for Elevation Shoring that's done by a former LSU football and baseball player? You almost can't understand what he's saying. At least when guys like Matt Forte and Mewelde Moore get interviewed, you know they're not just "dumb jocks".

Are real football talent and academic intelligence as mutually exclusive as people seem to want to make them out to be? Of course not. We just need to make ourselves attractive to the same talented athletes that are currently choosing Stanford, USC, TCU, etc. And I'm sure they're not getting these players over us just because they offer a P.E. degree.

As long as they meet NCAA standards to get in school, and we have majors that are appealing (not just easy), it's the University's JOB to give them the tools necessary to succeed. Isn't that supposed to be what makes a Tulane degree so valuable?

Just my two cents.
This post is a classic example of why Tulane will never be a winner. Get over yourself. The schools always been overrated academically and the latest rankings are starting to reflect that. Tulane loves to lose at athletics so it can say that's proof thatt hey are good academically. SICKENING. Btw, did you watch the interview Tammy did w/ Xavier Rush a few weeks ago. Couldn't understand him.
Tulane didn't have a stadium issue it had a program and facilities issues. To the new President- we want a new AD , a football facility and an IPF. We want top 25 programs in football and basketball the only two sports that count.
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6756
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:08 pm

wavedat wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:Everyone talks about athlete-friendly majors, but what does that really mean?

If you're talking about things that athletes might be more attracted to majoring in, like sports management, sports broadcasting and media, etc, then that's fine. And putting a system in place that helps them actually graduate makes sense as well. But if, by "athlete-friendly" you mean easier, such as a P.E. major, then that's just double-speak for reducing academic standards, isn't it? I mean, we need to have some standards, don't we? Isn't that what differentiates us from LSU and the like?

Let me ask you this: how many of you have heard the radio commercial for Elevation Shoring that's done by a former LSU football and baseball player? You almost can't understand what he's saying. At least when guys like Matt Forte and Mewelde Moore get interviewed, you know they're not just "dumb jocks".

Are real football talent and academic intelligence as mutually exclusive as people seem to want to make them out to be? Of course not. We just need to make ourselves attractive to the same talented athletes that are currently choosing Stanford, USC, TCU, etc. And I'm sure they're not getting these players over us just because they offer a P.E. degree.

As long as they meet NCAA standards to get in school, and we have majors that are appealing (not just easy), it's the University's JOB to give them the tools necessary to succeed. Isn't that supposed to be what makes a Tulane degree so valuable?

Just my two cents.
This post is a classic example of why Tulane will never be a winner. Get over yourself. The schools always been overrated academically and the latest rankings are starting to reflect that. Tulane loves to lose at athletics so it can say that's proof thatt hey are good academically. SICKENING. Btw, did you watch the interview Tammy did w/ Xavier Rush a few weeks ago. Couldn't understand him.

I never said the school wasn't overrated. Especially for what they charge. And my point was that there's no reason you can't have BOTH. Losing in athletics is not proof that you're good academically. Its just proof that you suck athletically. So what you're saying is, we have to accept mediocrity in academics in order to be good in athletics? I'm sure most of the kids at Jesuit or Newman would take exception to that. And, if that really were the case, the Louisiana Class 5A state football champion would be an inner city New Orleans public school every year.

Remember, we can only sign at most 25 players in a given year. Can we not find 25 talented AND intelligent players to sign? I feel like Lot talking to God before He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah: "If you can find ten decent men, I will spare the city". He couldn't. I guess we can't either.

This post is a classic example of why Tulane will never be a winner.
Why, because I think we can do it without a P.E. major? So then, back to my ORIGINAL point, why doesn't everyone stop with the politically correct B.S. and just say, "we need a P.E. major in order to keep good football players in school"? Stop trying to sugar-coat it by saying we need "athlete-friendly majors". THAT was my point all along.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
sader24
Tsunami
Posts: 5498
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:35 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:22 pm

I think Tulane's biggest issue is that at this point it has no identity. If you asked people what their opinion of Tulane is most would say that its a place where people from around the country (especially the Northeast) can come to party in New Orleans for a few years and still say they went to a pretty good school and leave with a respectable degree. It's not an elite Academic Institution at this point and most of the people who graduate from here dont seem to really leave here with any sort of pride in the school or any real connection. The alumni seem disjointed and disorganzied, I think athletics more than anything is something that really brings together students while they are at a particular University and gives them a feeling of pride and connection to the place. There hasnt been any of that here in over a decade. A good football program would create that with the students/alumni an the City of New Orleans all in one fell swoop. I dont think the administration has ever gotten that and ever understood what a good athletic department truly brings to a University.
Fred Dowler
Riptide
Posts: 4716
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:33 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:29 pm

The whole point is that if you were around during the 1970's and 80's when the last time it was that Tulane football came close to establishing consistency, yes, Tulane really was different at that time in regards to how it handled athletes and academics.

There was a Phys. Ed. major and there was none of this special admissions slots business and athletes were definitely directed into the academic "home base" where they were supposed to be.

All of that's gone now. The "reform" came about directly because of the scandals circa 1985-86 when all of a sudden Tulane found religion and then since then the record on the field speaks for itself.

Now you may well get to have a winning year every now and then with the current approach.

But you're just as likely to have severe up's and down's and especially if a couple of injuries wipe out a unit when you have no depth because recruiting is hamstrung.

You have got to be able to have the depth and breadth of talent on the roster so that you can be consistent on the field.

No matter how salary is offered it's still very unlikely that a solid, ambitious coach is going to be willing to sit still for business-as-usual that keeps them from really being able to build the program.

