What happens if the Big 12 takes two AAC members?

Discuss anything else athletic or non-athletic related that doesn't belong on the main Tulane athletics forum.
DfromCT
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13222
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
CN Hide & Seek Team wrote:Tulane was in talks with the Big XII for membership in 2011 along with UL, TCU, WVU, and Cincy. UL TCU and WVU got the invites, but UL went to the ACC instead. BigXII chose this list after a study by a sports marketing consulting firm. This information was disclosed to a room full of TAF members by the athletics department during the unveiling of the plans for Yulman. I know several of the men who were in the room. Since then Tulane and Cincy have made major stadium upgrades. i dont see that as a coincidence.
This is the kind of BS that keeps Tulane down in the dumps.

Why is this information being kept a secret? If there is a goal of obtaining membership in the Big 12, what is the big picture or plan and how does Yulman fit into that? I'm quite certain that if you told Tulane alumni "donate to Yulman because as soon as we pay that off we'll take the next steps towards a P5 because that's the program we want" that the Yulman challenge would have been successful.

There is also a very key but perhaps subtle difference between what you are saying and perhaps reality. You say that Tulane "made major stadium upgrades". It is true that Tulane spent a sum of money on a facility, but whether or not it was an upgrade (in terms of impact on the program) is highly questionable and remains to be seen. And whether that same sum of money could have been more effectively spent towards the upgrades that would make a P5 a reality is also highly questionable.

So we aren't disclosing our fundraising and/or athletics strategy because we don't have the b@lls or political will to hold off a handful of bored housewife NIMBYs? What kind of childish BS is this?

Again, this is the problem. We're expected to trust the judgment of a few fools who refuse to discuss their thinking or strategy or be held accountable for anything. This whole "Trust us. We talked about it with a select few people and we've got it covered" has been disastrous for the past 15 years, athletics and beyond and isn't the way successful or responsible people operate.

I know you and the people you know who were "in the room" have your hearts in the right place but WAKE THE F*CK UP AND STOP BEING PART OF THE PROBLEM. Enough talk. The Playbook was 5 years ago. It's well past time for results.

JJ, this is one of your posts that I can agree with. The shroud of secrecy is nothing positive. The "Tulane Model" doesn't work, and winning, more than anything else, is what would make us attractive to a P5. And I'm not talking about one good or even great season, but a series of successful seasons. That would build a fan base, force Yulman expansion, and make us WAY more attractive than we've been since 1998.

The problem is that SC/RD and now Fitts has chosen to stick to the Tulane model. I don't think we stand a chance, as we're maybe 5 years from having a complete separation of the "Haves" vs. the "Have Nots." We're on the outside looking in, with at least half a dozen, if not more, Universities ahead of us in the rush to get in to the preferred category. I don't believe for one second that there's ever been the institutional commitment needed to get where we all want to go.

The Playbook has produced NOTHING.


" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
CN Hide & Seek Team wrote:Tulane was in talks with the Big XII for membership in 2011 along with UL, TCU, WVU, and Cincy. UL TCU and WVU got the invites, but UL went to the ACC instead. BigXII chose this list after a study by a sports marketing consulting firm. This information was disclosed to a room full of TAF members by the athletics department during the unveiling of the plans for Yulman. I know several of the men who were in the room. Since then Tulane and Cincy have made major stadium upgrades. i dont see that as a coincidence.
This is the kind of BS that keeps Tulane down in the dumps.

Why is this information being kept a secret? If there is a goal of obtaining membership in the Big 12, what is the big picture or plan and how does Yulman fit into that? I'm quite certain that if you told Tulane alumni "donate to Yulman because as soon as we pay that off we'll take the next steps towards a P5 because that's the program we want" that the Yulman challenge would have been successful.

There is also a very key but perhaps subtle difference between what you are saying and perhaps reality. You say that Tulane "made major stadium upgrades". It is true that Tulane spent a sum of money on a facility, but whether or not it was an upgrade (in terms of impact on the program) is highly questionable and remains to be seen. And whether that same sum of money could have been more effectively spent towards the upgrades that would make a P5 a reality is also highly questionable.

