PDA

View Full Version : ETSU task forces sez....



chattanoogamocs
December 21st, 2006, 01:44 AM
ETSU task force report was delivered on Wednesday, the recommendation...

Bring Back Buccaneer Football!

:hurray:

Should be a full story in the Johnson City Press on Thursday.

Mountaineer
December 21st, 2006, 01:56 AM
Oh hell yeah!!!!

Way to go Bucs fans!!

:hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray:

chattanoogamocs
December 21st, 2006, 02:43 AM
Now they just gotta fund it. Some of it will come from a student fee (I think I read 71% of students supported it...even with a fee).

They are estimating a $4-5 start up (including schollies...men's and women's equivalents)

...and $12-15 million for a 10,000 seat stadium.

With this in mind, what I hear on SoCon expansion is that Samford is pretty much a done deal and an announcement could actually come as early as January from the school (this was information I obtained on Tuesday).

There will definitely be a second round of expansion in about 2 seasons...I wouldn't be surprised at all (using rumor and logic combined) if it is ETSU and CCU.

This biggest road block for ET phoning, I mean coming, home to the SoCon is the dislike for the way Mullins and Staton handled the whole affair to begin with...one will be gone soon, I wouldn't be surprised if the other (after the failure of killing football the first time) wasn't too far behind.

I know at least one school for sure will fight for them to be readmitted!

chattanoogamocs
December 21st, 2006, 02:49 AM
Now they just gotta fund it. Some of it will come from a student fee (I think I read 71% of students supported it...even with a fee).

They are estimating a $4-5 start up (including schollies...men's and women's equivalents)

...and $12-15 million for a 10,000 seat stadium.

With this in mind, what I hear on SoCon expansion is that Samford is going to happen and that there will definitely be a second round of expansion in about 2 seasons...I wouldn't be surprised at all (using rumor and logic combined) if it is ETSU and CCU.

This biggest road block for ET phoning, I mean coming, home to the SoCon is the dislike for the way Mullins and Stanton handled the whole affair to begin with...one will be gone soon, I wouldn't be surprised if the other (after the failure of killing football the first time) wasn't too far behind.

I know at least one school for sure will fight for them to be readmitted!

Blueandwhitefightfight
December 21st, 2006, 02:56 AM
Just in time for GSU and ASU to make an exit, stage right...

Or be doomed in a conference with Samford, Elon, Western Carolina, Eastern Tenn., and the Citadel.

App St. is a good, well rounded program. Furman is pretty solid all around too. Davidson, UTC, and CofC are good for hoops. Wofford is coming up. Coastal would be great.

But if our football schedule in a couple years is going to look like Samford, Elon, Western Carolina, Eastern Tenn., Citadel, UTC, Furman, Wofford,

GSU and App. St. don't belong in the SoCon at that time! Someone save us! Please! We about about to drown in the conference of small private schools or no name public schools.


Erk wanted us to be in DI, and to him, DI meant "Southern California, Georgia, Notre Dame, those sort of folks." NOT Eastern Tenn, Elon, and Samford...


I'd welcome Coastal with open arms in a heartbeat though. That is one up and coming program.


Oh yea, y'all can have Georgia State right after we leave too! And perhaps West Georgia! They deserve a good home (the SoCon would be a good fit for them, but not ASU and GSU!)

youwouldno
December 21st, 2006, 03:23 AM
Thinking GSU can ever compete with the likes of Georgia and Notre Dame would be beyond retarded even when GSU was winning I-AA NC's like crazy... I'm sure the SEC is dying to have a 3-8 FCS team in their ranks. Quite honestly, at this point I'm not even sure the Sun Belt would be dying to get GSU...

rokamortis
December 21st, 2006, 05:30 AM
Good for ETSU, I hope they add football. If the SoCon doesn't want them I'm sure the OVC and Big South will go after them hard.

mcveyrl
December 21st, 2006, 07:33 AM
How did you found this out? JC Press is reporting no details are being released until President Stanton looks at the proposal. I'm trying to find the online version to post.

mcveyrl
December 21st, 2006, 07:40 AM
Here's the article.

Couldn't hyperlink because of the way the sight is set up. You can go to www.ejcpress.com and the username and password are given to you for free until Jan. 1.

It does seem positive since the main supporter is happy, but I'm not too sure about the AD's comments.

Panel completes football feasibilty study for Stanton
Few details made available pending ETSU president’s review.

Although an East Tennessee State University task force completed its football feasibility report Wednesday, an official declined to release details until President Paul Stanton had a look. “We have reached consensus on a report that we’ll be sending to President Stanton,” ETSU Vice President for Administration and Chief Operating Officer Wilsie Bishop, the task force’s co-chairwoman, said in a news conference following the task force’s meeting Wednesday. “We’ll have it on his desk first thing in the morning.
“Dr. Stanton needs to have the first look at it, I think, before we make a public announcement.”
Stanton, who was away from campus Wednesday, has said he intends to announce his position on football’s future at ETSU within a few days of receiving the task force’s report. Stanton, who axed the football program in 2003 citing financial concerns, appointed the task force last summer to study the feasibility of the sport’s return.
Having met since July, the group of university officials and community representatives gathered for the last time on Wednesday to iron out fiscal issues, facilities needs and other aspects of what ETSU would require to revive football.
“We’ve addressed all the issues that we said we would throughout the last six months,” Bishop said. “We’ve looked at costs. We’ve looked at revenues, facil- ities issues and other components that it would take to have a competitive football program.”
Among the task force’s chief concerns was how to fund the program. Stanton has estimated that ETSU would need $1.5 million to $2 million to appropriately fund a football team, as well as additional funding for equivalent female programs to meet gender equity requirements for female athletes — a total $4 million to $5 million.
“We’ll be giving the president several budget scenarios that he can look at,” Bishop said. “We’ve identified dollars — the gaps we’d have to make up with fundraising. We’ve talked about potential gate receipts. We’ve talked about potential student fees.”
The report included results of faculty and student polls the university conducted to gauge campus support for restoring football, including students’ willingness to attend games and increase athletic fees to fund the program. Bishop described results from both polls as positive.
Student Government Association President Josh Shearin said nearly 4,000 students — about one-fourth of the student body — responded to the online poll. More than 60 percent supported the fee increase, he said, although several students had questions about the amount and how the university would phase in the increases.
Should Stanton move ahead with football, Shearin said, the SGA would have to conduct a referendum in April for students to vote on a specific fee structure in keeping with Tennessee Board of Regents requirements.
“Depending on how that went, we would forward that to the administration, and they would take that to the (Regents) at their June meeting,” Shearin said.
In addition to costs and revenue, the task force explored facilities issues. Since the football team’s former home, Memorial Center, has been deemed unsuitable, ETSU would have to develop alternatives. Asked whether the report identified facilities options, Bishop said the report included references to different possibilities.
“We have had some discussions about stadiums, but we really don’t have a final decision,” Bishop said. “I think if we move forward, we’ll have to do more investigation into facilities.”
Former ETSU trainer Jerry Robertson, task force cochairman and founder of the Buc Football & Friends Foundation, said he was comfortable with Wednesday’s meeting and most of the figures in the report. He predicted that Stanton would support football’s return.
“It may not happen as quickly as I want it to, but it will happen,” Robertson said. “I’d certainly like to see it as soon as possible — probably somewhere in ’09 or ’10, more likely ’10.”
Asked whether he saw football’s return on the horizon, Shearin expected the decision to hinge on community support. The SGA president said even if students and the Regents were to approve a fee increase, the program’s finances would run in the red without community contributions.
“I’d probably be willing to say yes, but part of me is very hesitant, because there are still a lot of questions to be answered, especially on the side of the community,” Shearin said. “Until that is taken care of and addressed, I couldn’t say 100 percent that it would be back. We have yet to hear where the community is — are they actually going to give support financially?”
ETSU Athletic Director Dave Mullins said a revived football team would have to fit into the university’s goal of fielding championship-level programs in all 16 ETSU sports — 17 with football.
“Our decisions we’ve made about budgets and operations over the last 3 1/2 years have been with that goal in mind,” Mullins said. “One of the jobs of the task force was to identify how to continue to fund everything that we currently have and then how to fund a football program at that level, because the two become complementary programs and they become part of the total goal of the athletic department.
“I don’t think we can lose sight of the total department for any one program, and that’s the approach we’ve taken in the task force.”