Or maybe somehow things will work out well enough for a single okay season and then Coach X will jet out right away, in spite of whatever adoration develops, to another program (and please don't pretend that such a scenario is still okay. It's still a slap in Tulane's face and if you really want Tulane to going places in football then that kind of scenario is not acceptable and the goal has to be to get a successful coaching regime to stick through at least 3-4 winning seasons).

And it's absolutely correct that in 1997 what Tulane was doing on offense was completely new and different and caught everyone by surprise which would not be the case this time around and maybe even a little of that kind of phenomenon was starting to catch up to Rich Rodriguez at Michigan.

His whole history BTW, just like Bowden's (and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, does it?) is that he's very exacting, he makes demands and he expects those to be met and he stands firm.

I would even go far as to say that Rodriguez, if he doesn't feel completely comfortable with the situation, may well say that he just doesn't feel like returning to coaching at this time and is still looking, like Bill Cowher supposedly, for the time and place that's just right for him to make his return.

So maybe Tulane is hemming and hawing about making the changes that he would demand, he's not that comfortable, he's reluctant to commit to Tulane and looking around to see what other options that he has.

So how does what Ed Daniels says not at least begin to make some sense?
Tulane sports: small football stadium, very small basketball arena, w̶i̶n̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶g̶r̶a̶m̶s̶, h̶o̶n̶e̶s̶t̶y̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶o̶u̶n̶t̶a̶b̶i̶l̶i̶t̶y̶ , but, hey, now there's tailgating.
wavedat
Swell
Posts: 2156
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2011 9:29 am
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 11:05 pm

Never said you have to accept mediocrity in academics to have success in athletics. Actually that's what you are saying. No one is candy coating it . We have been saying there needs to be a P.E. major. What's wrong w/ producing coaches who can help guide the young boys and men in this community who have never had a father figure. Tulane loves to brag about it's graduation rate but what's to brag about when you have raised standards. Bring in athletes at the NCAA standards and then maintain those graduation rates and you have something to really brag about.
Tulane didn't have a stadium issue it had a program and facilities issues. To the new President- we want a new AD , a football facility and an IPF. We want top 25 programs in football and basketball the only two sports that count.
User avatar
OUG
Riptide
Posts: 2673
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:59 am
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 11:27 pm

Guys, we got blown out by Army and Duke. Our only FBS win is against UAB. Who we destroyed.

Academics aren't the issue.
User avatar
OUG
Riptide
Posts: 2673
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:59 am
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 11:35 pm

sader24 wrote:I think Tulane's biggest issue is that at this point it has no identity. If you asked people what their opinion of Tulane is most would say that its a place where people from around the country (especially the Northeast) can come to party in New Orleans for a few years and still say they went to a pretty good school and leave with a respectable degree. It's not an elite Academic Institution at this point and most of the people who graduate from here dont seem to really leave here with any sort of pride in the school or any real connection. The alumni seem disjointed and disorganzied, I think athletics more than anything is something that really brings together students while they are at a particular University and gives them a feeling of pride and connection to the place. There hasnt been any of that here in over a decade. A good football program would create that with the students/alumni an the City of New Orleans all in one fell swoop. I dont think the administration has ever gotten that and ever understood what a good athletic department truly brings to a University.
Athletics is one way to do that. Ironically, the other way is to brand ourselves as a school focused on public/community service as a learning opportunity, which Cowen is trying to do. They aren't mutually exclusive either. Tulane students for so long have been focused on themselves too much... Too apathetic to be part of something larger. These are the types of personalities that will support Tulane athletics if we give them something worth supporting. Notre Dame students bleed blue and gold because to them, Notre Dame means being a part of something different and special, not just because of football. That is an identity worth promoting and pursuing.
User avatar
wave to em
Surge
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 2:14 pm
Status: Offline

Thu Nov 17, 2011 11:42 pm

OUG wrote:Guys, we got blown out by Army and Duke. Our only FBS win is against UAB. Who we destroyed.

Academics aren't the issue.
Your forgetting Tulsa, utep, Houston, smu, and ecu
CuJo.
#SickEmWave
sader24
Tsunami
Posts: 5498
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:35 pm
Status: Offline

Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:09 am

99% of New Orleanians haven't heard anything about nor have had any experience with Scott Cowen's community service. If Tulane is 6-0 ranked #25 in the Country with a bunch of New Orleans/Louisiana kids, everyone around here is going to know about it. Like it or not, this is a city and an area of the country that revolves around football. Cowen's plan could be a good idea for all I know and 10-15 yrs from now it may have become a very positive force in the new Orleans community. However, 10-15 yrs from now even if its a success most people in this area wont know about it and have very little idea what it is. People still remember Tulane going 12-0 in 98, people still remember Shaun King. What the University has failed to understand for a long time is that a successful athletics program gives you a platform and an oppurtunity to really highlight just what the University brings to this city. In a Utopian world everyone would be very interested in Tulane required Community Service, this aint that world. Having a successful athletics program can bring notoriety and public goodwill far quicker and a far greater level than anything else can down here. Do you realize how many well educated people who reside in New Orleans and the Metro Area have absolutely no idea that Tulane is the largest private employer in the city? Do you realize how many successful people in this city have absolutely zero idea how important Tulane is to the local economy? Having a successful athletic department gets you marketing, media exposure, and attention that you can use to highlight the great things the University does for this area. When a University puts such an inferior product out there and runs its athletic dept in such a shoddy manner it sheds a very poor light on the University as a whole. I mean people on here have joked that we supposedly have a great business school yet our Athletic Dept is terrible at business. It just looks bad to be that inept at the most public thing the University does, which is Athletics.
Post Reply