So we aren't disclosing our fundraising and/or athletics strategy because we don't have the b@lls or political will to hold off a handful of bored housewife NIMBYs? What kind of childish BS is this?

Again, this is the problem. We're expected to trust the judgment of a few fools who refuse to discuss their thinking or strategy or be held accountable for anything. This whole "Trust us. We talked about it with a select few people and we've got it covered" has been disastrous for the past 15 years, athletics and beyond and isn't the way successful or responsible people operate.

I know you and the people you know who were "in the room" have your hearts in the right place but WAKE THE F*CK UP AND STOP BEING PART OF THE PROBLEM. Enough talk. The Playbook was 5 years ago. It's well past time for results.

JJ, this is one of your posts that I can agree with. The shroud of secrecy is nothing positive. The "Tulane Model" doesn't work, and winning, more than anything else, is what would make us attractive to a P5. And I'm not talking about one good or even great season, but a series of successful seasons. That would build a fan base, force Yulman expansion, and make us WAY more attractive than we've been since 1998.

The problem is that SC/RD and now Fitts has chosen to stick to the Tulane model. I don't think we stand a chance, as we're maybe 5 years from having a complete separation of the "Haves" vs. the "Have Nots." We're on the outside looking in, with at least half a dozen, if not more, Universities ahead of us in the rush to get in to the preferred category. I don't believe for one second that there's ever been the institutional commitment needed to get where we all want to go.

The Playbook has produced NOTHING.
Just this one post? This is a different flavor of the same post I write every day. ;)

It's the lack of transparency that is both appalling and counterproductive. Then you have this group of people who believe they are "insiders" who seem to drink massive quantities of spiked kool aid who provide just enough cover. These are the people who have the audience with Cowen/Dickson but enable them to continue with their BS instead of holding them accountable.

What's worse, if it IS TRUE that the Big 12 is/was interested and Tulane relied on the unchecked and unvetted strategy of Cowen/Dickson to bypass the coaches wishes for IPF/locker room and build a too small stadium which eventually keeps us out of the P5 rather than getting us in.....would that be legally actionable?

There are two possible scenarios. 1) Cowen/Dickson lie to the insiders in an attempt to go ahead and implement the "Tulane Model", which is ethically reprehensible at best and legally questionable. Or 2) there is/was interest in a P5 membership, which would probably be worth $1B to the university, and Cowen/Dickson thought that a 22K football stadium/3.6K basketball arena was the best strategy to achieve that and thus their incompetence has eliminated that $1B opportunity.

Whatever the answer, there is some combination of dishonesty and incompetence on a billion dollar scale and Cowen/Dickson are still receiving paychecks after 15 years while every single other stakeholder of Tulane University, and that includes alumni and every single resident of the state of Louisiana, loses big time.

Why I'm the only one hopping mad I do not understand.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Said another way, how much did Cowen cost the University by choosing Scelfo over RichRod? Maybe $500M? It's a fireable offense.

Now there's a legitimate $1B opportunity and we let the same incompetent fools USING THE SAME DECISION MAKING PROCESS screw it up again.

No institution of any kind can survive under that type of leadership.
JerseyWave
Riptide
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:09 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Status: Offline

Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.
DfromCT
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13222
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 6308
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.
Yes but the truth is that Rick DIckson is doing exactly what Scott Cowen wants him to do, which is to implement the Tulane Model. Fitts was hired by Cowen's Board to continue implementing Scott Cowen University at Tulane. Has Fitts said ANYTHING yet?

The same reason Dickson isn't being replaced is why replacing him won't change enough. The changes need to occur at the Board level.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 6308
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
They cancelled engineering and CS at a time when those two majors were/are in the highest demand for companies. They cancelled civil engineering in a city that just experienced perhaps the greatest civil engineering disaster in this countries history. That's really all you want to know. They are incompetent and too insulated to make proper choices.