TexasTerror
December 21st, 2006, 07:47 AM
Just wondering...

What Title IX programs would ETSU have to add, if any?

mcveyrl
December 21st, 2006, 07:58 AM
I think they've given an indication of what they would consider, but I honestly don't remember.

That was helpful, huh.

DFW HOYA
December 21st, 2006, 08:13 AM
GSU and App. St. don't belong in the SoCon at that time! Someone save us! Please! We about about to drown in the conference of small private schools or no name public schools. Erk wanted us to be in DI, and to him, DI meant "Southern California, Georgia, Notre Dame, those sort of folks." NOT Eastern Tenn, Elon, and Samford...

What other options are there at this point?

ETSU-06
December 21st, 2006, 09:15 AM
How did you found this out? JC Press is reporting no details are being released until President Stanton looks at the proposal. I'm trying to find the online version to post.
More details were reported on news channel 11 and tricities.com yesterday. Their reports were more positive than the JC press and indicated that the task force had determined that football would provide value to the campus and community. (who knew, right?xidiotx ) Still yet, this is nowhere close to a done deal. Our president is reviewing the report and will have his decision in a couple of days. Everyone seems to think he will comply with the task force's recommendations , but you never know with this guy. The task force wil release their report after Stanton makes his decision, and I'll post it here if I can get my hands on it.

One of the biggest issues to me is Title IX. How in the world are we supposed to add 90 schollies for women's sports? Can marching band count?! I'm just not aware of any women's sports that could get that many scholarship players.

mcveyrl
December 21st, 2006, 09:29 AM
Their reports were more positive than the JC press and indicated that the task force had determined that football would provide value to the campus and community. (who knew, right?xidiotx )


I guess that depends on your determination of value...xlolx

The only sport that I was thinking was maybe gymnastics.:eek: :eek: Maybe field hockey, too, but that's not exactly a real popular sport around here (like gymnastics is...)

proasu89
December 21st, 2006, 09:48 AM
I guess that depends on your determination of value...xlolx

The only sport that I was thinking was maybe gymnastics.:eek: :eek: Maybe field hockey, too, but that's not exactly a real popular sport around here (like gymnastics is...)
In field hockey you can join the Norpac conference w/ us. We play in a conference tournament w/ Stanford if I'm not mistakenxidiotx

OL FU
December 21st, 2006, 12:46 PM
Just in time for GSU and ASU to make an exit, stage right...

Or be doomed in a conference with Samford, Elon, Western Carolina, Eastern Tenn., and the Citadel.

App St. is a good, well rounded program. Furman is pretty solid all around too. Davidson, UTC, and CofC are good for hoops. Wofford is coming up. Coastal would be great.

But if our football schedule in a couple years is going to look like Samford, Elon, Western Carolina, Eastern Tenn., Citadel, UTC, Furman, Wofford,

GSU and App. St. don't belong in the SoCon at that time! Someone save us! Please! We about about to drown in the conference of small private schools or no name public schools.


Erk wanted us to be in DI, and to him, DI meant "Southern California, Georgia, Notre Dame, those sort of folks." NOT Eastern Tenn, Elon, and Samford...


I'd welcome Coastal with open arms in a heartbeat though. That is one up and coming program.


Oh yea, y'all can have Georgia State right after we leave too! And perhaps West Georgia! They deserve a good home (the SoCon would be a good fit for them, but not ASU and GSU!)

Have fun wish you luck

*****
December 21st, 2006, 12:56 PM
... Erk wanted us to be in DI, and to him, DI meant "Southern California, Georgia, Notre Dame, those sort of folks." NOT Eastern Tenn...Don't worry, Georgia Southern will not be playing Eastern Tenn... you'll be playing East Tennessee State University AGAIN. :rolleyes:

ETSU-06
December 21st, 2006, 12:57 PM
Ok here's the latest word: President Stanton has called a press coference for Friday morning to announce his decision. If he says yes then we will move on to the regents to get fees approved. Tomorrow is big for us, if we don't get a yes from him this little train ride is over before it started basically. Comments from our incompetent AD didn't exactly sound supportive, but most of us in Johnson City are hoping he will be shown the door ASAP.

Question for all the Socon groupies: If and that's a big if, ETSU gets back in the Socon for all sports, when will they be allowed to join? Does the Socon let ETSU back in for basketball, baseball, etc. almost immediately or do they wait for football to come online in 2009/2010???

OL FU
December 21st, 2006, 01:07 PM
Someone remind me, when did ETSU drop Football? 2003. :eyebrow: What year is it now, 2006:eyebrow: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I have mixed emotions on ETSU re-joining the SoCon. I certainly enjoyed ETSU basketball in the past. I would not let them in if they are going to play football in the mini-dome.

What I do hope is that if schools decide to vote against ETSU they are not unduly criticized for making what would appear to to be a rational decision for an eyebrow raising issue:eyebrow:

OL FU
December 21st, 2006, 01:10 PM
Ok here's the latest word: President Stanton has called a press coference for Friday morning to announce his decision. If he says yes then we will move on to the regents to get fees approved. Tomorrow is big for us, if we don't get a yes from him this little train ride is over before it started basically. Comments from our incompetent AD didn't exactly sound supportive, but most of us in Johnson City are hoping he will be shown the door ASAP.

