UNLV

I can see Terror is tears...

WB getting screwed by the officials.

[quote name="SabineRavine" post="850415" timestamp="1284845257"] What exactly makes his opinion delusional? [/quote] "Personally, I expected us to lose to McNEese 56-0.  Anyway I fully expect yall to beat the crap out of us. "

[quote name="westendfirst" post="850353" timestamp="1284837327"] [quote author=pwdonaldson link=topic=72367.msg848171#msg848171 date=1284586877] You've talked about this topic to the point that even a visitor to your board is getting nauseous.  No one's even talking about this coming Saturday's reality check at Southeastern Louisiana, one of those little po-dunk Louisiana schools that you don't want to be in the same conference with. When you announce concrete plans to increase stadium capacity to 30k, then we'll start talking because there is no way you will continue to average 15k+ per home game.  Texas State will never get out of the shadows of UT.  Lamar and Sam simply don't have the fan support or population level needed.  UTSA.....maybe, if San Antonio shows they care, which to this point, they haven't. If the WAC continues with its rumored expansion plan, the Sun Belch may no longer be the doormat of FBS.  Seriously?  Games with Montana, Montana State, Louisiana Tech, Texas State, UTSA, San Jose State.....this is going to be a better fit for you than the Southland.  I would encourage all of you to look at McNeese.  They average more "real" fans than ULM and ULL.  They beat ULM and ULL when they play them.  They participate in a football playoff instead of hoping to be rewarded with a game in the New Orleans Bowl.  It CAN work in FCS and does work in FCS.  The grass isn't always greener on the other side my friends. As for reality......Hope to see some of you in Hammond this weekend where we'll show you what the SLC is like when there's tape on you.  You, just like Texas State, don't even dominate in the SLC and you think you are worthy of moving up to the next level.  Get a grip.  Win some games, win some championships, actually SELL OUT your stadium on a consistant basis, and then talk like you deserve it. [/quote] Settle down sparky!  For starters, there are only a handful of people talking about FBS.  These, people, in my opinoon, are delusional!  I am totally excited abut the FCS and about playing in the SLC!  I think the SLC is a great football conference.  Personally, I expected us to lose to McNEese 56-0.  Anyway I fully expect yall to beat the crap out of us. [/quote]Clearly you were delusional! On the other hand, I predicted a 3 point loss. I also predict LU goes FBS in 2-3 years.

[quote name="pwdonaldson" post="848587" timestamp="1284661550"] I'm not hijacking this board anymore, so I'm only going to comment on the Lamar and SLU game moving forward.  I'm also a Sam alum, so I'll be back to talk about that game and already have my tickets. My last comment on this thread is this: 50% of the teams that you would join in the WAC will be teams who have moved up from FCS to FBS to save the WAC.  These are the same teams people on this board are saying fans will not pay money to see.  For every Boise there are 10 ULLs, ULMs, North Texas', Arkansas State, Florida Atlantics, Troys, etc. [/quote]Yet none of those schools or any FBS is going back to FCS. They must not be smart.

[quote name="ispeakjive" post="848356" timestamp="1284607278"] That's a fair question, but it is ultimately apples and oranges.  Boise St. is the only big time program in Idaho and in that region.  They get their pick of the players in that region and have been successful enough to recruit outside of that region as well.  I love Lamar, but we would be competing to be the eighth pick of FBS recruits in the state behind UT, A&M, Tech, UH, Baylor, UTEP, and Rice.  And that doesn't even factor in LSU, Oklahoma, North Texas, and the other FBS schools in the state and region.  Lamar can fill a FCS niche here especially if Texas State and UTSA move up and have a very successful program for years to come. [/quote]Exactly like they did when they dropped the football program playing I-AA/FCS. Community support will once again dry up if LU continue to bring in "who are you" schools. That is a fact backed up by Lamars own history.

[quote name="pwdonaldson" post="848171" timestamp="1284586877"] You've talked about this topic to the point that even a visitor to your board is getting nauseous.  No one's even talking about this coming Saturday's reality check at Southeastern Louisiana, one of those little po-dunk Louisiana schools that you don't want to be in the same conference with. When you announce concrete plans to increase stadium capacity to 30k, then we'll start talking because there is no way you will continue to average 15k+ per home game.  Texas State will never get out of the shadows of UT.  Lamar and Sam simply don't have the fan support or population level needed.  UTSA.....maybe, if San Antonio shows they care, which to this point, they haven't. If the WAC continues with its rumored expansion plan, the Sun Belch may no longer be the doormat of FBS.  Seriously?  Games with Montana, Montana State, Louisiana Tech, Texas State, UTSA, San Jose State.....this is going to be a better fit for you than the Southland.  I would encourage all of you to look at McNeese.  They average more "real" fans than ULM and ULL.  They beat ULM and ULL when they play them.  They participate in a football playoff instead of hoping to be rewarded with a game in the New Orleans Bowl.  It CAN work in FCS and does work in FCS.  The grass isn't always greener on the other side my friends. As for reality......Hope to see some of you in Hammond this weekend where we'll show you what the SLC is like when there's tape on you.  You, just like Texas State, don't even dominate in the SLC and you think you are worthy of moving up to the next level.  Get a grip.  Win some games, win some championships, actually SELL OUT your stadium on a consistant basis, and then talk like you deserve it. [/quote]What population is needed? Do we need Beaumont msa to be 1 million? Also LU played at the highest level and at I-AA. Which one had the better community support? be honest.