They wanted to get the stadium built originally at 30k but stubbornly went ahead after the NIMBYs beat their brains in, then as they do with most other issues they rationalized the decision by seeing the added revenue and potential for expansion.
DfromCT
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13222
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
They'd like to enjoy the benefits of being in a P5, but, IMHO, don't want to commit to winning and being competitive. In other words, they'd love to be invited and enjoy the P5 $$ benefits, but would they really commit to doing what it takes on many levels to truly compete on the national stage? I think Tulane has been turning away from that commitment since the late 50's/mid 60's. Getting out of the SEC was the biggest mistake in Tulane history, and every President since Rufus Harris has perpetuated, or, worse, furthered the damage done by that decision.
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
They cancelled engineering and CS at a time when those two majors were/are in the highest demand for companies. They cancelled civil engineering in a city that just experienced perhaps the greatest civil engineering disaster in this countries history. That's really all you want to know. They are incompetent and too insulated to make proper choices.

They wanted to get the stadium built originally at 30k but stubbornly went ahead after the NIMBYs beat their brains in, then as they do with most other issues they rationalized the decision by seeing the added revenue and potential for expansion.
Yep. They bet against engineering/CS which they've tried to walk back (at least with CS) because it was such a failure. They bet against athletics which has been a massive failure. They bet against Greek Life which is one of those things that allows a physcial university to stave off competition from emerging online education options.

If there is a crippling mistake to be made, these fools will make it. So it's enraging to see Mr. Hide and Seek show up with his "insider" info as if everything is under control and we plebes will be informed of the great news and progress when they decide we should know.

What's truly remarkable is how pathetic the Tulane community is in allowing this charade to continue.
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 6308
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
They cancelled engineering and CS at a time when those two majors were/are in the highest demand for companies. They cancelled civil engineering in a city that just experienced perhaps the greatest civil engineering disaster in this countries history. That's really all you want to know. They are incompetent and too insulated to make proper choices.

They wanted to get the stadium built originally at 30k but stubbornly went ahead after the NIMBYs beat their brains in, then as they do with most other issues they rationalized the decision by seeing the added revenue and potential for expansion.
Yep. They bet against engineering/CS which they've tried to walk back (at least with CS) because it was such a failure. They bet against athletics which has been a massive failure. They bet against Greek Life which is one of those things that allows a physcial university to stave off competition from emerging online education options.

If there is a crippling mistake to be made, these fools will make it. So it's enraging to see Mr. Hide and Seek show up with his "insider" info as if everything is under control and we plebes will be informed of the great news and progress when they decide we should know.

What's truly remarkable is how pathetic the Tulane community is in allowing this charade to continue.
They have tried to walk back on SC's original athletics vision.

They have tried to walk back on the "changing chairs on the titanic statements" by begging our way into the AAC.

In time we will probably see Newcomb come back after that disaster. Hell maybe we will move back into the dome in 15 years, who knows.

I still want to know why in the hell they didn't buy the dorm near Loyola Law. Landlocked and we let opportunities pass to a broke school.
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 27044
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
They cancelled engineering and CS at a time when those two majors were/are in the highest demand for companies. They cancelled civil engineering in a city that just experienced perhaps the greatest civil engineering disaster in this countries history. That's really all you want to know. They are incompetent and too insulated to make proper choices.

They wanted to get the stadium built originally at 30k but stubbornly went ahead after the NIMBYs beat their brains in, then as they do with most other issues they rationalized the decision by seeing the added revenue and potential for expansion.
Yep. They bet against engineering/CS which they've tried to walk back (at least with CS) because it was such a failure. They bet against athletics which has been a massive failure. They bet against Greek Life which is one of those things that allows a physcial university to stave off competition from emerging online education options.

If there is a crippling mistake to be made, these fools will make it. So it's enraging to see Mr. Hide and Seek show up with his "insider" info as if everything is under control and we plebes will be informed of the great news and progress when they decide we should know.

What's truly remarkable is how pathetic the Tulane community is in allowing this charade to continue.
They have tried to walk back on SC's original athletics vision.

They have tried to walk back on the "changing chairs on the titanic statements" by begging our way into the AAC.

In time we will probably see Newcomb come back after that disaster. Hell maybe we will move back into the dome in 15 years, who knows.

I still want to know why in the hell they didn't buy the dorm near Loyola Law. Landlocked and we let opportunities pass to a broke school.
Most of Calhoun St was for sale after Katrina. Very cheap at that.
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 6308
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

tpstulane wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
They cancelled engineering and CS at a time when those two majors were/are in the highest demand for companies. They cancelled civil engineering in a city that just experienced perhaps the greatest civil engineering disaster in this countries history. That's really all you want to know. They are incompetent and too insulated to make proper choices.