Question for all the Socon groupies: If and that's a big if, ETSU gets back in the Socon for all sports, when will they be allowed to join? Does the Socon let ETSU back in for basketball, baseball, etc. almost immediately or do they wait for football to come online in 2009/2010???

Beats me, but if having football is a condition of re-entry, then you should not enter until it is absolutely clear football is going to happen. I am not sure what absolute certainty means ( maybe half of a new stadium built,:) )Once that occurs, I would see no problem with entry for the other sports first.

Sir William
December 21st, 2006, 01:47 PM
Question for all the Socon groupies: If and that's a big if, ETSU gets back in the Socon for all sports, when will they be allowed to join? Does the Socon let ETSU back in for basketball, baseball, etc. almost immediately or do they wait for football to come online in 2009/2010???

I think it's a very big if! I'm like most...restore ETSU to the SoCon in all sports. However bridges were burned by ETSU and trusts were broken. As Ricky said to Lucy, "you gotta lotta splainin' to do.

Again, I hope ETSU comes home. And I'm sure UTC fans and App fans feel the same, given proximity. I say forget Samford and Jax State; bring in ETSU (if football approved) and Coastal. This makes for a strong SoCon. And Georgia Southern would only hurt themselves to leave...so don't. :nod:

DinoDex200
December 21st, 2006, 01:52 PM
Great news...ETSU was one of our biggest rivals, and I think watching a game...outdoors...in Johnson City would be a great experience. Plus, those games always brought a good amount of App fans...for basketball and football.

They need to work on some sort of deal with the City where they can build a shared facility...it would probably get them a bigger stadium. :hurray: :hurray: :hurray:

mcveyrl
December 21st, 2006, 01:55 PM
Someone remind me, when did ETSU drop Football? 2003. :eyebrow: What year is it now, 2006:eyebrow: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I have mixed emotions on ETSU re-joining the SoCon. I certainly enjoyed ETSU basketball in the past. I would not let them in if they are going to play football in the mini-dome.

What I do hope is that if schools decide to vote against ETSU they are not unduly criticized for making what would appear to to be a rational decision for an eyebrow raising issue:eyebrow:


They can't play football in the Mini-Dome. I think it's limited to 5,000 capacity now.

I wonder if the report gives a conference preference?

FurmanPaladins4138
December 21st, 2006, 02:03 PM
Just in time for GSU and ASU to make an exit, stage right...

Or be doomed in a conference with Samford, Elon, Western Carolina, Eastern Tenn., and the Citadel.

App St. is a good, well rounded program. Furman is pretty solid all around too. Davidson, UTC, and CofC are good for hoops. Wofford is coming up. Coastal would be great.

But if our football schedule in a couple years is going to look like Samford, Elon, Western Carolina, Eastern Tenn., Citadel, UTC, Furman, Wofford,

GSU and App. St. don't belong in the SoCon at that time! Someone save us! Please! We about about to drown in the conference of small private schools or no name public schools.


Erk wanted us to be in DI, and to him, DI meant "Southern California, Georgia, Notre Dame, those sort of folks." NOT Eastern Tenn, Elon, and Samford...


I'd welcome Coastal with open arms in a heartbeat though. That is one up and coming program.


Oh yea, y'all can have Georgia State right after we leave too! And perhaps West Georgia! They deserve a good home (the SoCon would be a good fit for them, but not ASU and GSU!)

I'm sorry but...
That is absolutely the STUPIDEST thing I've ever heard.

FurmanPaladins4138
December 21st, 2006, 02:05 PM
I would love to see ETSU come back to the SoCon. I don't know if I'm too big on a conference where you don't play everyone else in the same year, but w/e...

Thumper250
December 21st, 2006, 02:09 PM
If I'm not mistaken, after G-W left the Atlantic Sun, they implemented some pretty stiff penalties for anyone else wishing to leave. I've heard rumors of million $$$ buyouts, etc., no postseason play after announcing departure, etc.

There was no buyout clause for G-W's move fully to the Big South.

I've long heard rumors of ETSU having interest in the Big South as well, FWIW. Much more feasible travel, etc., for all sports.

As for potential women's sport additions ... Swimming, crew (that's the big one that many of the Big 10 schools, ACC schools used to offset 85 schollies back when), women's lacrosse ... Dropping men's track is always an option.

Thumper250
December 21st, 2006, 02:11 PM
That said, the old guard in J.C. loved the SoCon. If I'm the Big South, and word comes out Friday that they're adding, I make an immediate push hard for ETSU. Hard. Buy 'em if you have to.

Mr. C
December 21st, 2006, 02:13 PM
Erk wanted us to be in DI, and to him, DI meant "Southern California, Georgia, Notre Dame, those sort of folks." NOT Eastern Tenn, Elon, and Samford...

I'm surprised no one has jumped on this earlier.

Georgia Southern and everyone else in the SoCon already plays DIVISION I in football and every other sport. That kind of statement is exactly the reason why the name change away from I-A and I-AA was made. There is little to be gained by moving to the FBS for a school like Georgia Southern. In my mind, playing in the Sun Belt (the only alternative right now) would be a step backwards from the SoCon.

Sir William
December 21st, 2006, 02:14 PM
Georgia Southern and everyone else in the SoCon already plays DIVISION I in football and every other sport. That kind of statement is exactly the reason why the name change away from I-A and I-AA was made. There is little to be gained by moving to the FBS for a school like Georgia Southern. In my mind, playing in the Sun Belt (the only alternative right now) would be a step backwards from the SoCon.

EXACTLY !!

Mr. C
December 21st, 2006, 02:15 PM
If I'm not mistaken, after G-W left the Atlantic Sun, they implemented some pretty stiff penalties for anyone else wishing to leave. I've heard rumors of million $$$ buyouts, etc., no postseason play after announcing departure, etc.

There was no buyout clause for G-W's move fully to the Big South.

I've long heard rumors of ETSU having interest in the Big South as well, FWIW. Much more feasible travel, etc., for all sports.

As for potential women's sport additions ... Swimming, crew (that's the big one that many of the Big 10 schools, ACC schools used to offset 85 schollies back when), women's lacrosse ... Dropping men's track is always an option.
ETSU has a great track and field program. It would make NO SENSE to drop track and field.

DinoDex200
December 21st, 2006, 02:15 PM
There is little to be gained by moving to the FBS for a school like Georgia Southern.

There's alot to be gained from being the only FBS school in talent-laden South Georgia, I promise you. With the right coach, they'd be Sun Belt champs in less than 3 years...and moving on to another conference within 6...