[quote name="ispeakjive" post="848164" timestamp="1284585690"] Obviously, if the SLC changes dramatically over the next three or four years, the conference affiliation may have to change, but at this point, I would rather the program go in the direction of McNeese rather than North Texas.  I don't even know that FBS is feasible in terms of facilities, stadium size, and money available to the program. [/quote]Why did you pick North Texas and not Boise st as your example?

[quote name="SabineRavine" post="847840" timestamp="1284549116"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=72367.msg847797#msg847797 date=1284522052] Everyone see how you cherry pick and dismiss away at my post. [/quote] LOL at "cherry picking".  Look back at your posts for great examples of cherry picking.  All I've asked for is your hard evidence; all I get is wishful thinking and a lot of dodging.  When I counter your arbitrary justifications, we see how you react.  I'm OK with that; just be prepared to explain the next time you are critical of someone bringing facts to the table.  [quote author=UNLV link=topic=72367.msg847797#msg847797 date=1284522052]You are not interested in what I posted.[/quote] I'm interested in where you get your information.  You rely on 20+ year old data to support your ideas.  No business model would ever move forward following that logic.   And it appears that our LU administration agrees.  [quote author=UNLV link=topic=72367.msg847797#msg847797 date=1284522052]If it was, all fcs move up results would be the same[/quote] Bingo.  Thanks for supporting my point.  [/quote]How about giving the forum hard evidence FCS will work at LU?

[quote name="SabineRavine" post="847686" timestamp="1284514455"] That's the lack of justification I was expecting.  Surely UNLV's professors taught you that past performance is no indication of future results.  I'm assuming you are talking about attendance values from 30 years ago.  Do you think LU administrators should be using that as their rationale, or should they be looking at hard data from similar models?    You said LU became a flop when switching to FCS.  Would you be willing to say there are no schools that became a flop (poor record, low attendance, budgetary problems) when switching to FBS? I'm curious though . . . you say a "packed house" occurred when Lamar played at the highest level.  I saw that when Lamar plays an NAIA team, a sellout.  It appears that there is no lack of community support.  So, why the need to move up? [/quote]USF and Boise st didn't flop. Similar models is no indication of future results. If it was, all fcs move up results would be the same. I posted why I think LU should move up, many times. You are not interested in what I posted. Everyone see how you cherry pick and dismiss away at my post. Finally, Dr Simmons and the Legend Tubbs agrees with me, LU should move up. Convo over...

If Fresno and Nevada is forced to stay in the WAC until 2013, That give LU 4 years to get ready for FBS.

[quote name="SabineRavine" post="847394" timestamp="1284489649"] So you're predicting a 150% increase in average home attendance if Lamar goes FBS?  That's quite a prediction, given this board's opinion of how strongly SETX fans wanted football back.  Where will the extra 15,000 (assuming the visiting team FCS or FBS team brings the same proportion of fans) attending fans come from for FBS, and why wouldn't they show up for FCS games?  Please provide evidence for the 150% increase. I'm sure the best model would be looking at what attendance has been at other schools before vs. after making the FBS switch. [/quote] The evidence is in LU's past. Packed house when LU played at the highest level, a flop when LU dropped to I-AA/FCS. [quote] Any feasibility study is going to have to evaluate a worst-case scenario.  16 million doesn't sound so arbitrary, so I'm guessing you obtained this value from a similar-sized school that made or is making the switch?  However, in an evaluation of cost effectiveness (i.e. profit/loss), "that depends on several/other factors" won't work.  I'm hoping our administration doesn't look at it from a "that depends" focus.   So we will average the same team record whether we're FBS or FCS?  I'm guessing that you are assuming our level of recruits/signees immediately increases proportionally.  I believe there have been 18 or 19 FCS-to-FBS schools since the late 1980s.  Can I assume your 7-5 record parallels what happened at these schools regardless of the fact that we will be (according to your schedule) within five years of being a start-up team? So you're saying that we will see a 150% increase in attendance and average seven wins a year after becoming FBS.  Before I comment on that I'm going to wait to see where your numbers came from.  I hope they're not all arbitrary.   [b]"If your child is slow in the morning, he/she can miss the bus"[/b].   ???  That is your rationale? [/quote]Again, when LU played at the highest level, even when losing, full community support. One year in the 80's, hmmm maybe 88 I can't remember, LU was ranked as high as number 11. Less than 3,000 at the home games. Conclusion using your logic, I-AA/FCS failed at Lamar. Lamar should not repeat that mistake.