They wanted to get the stadium built originally at 30k but stubbornly went ahead after the NIMBYs beat their brains in, then as they do with most other issues they rationalized the decision by seeing the added revenue and potential for expansion.
Yep. They bet against engineering/CS which they've tried to walk back (at least with CS) because it was such a failure. They bet against athletics which has been a massive failure. They bet against Greek Life which is one of those things that allows a physcial university to stave off competition from emerging online education options.

If there is a crippling mistake to be made, these fools will make it. So it's enraging to see Mr. Hide and Seek show up with his "insider" info as if everything is under control and we plebes will be informed of the great news and progress when they decide we should know.

What's truly remarkable is how pathetic the Tulane community is in allowing this charade to continue.
They have tried to walk back on SC's original athletics vision.

They have tried to walk back on the "changing chairs on the titanic statements" by begging our way into the AAC.

In time we will probably see Newcomb come back after that disaster. Hell maybe we will move back into the dome in 15 years, who knows.

I still want to know why in the hell they didn't buy the dorm near Loyola Law. Landlocked and we let opportunities pass to a broke school.
Most of Calhoun St was for sale after Katrina. Very cheap at that.
Possibly the greatest mistake SC made. Yes it would have been risky but if we were going to come back then go all in, hell you could have ended up selling the land/homes for 5X's more in just a few years, never mind the possibility to build out as you please.
golfnut69
Wild Pelican
Posts: 14465
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
CN Hide & Seek Team wrote:Tulane was in talks with the Big XII for membership in 2011 along with UL, TCU, WVU, and Cincy. UL TCU and WVU got the invites, but UL went to the ACC instead. BigXII chose this list after a study by a sports marketing consulting firm. This information was disclosed to a room full of TAF members by the athletics department during the unveiling of the plans for Yulman. I know several of the men who were in the room. Since then Tulane and Cincy have made major stadium upgrades. i dont see that as a coincidence.
This is the kind of BS that keeps Tulane down in the dumps.

Why is this information being kept a secret? If there is a goal of obtaining membership in the Big 12, what is the big picture or plan and how does Yulman fit into that? I'm quite certain that if you told Tulane alumni "donate to Yulman because as soon as we pay that off we'll take the next steps towards a P5 because that's the program we want" that the Yulman challenge would have been successful.

There is also a very key but perhaps subtle difference between what you are saying and perhaps reality. You say that Tulane "made major stadium upgrades". It is true that Tulane spent a sum of money on a facility, but whether or not it was an upgrade (in terms of impact on the program) is highly questionable and remains to be seen. And whether that same sum of money could have been more effectively spent towards the upgrades that would make a P5 a reality is also highly questionable.

So we aren't disclosing our fundraising and/or athletics strategy because we don't have the b@lls or political will to hold off a handful of bored housewife NIMBYs? What kind of childish BS is this?

Again, this is the problem. We're expected to trust the judgment of a few fools who refuse to discuss their thinking or strategy or be held accountable for anything. This whole "Trust us. We talked about it with a select few people and we've got it covered" has been disastrous for the past 15 years, athletics and beyond and isn't the way successful or responsible people operate.

I know you and the people you know who were "in the room" have your hearts in the right place but WAKE THE F*CK UP AND STOP BEING PART OF THE PROBLEM. Enough talk. The Playbook was 5 years ago. It's well past time for results.

JJ, this is one of your posts that I can agree with. The shroud of secrecy is nothing positive. The "Tulane Model" doesn't work, and winning, more than anything else, is what would make us attractive to a P5. And I'm not talking about one good or even great season, but a series of successful seasons. That would build a fan base, force Yulman expansion, and make us WAY more attractive than we've been since 1998.

The problem is that SC/RD and now Fitts has chosen to stick to the Tulane model. I don't think we stand a chance, as we're maybe 5 years from having a complete separation of the "Haves" vs. the "Have Nots." We're on the outside looking in, with at least half a dozen, if not more, Universities ahead of us in the rush to get in to the preferred category. I don't believe for one second that there's ever been the institutional commitment needed to get where we all want to go.