OL FU
December 21st, 2006, 02:19 PM
Originally Posted by Blueandwhitefightfight
Erk wanted us to be in DI, and to him, DI meant "Southern California, Georgia, Notre Dame, those sort of folks." NOT Eastern Tenn, Elon, and Samford...



I'm surprised no one has jumped on this earlier.

Georgia Southern and everyone else in the SoCon already plays DIVISION I in football and every other sport. That kind of statement is exactly the reason why the name change away from I-A and I-AA was made. There is little to be gained by moving to the FBS for a school like Georgia Southern. In my mind, playing in the Sun Belt (the only alternative right now) would be a step backwards from the SoCon.

Some of us quit reading the post after the first sentence.

gophoenix
December 21st, 2006, 02:42 PM
it's more that some people are hipocrits. Not all, but some. Some people like to dump on the Samford, Wofford, Western, UTC, Towson type teams and expect CUSA, MAC and other teams of the division formerly known as I-A to accept them.

If A regional school like GSU can't take playing schools like us, then why on Earth, even if you were good in I-A, would anyone ever like playing you? Even schools like BGSU, Toledo, ECU, TCU, SMU and others have a hard time when it comes to Big 6 conference schools. And there are still "small private and small public" schools in I-A. And to be honest, what constitutes a "small" school? GSU sits at what, 12k roughly? Which is 7k larger than Elon, but anywhere from 10-30k smaller than a ton of other I-A schools? So depending on the comparison, GSU is pretty small. And then you have football crowds. Say GSU draws 25k to games consistently, but Michigan is drawing what, 102k? You're crowds are then pretty pathetic comparatively too.....

But then, I guess there is always someone to pick on to make yourself look better?

But then again, a loss is a loss whether it is CCSU or Notre Dame.

mcveyrl
December 21st, 2006, 02:48 PM
Just got an e-mail from the JC Press reporter. The report does not make a recommendation one way or the other, it only presents info on what it would take.

Says that he expects Stanton to approve football with some conditions. Mainly student approval of the fee (which I think will not be a problem) and a fund raising minimum. But, his guess is as good as ours.

Mr. C
December 21st, 2006, 03:12 PM
I just got an email telling me that Dr. Stanton's press conference is set for 10 a.m. tommorrow on th ETSU campus. Thinking of attending and asking Stanton some tough questions.

gophoenix
December 21st, 2006, 03:13 PM
Well if ETSU comes back and makes a commitment.... then I personally say let's get Coastal, Samford and ETSU and move along.

Elon and Western were part of the few who weren't against an ETSU waiver, it make take some doing to get Furman and GSU on board, but UTC and App should have some pull in swaying some.

*****
December 21st, 2006, 04:16 PM
I just got an email telling me that Dr. Stanton's press conference is set for 10 a.m. tommorrow on th ETSU campus. Thinking of attending and asking Stanton some tough questions.Go get 'em Mr. C. Could be a great article!

Remember this from the I-AA.org Magazine 2004 Fall Preview?
http://www.i-aa.org/article.asp?articleid=77608
Anatomy of Canceling Football
BY KIMBERLY REECE

As most universities are finalizing their plans for the onslaught of players arriving for training campus, media outlets release their preseason predictions and overviews, and sport message boards are alive with excitement and hope from the coming college football season; one college campus is busy removing the final vestiges of a team that no longer exists.

On Nov. 22, 2003, East Tennessee State University bid farewell to an 80 year old program which had survived The Depression, rebounded robustly after a three year hiatus during World War II, survived the tumultuous days of the Vietnam era, and ushered in the new millennium with nary a Y2K bug in sight.

But this time the program didn’t survive the axe of a college president, who faced the dual dilemma of reduced state funding and an increasing deficit in college athletics. Someone, somewhere in Tennessee, in a position far removed from the glory of the gridiron and the teaching and learning of the lessons from sport, decided that it would be a good idea that all of the intercollegiate athletic programs in the public higher education system be “self-supporting.”

So the motion was set forth to eliminate the state funding allocations allowed from college athletics from the higher education funding formula. The idea, presented in the Tennessee Higher Education Commission’s (THEC) “Plan of Action for Tennessee Higher Education: A Revision of the 2000-05 Master Plan” was part of an 11 item agenda designed to “encourage Tennessee universities to strategically position themselves and to maintain the highest level of academic integrity and quality.” Even though the Plan concluded that some of the points may adversely impact “the traditional access goals,” they hoped that an examination of programs and services would result in institutional mission adjustments and refocusing.

One of the more controversial items included in the proposal was that intercollegiate athletics be designated and operated as an “auxiliary enterprise” and that each governing board adopt “specific and dedicated student fees to support intercollegiate athletics.” This proposal was to be phased in over four years beginning in 2003 at all levels of public higher education, including the state’s community college system. Interesting, within the documents, a clause stated that each institution should “position higher education for quick recovery and advancement when the funding for higher education improves in the future.” The authors also reminded officials that once a program or service has been eliminated it would be “very difficult to bring it back.”

An examination of the “state allocations” revealed that all of Tennessee’s two and four year public higher education intercollegiate athletic programs, with the exception of the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, had a heavy reliance on the state funding allocations. These funding allocations are a combination of student maintenance fees and state appropriated funding from the legislature and divided to various programs, departments and divisions based on a “funding formula.” Across the board, the four-year institutions rely on up to 70% of their budgets being carried by the funding allocations.

In the July 2002 meeting, a memo was issued from Richard Rhoda, the Executive Director of THEC, stating that the plan has been adopted in principle at the April meeting, the plan had been widely distributed across the state, and formal responses were forwarded to the commission by June 5. As of that date, the there were three dimensions of the Plan where the staff, governing board, and institutions had YET to reach a unified consensus, one of those areas was Athletics. THEC then formed a Task Force that would review athletic expenditures and develop steps where the expenditures can be significantly reduced. In the interim, the THEC staff recommended that the operating support remain constant at the 2001-02 levels.

Like the Little Energizer Bunny... they talked and talked... and kept talking... and in April 2003, THEC reported that the Task Force has successfully defined "what is to be included in determining athletic expenditures" and the next phase would be to further investigate the feasibility of eliminating the state appropriations. They also added that the Tennessee Board of Regents, the governing board responsible for East Tennessee State, was individually addressing guidelines to limit the use of student funds for athletics.

continued next post...

*****
December 21st, 2006, 04:17 PM
continued from previous post...
On May 20, 2003, the Tennessee Board of Regents passed a revision of the TBR guideline "Allocation for maintenance Fees for University Athletics" which would be contingent upon approval of an athletic fee. In guideline No. B- 042, it states: Intercollegiate athletics is a major university activity that is supported by various sources which include student maintenance fees. The following represents the methodology as well as guidelines for the allocation of maintenance fees for Athletics at TBR universities:

A) Effective July 1, 2004, each university MAY allocate the greater of $3,750,000 OR $150 per student (cumulative headcount) per fiscal year fro Athletics from maintenance fees, subject to a maximum of $5,750,000.

This initial limit will be reviewed annually by Board staff and may be adjusted based on such factors as student fee increases, inflations, and mandated salary and employee benefits increases....

B) Each university must evaluate the amount of maintenance fee revenues available for Athletics, subject to the limits established by this guideline, relative to other campus priorities.

It went on to add "No state appropriated funds from the General State of Tennessee Revenue may be used for Athletics." East Tennessee State, which previously had not had a dedicated “Student Athletic Fee” also received the good news that they would be approved to charge a $50 per student fee, one month after the decision to eliminate the football program was made public. The fee was denied to ETSU on a previous occasion.

After all the dollars have been counted, it basically seems to boil down to one question: What is the role of athletics on the college campus?

If the response comes back as having intercollegiate athletics serve as an “auxiliary enterprise” where revenues “in” must surpass expenses “out,” then 90% of all NCAA programs appear to be involved in a business that is doomed for failure (http://www.ncaa.org/library/research ).

Another possible response could be that “Athletics is the window to the University.” If this premise guides the thinking of a university administration, then Athletic Departments should be held accountable for keeping the window clean by establishing and enforcing high standards of performance and conduct of the part of coaches and players, on and off the court. According to the former Athletic Director of Tennessee Tech University, Dr. David Larimore, college athletics comprises of 80% of what is written and said in the media about higher education. Football and men’s basketball make up the vast majority of the column inches and news reports. Larimore added that there is a “high correlation” between perceived academic status of a university and the athletic status of an institution. The point being very basic, visibility gives credibility and validity to your school. Visibility translates to interest, gifts, enrollment, and institutional name recognition.

Eliminating the direct economic and public relations impact to the institution and the surrounding community, one other possible response might be a focus on the “educational opportunity” that is provided to thousands of student-athletes each year on our college campuses. These opportunities go beyond the scholarship assistance and degree attainment.

College athletics is about lessons learned from playing experiences on the competitive field of play and is translated to the ‘real world” in the form of leadership development, high levels of dedication and loyalty, commitment to goals and ideals, teamwork mentality, competitive drive, and an introduction to the idea that “we” is always bigger than “I.”

This week at East Tennessee State, the photos have all been removed from the hallways outside the lockerroom and corridors to the arena floor, the yard-line markers have been taken down from the former sidelines of the inside home of the football team known as “The Dome.” The rolled up artificial turf is being unrolled, not to play host to a traditional Southern Conference rival, but to be cut and placed in other areas of the multi-purpose facility for workouts and batting practice. The walls of the weight room no longer bear the strength records of players whose personal sweat and determination placed them among the elite in the history of the program.

There is a void in college football today, not just because ETSU didn’t answer the call of the voices from the sidelines to preserve a program that has produced doctors, lawyers, policemen, businessmen, bankers, teachers, preachers, and coaches. But the void comes from the reality that there are 63 less opportunities in America for a young man to fulfill his dream of playing college football and the opportunity to earn a degree through blood, sweat, and tears.

As a life-long fan of I-AA, I know that some of the best football is not played in front of 100,000 spectators with multimillion-dollar jumbo-trons where commercials and television time-outs outrank graduation rates and community service. Some of the best college football is played on the fields where “iron men” still exist, where the dreams of the players are not of million dollar shoe contracts… but where the dreams still exist to be the hero of the game, to marry the homecoming queen, and walk across a stage with a diploma in hand to be met by the hopes and dreams of their future.

SouthernEagle02
December 21st, 2006, 08:15 PM
If A regional school like GSU can't take playing schools like us, then why on Earth, even if you were good in I-A, would anyone ever like playing you?
Depends. How much $$$ we would offer or be offered; whether or not playing us would garner them or us quality/style points; and the fact of knowing that usually (minus this year) we bring our 'A' game and put on a good show.


GSU sits at what, 12k roughly? Which is 7k larger than Elon, but anywhere from 10-30k smaller than a ton of other I-A schools? So depending on the comparison, GSU is pretty small.
Actually we are slightly above the 16,500 mark. We are still larger than a good handful of I-A schools.


Say GSU draws 25k to games consistently, but Michigan is drawing what, 102k? You're crowds are then pretty pathetic comparatively too.....
You're comparing apples and oranges


But then again, a loss is a loss whether it is CCSU or Notre Dame.
Yup, a loss is a loss. But we still beat you.:smiley_wi
Honestly dude its all about the $$$$.



There's alot to be gained from being the only FBS school in talent-laden South Georgia, I promise you. With the right coach, they'd be Sun Belt champs in less than 3 years...and moving on to another conference within 6...
Hey thanks for the vote of confidence. And FWIW, I couldn't think of a better partner to move up to I-A with than App.:thumbsup:

74AppState
December 21st, 2006, 09:02 PM
Emory and Henry College had better attendance than ETSU, why would things be any different now?

ASUSig
December 21st, 2006, 09:09 PM
I havn't read all the posts but i've read some that say GSU and ASU should move up, that they are too good for the SoCon. What conference options do they have? CUSA... ACC... SEC? And where would the funding for the other 22 scholarships they have to give out come from? I'm not sure on GSU's stadium cap. but ASU can only hold roughly 17k seated while we've packed 26k in for a reg. season game (8-9k standing/filling the student section which is packed anyway) so ASU would have to build a stadium to fit at least 30k (possible exageration). I would love to see the move, but there would have to be some major fundrasing and accept that either team would lose for a few years before being conference contenders. But given how good the teams are... if I had to predict... 3-6 years for one of the two.

BigApp
December 21st, 2006, 09:21 PM
...ETSU was one of our biggest rivals...

They were?? :eyebrow:

Mr. C
December 21st, 2006, 09:31 PM
Emory and Henry College had better attendance than ETSU, why would things be any different now?
Emory & Henry also had a better, outdoor stadium.

Mr. C
December 21st, 2006, 09:35 PM
Well if ETSU comes back and makes a commitment.... then I personally say let's get Coastal, Samford and ETSU and move along.

Elon and Western were part of the few who weren't against an ETSU waiver, it make take some doing to get Furman and GSU on board, but UTC and App should have some pull in swaying some.
The SoCon is more likely to add one school that plays football to give it nine football-playing schools. Samford seems to be the most likely candidate right now. Coastal Carolina does not have the support of enough SoCon schools and ETSU would seemingly be a longshot right now. Personally, I'd like to see the Bucs back in the SoCon, however.