The Playbook has produced NOTHING.
I am told that not even the "rosetta stone" can be used to unlock the mystery of "The Playbook'....no wonder RD was telling everyone to "go across the street"
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 27044
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
They cancelled engineering and CS at a time when those two majors were/are in the highest demand for companies. They cancelled civil engineering in a city that just experienced perhaps the greatest civil engineering disaster in this countries history. That's really all you want to know. They are incompetent and too insulated to make proper choices.

They wanted to get the stadium built originally at 30k but stubbornly went ahead after the NIMBYs beat their brains in, then as they do with most other issues they rationalized the decision by seeing the added revenue and potential for expansion.
Yep. They bet against engineering/CS which they've tried to walk back (at least with CS) because it was such a failure. They bet against athletics which has been a massive failure. They bet against Greek Life which is one of those things that allows a physcial university to stave off competition from emerging online education options.

If there is a crippling mistake to be made, these fools will make it. So it's enraging to see Mr. Hide and Seek show up with his "insider" info as if everything is under control and we plebes will be informed of the great news and progress when they decide we should know.

What's truly remarkable is how pathetic the Tulane community is in allowing this charade to continue.
They have tried to walk back on SC's original athletics vision.

They have tried to walk back on the "changing chairs on the titanic statements" by begging our way into the AAC.

In time we will probably see Newcomb come back after that disaster. Hell maybe we will move back into the dome in 15 years, who knows.

I still want to know why in the hell they didn't buy the dorm near Loyola Law. Landlocked and we let opportunities pass to a broke school.
Most of Calhoun St was for sale after Katrina. Very cheap at that.
Possibly the greatest mistake SC made. Yes it would have been risky but if we were going to come back then go all in, hell you could have ended up selling the land/homes for 5X's more in just a few years, never mind the possibility to build out as you please.
A friend of mine bought about 10 flooded properties for about $750K total. His investment is now worth $2.5 million. He's pulling in over $25K a month in rent on the properties he still has on Calhoun.
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 6308
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

tpstulane wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
They cancelled engineering and CS at a time when those two majors were/are in the highest demand for companies. They cancelled civil engineering in a city that just experienced perhaps the greatest civil engineering disaster in this countries history. That's really all you want to know. They are incompetent and too insulated to make proper choices.

They wanted to get the stadium built originally at 30k but stubbornly went ahead after the NIMBYs beat their brains in, then as they do with most other issues they rationalized the decision by seeing the added revenue and potential for expansion.
Yep. They bet against engineering/CS which they've tried to walk back (at least with CS) because it was such a failure. They bet against athletics which has been a massive failure. They bet against Greek Life which is one of those things that allows a physcial university to stave off competition from emerging online education options.

If there is a crippling mistake to be made, these fools will make it. So it's enraging to see Mr. Hide and Seek show up with his "insider" info as if everything is under control and we plebes will be informed of the great news and progress when they decide we should know.

What's truly remarkable is how pathetic the Tulane community is in allowing this charade to continue.
They have tried to walk back on SC's original athletics vision.

They have tried to walk back on the "changing chairs on the titanic statements" by begging our way into the AAC.

In time we will probably see Newcomb come back after that disaster. Hell maybe we will move back into the dome in 15 years, who knows.

I still want to know why in the hell they didn't buy the dorm near Loyola Law. Landlocked and we let opportunities pass to a broke school.
Most of Calhoun St was for sale after Katrina. Very cheap at that.
Possibly the greatest mistake SC made. Yes it would have been risky but if we were going to come back then go all in, hell you could have ended up selling the land/homes for 5X's more in just a few years, never mind the possibility to build out as you please.
A friend of mine bought about 10 flooded properties for about $750K total. His investment is now worth $2.5 million. He's pulling in over $25K a month in rent on the properties he still has on Calhoun.
Gutsy, well done.
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 27044
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
They cancelled engineering and CS at a time when those two majors were/are in the highest demand for companies. They cancelled civil engineering in a city that just experienced perhaps the greatest civil engineering disaster in this countries history. That's really all you want to know. They are incompetent and too insulated to make proper choices.