FunkyV
December 21st, 2006, 10:21 PM
Why does the SoCon want to add Samford? The stadium only holds 6700 people and they are all the way in Alabama. I'm just curious as to Why Samford and not CCU or someone closer.

*****
December 21st, 2006, 10:28 PM
Carolina SoCon schools are skeered of adding CCU I think. Too much recruiting disadvantage for them vs CCU.

FunkyV
December 21st, 2006, 10:30 PM
^ Gotcha, well that still doesn't explain why a small little school in Alabama for the SoCon

I'm not bitching, I'm just honestly curious.

Mr. C
December 21st, 2006, 10:33 PM
Carolina SoCon schools are skeered of adding CCU I think. Too much recruiting disadvantage for them vs CCU.
It's actually the South Carolina schools that have been more strong in their support against Coastal Carolina. I doubt Applachian State is too worried about anyone's recruiting advantage right now. The Mountaineers get some of their best players from South Carolina (anybody ever hear of Armanti Edwards?).

*****
December 21st, 2006, 10:34 PM
^ Gotcha, well that still doesn't explain why a small little school in Alabama for the SoCon
I'm not bitching, I'm just honestly curious.Samford is not a threat to those who oppose CCU (which includes App St).

Mr. C
December 21st, 2006, 10:35 PM
^ Gotcha, well that still doesn't explain why a small little school in Alabama for the SoCon

I'm not bitching, I'm just honestly curious.
They may be trying to appease Chattanooga by adding a school that is close to the Mocs. Also, with Samford being a private school, it is easier to get the support of schools like Furman and Wofford.

FunkyV
December 21st, 2006, 10:39 PM
Thank you both.


But yeah, App has/had some good S.C. talent. Richie Williams, Trey Elder, Armanti Edwards...

rokamortis
December 21st, 2006, 11:21 PM
It's actually the South Carolina schools that have been more strong in their support against Coastal Carolina.

Really? That's contradictory to what I've seen in rumors and innuendo from various sources. Of course, you would know better than I. But the common belief is that Furman and Wofford oppose CCU along with Davidson. Some say the Citadel and I have seen one ASU fan say that ASU does too, but that would go against the '8-3' I've seen bounced around, but of course that doesn't mean anything. I'm interested to see which schools you understand are pro, con, or indifferent and why. I'm genuinely interested. I know you can't post your sources - but I think it would be nice to see where we stand, as you see it.

gophoenix
December 21st, 2006, 11:25 PM
Carolina SoCon schools are skeered of adding CCU I think. Too much recruiting disadvantage for them vs CCU.

Is that right? If so, why aren't UNCG, Elon, Davidson, The Citadel and Western Carolina against them? From everything that is said, Furman and Wofford were the main opponents from the start, and some seem to think App was against them too. Which surprises me that App would be against them, but not Samford.

As for why Samford? Right now, the SoCon only has schools in two metro areas with 1+ million (Davidson in Charlotte which is 1.7 and Elon/UNCG in Greensboro which is 1.4 million). Samford may have the #2 support in Birmingham behind UAB, but it does spread the SoCon out. Everyone complains about the "footprint" until a school outside the footprint is looked at.

If the SoCon is expanding to 14, I'd prefer that every new school participate in the marquis sports (Football, Baseball, M&W Basketbal, M Soccer). But that's just me. I am tired of the schools who don't play in the SoCon for football. And even if Davidson was terrible in the SoCon, I'd still prefer them in here, than out in the Pioneer.

Mr. C
December 21st, 2006, 11:33 PM
Really? That's contradictory to what I've seen in rumors and innuendo from various sources. Of course, you would know better than I. But the common belief is that Furman and Wofford oppose CCU along with Davidson. Some say the Citadel and I have seen one ASU fan say that ASU does too, but that would go against the '8-3' I've seen bounced around, but of course that doesn't mean anything. I'm interested to see which schools you understand are pro, con, or indifferent and why. I'm genuinely interested. I know you can't post your sources - but I think it would be nice to see where we stand, as you see it.
I've heard that Furman and Wofford are strongly against CCU coming in for several reasons. They don't like CCU's academics (just passing along info, I'm not up enough on CCU's academics to make any kind of judgement on how good of a school it is you tell me and I'll know more than I already know on that subject) and they don't want the added recruiting pressure of a fourth SoCon school from the state being included. ASU, from what I've heard, is firmly against it. I don't know the reasons why. I think The Citadel and Western Carolina are more ambivalent than anything else. In talking to some CCU athletic folks recently (can't name names), I got the impression that they had not had ANY official contact at a department level with the SoCon, so that tells you something. I think we're looking at least one more year of status quo, with maybe some announcement at the spring meetings.

rokamortis
December 21st, 2006, 11:46 PM
Thanks.

I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that we won't get an invite, so I'm not too concerned at this point. I would like to see us in the SoCon for the obvious benefits, and I think we would be beneficial to the conference as well. But if they wanted us then we would have been invited already. We just need to plan for life without the SoCon and look towards the future.

I am really curious as to why ASU is against though, I would think they would like to have a school with a demonstrated commitment to athletics, better facilities on the way (7,000 seat arena, 50,000+ sqft fieldhouse, 2,100 more seats in the football stadium), and a fan base that travels fairly well.

As far as a academics are concerned, we have strong education, business, and marine science programs. We used to be pretty much an open enrollment school but have increased the GPA and standardized test scores to levels of many other SoCon schools while growing tremendously. Of course we aren't at the level of the privates, but that really isn't our mission either. With a new president set to arrive in 6 months I think there will be a lot more positive changes in store for CCU.

mistersykes
December 22nd, 2006, 01:31 AM
Thanks.

I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that we won't get an invite, so I'm not too concerned at this point. I would like to see us in the SoCon for the obvious benefits, and I think we would be beneficial to the conference as well. But if they wanted us then we would have been invited already. We just need to plan for life without the SoCon and look towards the future.

I am really curious as to why ASU is against though, I would think they would like to have a school with a demonstrated commitment to athletics, better facilities on the way (7,000 seat arena, 50,000+ sqft fieldhouse, 2,100 more seats in the football stadium), and a fan base that travels fairly well.

As far as a academics are concerned, we have strong education, business, and marine science programs. We used to be pretty much an open enrollment school but have increased the GPA and standardized test scores to levels of many other SoCon schools while growing tremendously. Of course we aren't at the level of the privates, but that really isn't our mission either. With a new president set to arrive in 6 months I think there will be a lot more positive changes in store for CCU.

You guys are really puttin' it together down there! I know you'll enjoy that no matter what conference you're in.:thumbsup:

youwouldno
December 22nd, 2006, 03:41 AM
I don't think Furman's opposition, such as it is, has much to do with recruiting. Georgia is Furman's talent base, and Alabama is significant, too... so adding Samford instead of CCU would have more or less the same result. Lately the Paladins have been recruiting more in Florida, Tennessee, and a bit in Kentucky. Wofford might be more concerned... they don't have a big recruiting budget.

Cocky
December 22nd, 2006, 07:24 AM
Is that right? If so, why aren't UNCG, Elon, Davidson, The Citadel and Western Carolina against them? From everything that is said, Furman and Wofford were the main opponents from the start, and some seem to think App was against them too. Which surprises me that App would be against them, but not Samford.

As for why Samford? Right now, the SoCon only has schools in two metro areas with 1+ million (Davidson in Charlotte which is 1.7 and Elon/UNCG in Greensboro which is 1.4 million). Samford may have the #2 support in Birmingham behind UAB, but it does spread the SoCon out. Everyone complains about the "footprint" until a school outside the footprint is looked at.

If the SoCon is expanding to 14, I'd prefer that every new school participate in the marquis sports (Football, Baseball, M&W Basketbal, M Soccer). But that's just me. I am tired of the schools who don't play in the SoCon for football. And even if Davidson was terrible in the SoCon, I'd still prefer them in here, than out in the Pioneer.

Samford maybe 4th in B'ham. UAT, Auburn, UAB, and probably JSU get more coverage in this market. Samford basketball gets more coverage than JSU but it turns around come football time.

OL FU
December 22nd, 2006, 07:26 AM
Carolina SoCon schools are skeered of adding CCU I think. Too much recruiting disadvantage for them vs CCU.


Ralph, skeered has nothing to do with it. Furman and Wofford wants private academic schools. You don't read these threads:p

mcveyrl
December 22nd, 2006, 07:54 AM
Just got some inside scoop that Stanton's going to give it his approval this morning.

rokamortis
December 22nd, 2006, 08:05 AM
Just got some inside scoop that Stanton's going to give it his approval this morning.

Good for ETSU - I'm glad the alumni/boosters kept pushing to make it an issue at the school.

mcveyrl
December 22nd, 2006, 08:13 AM
Of course, if that's wrong, I'm blaming my source...

lizrdgizrd
December 22nd, 2006, 09:10 AM
Thanks.

I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that we won't get an invite, so I'm not too concerned at this point. I would like to see us in the SoCon for the obvious benefits, and I think we would be beneficial to the conference as well. But if they wanted us then we would have been invited already. We just need to plan for life without the SoCon and look towards the future.

I am really curious as to why ASU is against though, I would think they would like to have a school with a demonstrated commitment to athletics, better facilities on the way (7,000 seat arena, 50,000+ sqft fieldhouse, 2,100 more seats in the football stadium), and a fan base that travels fairly well.

As far as a academics are concerned, we have strong education, business, and marine science programs. We used to be pretty much an open enrollment school but have increased the GPA and standardized test scores to levels of many other SoCon schools while growing tremendously. Of course we aren't at the level of the privates, but that really isn't our mission either. With a new president set to arrive in 6 months I think there will be a lot more positive changes in store for CCU.
I wonder if the SoCon is waiting to see what your new president is going to be like before they consider CCU. A change at the top can make or break a team on the rise.

rokamortis
December 22nd, 2006, 09:32 AM
I wonder if the SoCon is waiting to see what your new president is going to be like before they consider CCU. A change at the top can make or break a team on the rise.

I think that may be a reason, but the reasons we've heard so far are academics and being a public institution. Any president that comes in would be a fool to not continue with the momentum. They might, but that would not be a good move. We obvioulsy have some issues to be resolved, but I think things will only improve - I could be wrong though.

mcveyrl
December 22nd, 2006, 09:34 AM
I just found an online copy of the task force report..

http://www.tricities.com/tristate/tri/news/specials/etsu-football-report.htmlhttp://www.tricities.com/tristate/tri/news/specials/etsu-football-report.html

Haven't read it yet though...

mcveyrl
December 22nd, 2006, 09:44 AM
Looking at the report...

Looks like the goal is to start play in '09-'10 since the traveling budget starts then.

The gender equity sports looked at in the study are:

Swimming - I don't know why they put "Women's" before swimming...I guess just to clarify that adding Men's Swimming would not help Title IX issues.

Rifle
Rowing
Field Hockey

I also think that a stadium not located in Johnson City would fail miserably...

OL FU
December 22nd, 2006, 09:47 AM
Looking at the report...

Looks like the goal is to start play in '09-'10 since the traveling budget starts then.

The gender equity sports looked at in the study are:

Swimming - I don't know why they put "Women's" before swimming...I guess just to clarify that adding Men's Swimming would not help Title IX issues.

Rifle
Rowing
Field Hockey

I also think that a stadium not located in Johnson City would fail miserably...

Are the talking about a stadium outside of Johnson City?

ETSU-06
December 22nd, 2006, 09:51 AM
I also think that a stadium not located in Johnson City would fail miserably...[/QUOTE]

You've got that right! I think even an off campus stadium somewhere in JC would fail too. Alumni and fans want to come to campus to relive the past and enjoy the gameday experience. If they go off campus the money to fund this deal will never be seen.

ETSU-06
December 22nd, 2006, 09:52 AM
I also think that a stadium not located in Johnson City would fail miserably...

You've got that right! I think even an off campus stadium somewhere in JC would fail too. Alumni and fans want to come to campus to relive the past and enjoy the gameday experience. If they go off campus the money to fund this deal will never be seen.

mcveyrl
December 22nd, 2006, 09:54 AM
Are the talking about a stadium outside of Johnson City?


The task force questionnaire inquired whether faculty would attend games if the stadium was in the Tri-Cities region but not in Johnson City.

I assume they're thinking about trying to partner with Bristol or Kingsport. Bad idea, IMO. ETSU has "campuses" in each city, but they are nothing more than a couple of rooms. I also think that a semi-pro team (Tennessee Raptors) has recently relocated to Kingsport. That might be an incentive, but I don't see a city building a brand new stadium for a bad semi-pro team and a semi-fledgling football program.

TexasTerror
December 22nd, 2006, 10:07 AM
After reading the study...

I'm impressed by the student response. Over 80% said they wanted football back and over 80% said they would attend games. Of course, only 61% wanted to pay the fee, but that can be expected. The students are overwhelmingly in support of football and that's critical...

Then, you have the faculty who don't seem to embrace it as much...

ETSU-06
December 22nd, 2006, 10:13 AM
After reading the study...

I'm impressed by the student response. Over 80% said they wanted football back and over 80% said they would attend games. Of course, only 61% wanted to pay the fee, but that can be expected. The students are overwhelmingly in support of football and that's critical...