They wanted to get the stadium built originally at 30k but stubbornly went ahead after the NIMBYs beat their brains in, then as they do with most other issues they rationalized the decision by seeing the added revenue and potential for expansion.
Yep. They bet against engineering/CS which they've tried to walk back (at least with CS) because it was such a failure. They bet against athletics which has been a massive failure. They bet against Greek Life which is one of those things that allows a physcial university to stave off competition from emerging online education options.

If there is a crippling mistake to be made, these fools will make it. So it's enraging to see Mr. Hide and Seek show up with his "insider" info as if everything is under control and we plebes will be informed of the great news and progress when they decide we should know.

What's truly remarkable is how pathetic the Tulane community is in allowing this charade to continue.
They have tried to walk back on SC's original athletics vision.

They have tried to walk back on the "changing chairs on the titanic statements" by begging our way into the AAC.

In time we will probably see Newcomb come back after that disaster. Hell maybe we will move back into the dome in 15 years, who knows.

I still want to know why in the hell they didn't buy the dorm near Loyola Law. Landlocked and we let opportunities pass to a broke school.
Most of Calhoun St was for sale after Katrina. Very cheap at that.
Possibly the greatest mistake SC made. Yes it would have been risky but if we were going to come back then go all in, hell you could have ended up selling the land/homes for 5X's more in just a few years, never mind the possibility to build out as you please.
A friend of mine bought about 10 flooded properties for about $750K total. His investment is now worth $2.5 million. He's pulling in over $25K a month in rent on the properties he still has on Calhoun.
Gutsy, well done.
Tulane could have bought close to the entire block (Claiborne to Willow) for less than $3 million. That would have allow the stadium to be built like it should have.
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote: They have tried to walk back on SC's original athletics vision.

They have tried to walk back on the "changing chairs on the titanic statements" by begging our way into the AAC.

In time we will probably see Newcomb come back after that disaster. Hell maybe we will move back into the dome in 15 years, who knows.

I still want to know why in the hell they didn't buy the dorm near Loyola Law. Landlocked and we let opportunities pass to a broke school.
Yeah I don't think Tulane is going to be around in 15 years to have 7th and 8th chances to get it right.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

tpstulane wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
tpstulane wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JerseyWave wrote:Tulane's athletic department lacks credibility and cannot be taken seriously as long as Rick Dickson is AD. Replace Dickson with a National search for an innovative AD whose job will be to position Tulane for serious P5 consideration.

+ 1,000

But does the board really want Tulane in a P5? Do they buy into the Scott Cowen BS or are they committed to doing what needs to be done to maximize a POSITIVE return from the Athletics Dept., improve the quality of student life, and raise Tulane's image on the national stage. That's what a true commitment to P5 and D1 athletics would do. Even if we didn't succeed in getting into a P5, making the commitment, and consistently winning would provide a lot of the same benefits, less the P5$'s.
The idea that the board and Fitts doesn't want TU to be in a P5 conference is tinfoil hat stuff. Now the idea that they don't want to take the financial gamble to accomplish this goal is a rational thought process IMO.
It's really not tinfoil hat stuff at all. Building a D1A football stadium in a major metropolitan area with 22K/23K seats is by far, per capita, the smallest D1A stadium much less P5 stadium. The lowest Big12 attendance numbers (not capacity) are close to 40K. No on in their right mind spends $80M to build 50% of the required capacity.

Either they are lying and do not want Tulane in a P5, or they are massively and demonstrably incompetent and have sunk Tulane's chances of a P5 while spending a lot of donor money in the process. Choose one.

They already "took the financial gamble". Being half pregnant with no plan to "raise the child" so to speak is far worse than doing nothing. But the idea that they haven't already taken a major "financial gamble" is incorrect.
They cancelled engineering and CS at a time when those two majors were/are in the highest demand for companies. They cancelled civil engineering in a city that just experienced perhaps the greatest civil engineering disaster in this countries history. That's really all you want to know. They are incompetent and too insulated to make proper choices.

They wanted to get the stadium built originally at 30k but stubbornly went ahead after the NIMBYs beat their brains in, then as they do with most other issues they rationalized the decision by seeing the added revenue and potential for expansion.
Yep. They bet against engineering/CS which they've tried to walk back (at least with CS) because it was such a failure. They bet against athletics which has been a massive failure. They bet against Greek Life which is one of those things that allows a physcial university to stave off competition from emerging online education options.

If there is a crippling mistake to be made, these fools will make it. So it's enraging to see Mr. Hide and Seek show up with his "insider" info as if everything is under control and we plebes will be informed of the great news and progress when they decide we should know.

What's truly remarkable is how pathetic the Tulane community is in allowing this charade to continue.
They have tried to walk back on SC's original athletics vision.

They have tried to walk back on the "changing chairs on the titanic statements" by begging our way into the AAC.

In time we will probably see Newcomb come back after that disaster. Hell maybe we will move back into the dome in 15 years, who knows.

I still want to know why in the hell they didn't buy the dorm near Loyola Law. Landlocked and we let opportunities pass to a broke school.
Most of Calhoun St was for sale after Katrina. Very cheap at that.
Possibly the greatest mistake SC made. Yes it would have been risky but if we were going to come back then go all in, hell you could have ended up selling the land/homes for 5X's more in just a few years, never mind the possibility to build out as you please.
A friend of mine bought about 10 flooded properties for about $750K total. His investment is now worth $2.5 million. He's pulling in over $25K a month in rent on the properties he still has on Calhoun.
Gutsy, well done.
Tulane could have bought close to the entire block (Claiborne to Willow) for less than $3 million. That would have allow the stadium to be built like it should have.
That about explains it. Successful D1A athletics is worth ~$1B to a university but Cowen/Dickson screwed it up over $3M and 8 bored housewives.
cajunfanatico
Swell
Posts: 1313
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 10:10 am
Status: Offline

MicMan wrote:It is hilarious to watch TU and fans of other also-ran and never-was schools cling desperately in vain to the hope that they still have a chance to join a P5 conference. They'd tear each others' children to pieces if it meant getting an invite. Well done, losers!
It'd be easier to look down your nose at the unwashed masses around you if you'd pull your head out of your ass.

I'd bet there is a sum total of about 3 delusional Cajun fans who really think that the program has a shot at getting into a P5 Conference. There are many many more Tulane fans who are convinced they've got a shot, and if the university hadn't pissed away numerous opportunities over the last couple of decades, I'm sure they'd be there today. Unfortunately, I'm afraid the train has left the station.
ajcalhoun: Nobody here gives a flying fuck about UL-L and the Sunbelt Conference.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

cajunfanatico wrote:
MicMan wrote:It is hilarious to watch TU and fans of other also-ran and never-was schools cling desperately in vain to the hope that they still have a chance to join a P5 conference. They'd tear each others' children to pieces if it meant getting an invite. Well done, losers!
It'd be easier to look down your nose at the unwashed masses around you if you'd pull your head out of your ass.

I'd bet there is a sum total of about 3 delusional Cajun fans who really think that the program has a shot at getting into a P5 Conference. There are many many more Tulane fans who are convinced they've got a shot, and if the university hadn't pissed away numerous opportunities over the last couple of decades, I'm sure they'd be there today. Unfortunately, I'm afraid the train has left the station.
Sad on many levels and true.
User avatar
MicMan
Swell
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 6:00 pm
Status: Offline

cajunfanatico wrote:
It'd be easier to look down your nose at the unwashed masses around you if you'd pull your head out of your ass.

I'd bet there is a sum total of about 3 delusional Cajun fans who really think that the program has a shot at getting into a P5 Conference. There are many many more Tulane fans who are convinced they've got a shot, and if the university hadn't pissed away numerous opportunities over the last couple of decades, I'm sure they'd be there today. Unfortunately, I'm afraid the train has left the station.
How's that chem company cancer experiment going in Lafayette? Any genetic damage would only be an improvement on you and the rest of your inbred shitheads.
Jonathan
Riptide
Posts: 4207
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:03 pm
Status: Offline

This thread title, is it a joke? How did we get to four pages discussing it?
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 27044
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Wow. This old thread popped up on me. As we all know now they actually took 3 AAC members UCF, Cincy and Houston.
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Post Reply