Then, you have the faculty who don't seem to embrace it as much...

I wouldn't be suprised if the faculty at Ohio State or Florida showed little support for their football programs. These profs are paranoid that sports will suck away their funding for the theatre, etc programs. They only see the academic side of college, and don't realize what athletics can do.

gophoenix
December 22nd, 2006, 05:18 PM
I think that may be a reason, but the reasons we've heard so far are academics and being a public institution. Any president that comes in would be a fool to not continue with the momentum. They might, but that would not be a good move. We obvioulsy have some issues to be resolved, but I think things will only improve - I could be wrong though.

Saying the private schools are against publics and public schools are against privates is nothing but message board non-sense. Some fans like to push this agenda; but there's no proof of this.

As for the private schools being scared? If that's the case, everyone should be scared. Coastal is recruiting against many of the schools anyway, big deal. Plus, you have a nice location. There are tons of things going for you here that could directly impact from App to The Citadel.

Academics. This could be a valid concern. Hear me out first though. It wasn't long ago that Coastal had retention problems across the board. Sure, it appears to have changed now, but it takes years for public opinion to correct itself.

Being in SC. Another cop out answer if you ask me.

We don't know what any of the Presidents had to say. In fact, we don't really know much about what happened or if anything happened at all. And just because you have the same fans agreeing with themselves on why coastal may or may not have made the cut, doesn't make those reasons valid. So you have to take it all with a grain of salt.

The Cats
December 24th, 2006, 10:12 PM
Just in time for GSU and ASU to make an exit, stage right...

Or be doomed in a conference with Samford, Elon, Western Carolina, Eastern Tenn., and the Citadel.

Erk wanted us to be in DI, and to him, DI meant "Southern California, Georgia, Notre Dame, those sort of folks." NOT Eastern Tenn, Elon, and Samford...

Don't let that SoCon back door hit your a$$ on the way out. xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx :hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray: :hurray:

get real about GSU playing Southern Cal and Notre Dame xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx

SoccerSmells
December 25th, 2006, 06:36 PM
If I hear things correctly, ETSU has plans to bulldoze the Memorial Center-Mini Dome in a few years. That parking area there would be a great location to build a stadium and a new basketball arena. Combine the two field houses, similar to how WCU has it with Ramsey and that might be a good combo.

As for Coastal and the Southern Conference? Who cares at this point. CCU has a good fit within the Big South currently in all sports, and is doing well. With some other schools coming on board soon, the auto bid situation will at least be in play by 2008-09, maybe 2009-10.

Why try to date the girl who won't give you the proper time of day? Not worth it. :twocents:

SoccerSmells
December 25th, 2006, 06:40 PM
... the Big South by 2011 could very well look like this in football.

Campbell
CCU
Charlestown South
ETSU
G-WU
Liberty
Presby
VMI
Wingate

And that would be just fine by me.

The Gadfly
December 25th, 2006, 07:14 PM
... the Big South by 2011 could very well look like this in football.

Campbell
CCU
Charlestown South
ETSU
G-WU
Liberty
Presby
VMI
Wingate

And that would be just fine by me.

I have to agree with every team BUT Campbell. They stabbed the BSC in the back when they left. Wingate is following PC in the way of building up it's athletic programs and facilities. I can also see another Tennesee school coming in if ETSU joins: Carson-Newman. They just built a brand new football stadium...
http://news.cn.edu/athletics/Football/New%20Burke-Tarr%20Stadium/Aerial-Stadium0037.gif
http://news.cn.edu/athletics/Football/New%20Burke-Tarr%20Stadium/Aerial-Stadium0080.gif
http://news.cn.edu/athletics/Football/New%20Burke-Tarr%20Stadium/Aerial-Stadium0079.gif

... and are now working to build a new baseball stadium.

When will ETSU have football running?

rokamortis
December 26th, 2006, 06:53 AM
With some other schools coming on board soon, the auto bid situation will at least be in play by 2008-09, maybe 2009-10.


It takes 2 years playing with 6+ teams before the BSC would be eligible for an autobid. So even if a team gets added in 2008 or 2009, we won't see the benefit until 2 years later. PC won't count until 2012.

mcveyrl
December 27th, 2006, 03:43 PM
If I hear things correctly, ETSU has plans to bulldoze the Memorial Center-Mini Dome in a few years. That parking area there would be a great location to build a stadium and a new basketball arena. Combine the two field houses, similar to how WCU has it with Ramsey and that might be a good combo.




I heard they had to keep the Mini-Dome because it's considered a "classroom building" for funding purposes. If they knock it down, they'll have to build something else. Plus, I think they would still use it for indoor track stuff, too.

mcveyrl
December 27th, 2006, 03:45 PM
I have to agree with every team BUT Campbell. They stabbed the BSC in the back when they left. Wingate is following PC in the way of building up it's athletic programs and facilities. I can also see another Tennesee school coming in if ETSU joins: Carson-Newman. They just built a brand new football stadium...

When will ETSU have football running?

You'd have to wait for C-N to move up (5 years, I think) and I haven't heard of any plans to do so.

I think ETSU said no sooner than 2010, longer if needed for the funds.

PantherRob82
December 27th, 2006, 05:46 PM
It takes 2 years playing with 6+ teams before the BSC would be eligible for an autobid. So even if a team gets added in 2008 or 2009, we won't see the benefit until 2 years later. PC won't count until 2012.

oh no, another conference wanting an autobid.

gatadotcom
December 27th, 2006, 06:27 PM
The question remains for Appalachian State and Georgia Southern . . .

http://www.gata.com/gataimages/futurechoice.jpg

PantherRob82
December 27th, 2006, 06:37 PM
The question remains for Appalachian State and Georgia Southern . . .

http://www.gata.com/gataimages/futurechoice.jpg

Interesting. What conferences have talked about this expansion. Besides the possible issues with the CAA and the possible end of the GWFC, I haven't heard anything about shakeups in any D-I conference.

ATrain
December 27th, 2006, 07:47 PM
Yeah, that map leaves out the CAA (don't forget, ODU will be playing football in 2009) and 2 important MEAC members: Norfolk St. and Hampton.

Personally, I'm interested in knowing what BS (formerly I-A) conferences are going to be expanding and who they're going after?

*****
December 27th, 2006, 10:21 PM
The question remains for Appalachian State and Georgia Southern . . . What's the valid question? Maybe you have some substantiation that makes your's a valid question (besides the huge graphic you made) for Appalachian State and Georgia Southern? :confused:

Lots of assumptions:
1. By 2010 several I-A (sic) conferences will expand.
2. By 2010 several I-A (sic) conferences will recruit members from smaller I-A (sic) conferences.
3. Several smaller I-A (sic) conferences will then recruit members from I-AA (sic) conferences.