[quote name="kingkat99" post="847161" timestamp="1284475879"] [quote author=Texantagonise link=topic=72967.msg847146#msg847146 date=1284474906] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=72967.msg847126#msg847126 date=1284471624] You don't see UTSA fans trying to stomp out UTSA growth... So who replaces UTSA and Texas st in the SLC?    I think Tarleton st and Kingsville. [/quote] Trying to compare San Antonio to Beaumont is insane. San Antonio population 1,200,000 [b]JEFFERSON COUNTY[/b] 252,051.  ONLY a MILLION people separate us from them.  That is like comparing apples to kumquats, you cant be serious.  I would like to sere Lamar move to FBS also but the WAC makes no sense. If it was so great North Texas would be all over it.  But as it has been posted on here UNT wants no part of the WAC and its travel distances.  [glow=red,2,300]Two other schools that were confirmed by these same sources that have been prominently mentioned to be very high on the WAC's list, are Montana and Montana State. [/glow] Montana, Montana St., Texas St., and UTSA that sounds like a nice [b]FCS[/b] division.  :o [b]Montana & Montana ST are 1780 and 1980 miles away from Beaumont.  Adding even more to the travel expenses.[/b] I think Whitney Houston said it best " The WAC is CRACK!" or something like that.  ;D [/quote] The thought of these travel expenses and more were no doubt apart of Lynn Hickey getting her feelings hurt when the SLC voted that they cant field an FBS football team in another conference and then play all non-revenue sports in the SLC...its on thing to send a football team out west a few times but to say that volleyball, basketball, baseball, softball etc has to make those same trips is a hard pill to swallow. [/quote]The most logical plan for the WAC is to build a eastern division around Tech and use non-football sports to take short non-conference trips and use the long trips money for WAC conference western trips. All balance out if done correctly. LU going to the WAC won't break the bank...

[quote name="Texantagonise" post="847146" timestamp="1284474906"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=72967.msg847126#msg847126 date=1284471624] You don't see UTSA fans trying to stomp out UTSA growth... So who replaces UTSA and Texas st in the SLC?    I think Tarleton st and Kingsville. [/quote] Trying to compare San Antonio to Beaumont is insane. San Antonio population 1,200,000 [b]JEFFERSON COUNTY[/b] 252,051.  ONLY a MILLION people separate us from them.  That is like comparing apples to kumquats, you cant be serious.  [/quote]Yet LU brings in more fan support. Can you also post Lubbocks pop?  Ruston? Monroe? College station? [quote] I would like to sere Lamar move to FBS also but the WAC makes no sense. If it was so great North Texas would be all over it.  But as it has been posted on here UNT wants no part of the WAC and its travel distances.  [/quote]UNT is in the Sunbelt. If LU was in the Sunbelt I would oppose going to the WAC too... [quote] [glow=red,2,300]Two other schools that were confirmed by these same sources that have been prominently mentioned to be very high on the WAC's list, are Montana and Montana State. [/glow] Montana, Montana St., Texas St., and UTSA that sounds like a nice [b]FCS[/b] division.  :o Montana & Montana ST are 1780 and 1980 miles away from Beaumont.  Adding even more to the travel expenses. I think Whitney Houston said it best " The WAC is CRACK!" or something like that.  ;D [/quote]Hey North, no  Kahunas here.

You don't see UTSA fans trying to stomp out UTSA growth... So who replaces UTSA and Texas st in the SLC?    I think Tarleton st and Kingsville.

[quote name="SabineRavine" post="846369" timestamp="1284392695"] As I expected UNLV you delivered . . . two sentences.  And avoided the question I asked regarding your justifications.   So, to make it simpler for you, for the first round I will frame my questions so that you can simply reply and fill in under each.  This is regarding your justification for our need to quickly move up to FBS.  I am curious to see your rationale, or whether you have thought those out.   Expected average home attendance each year over the next five if we stay in FCS.  You can use SELU as a good comparson if you need a model. [/quote] 10k [quote] Expected average home attendance each year over the next five years if we go FBS (were we to begin play in 2012). [/quote]25k [quote] Expected annual operating cost if we move to FBS (including travel).  You can list the difference between the current (FCS) budget if you'd like. [/quote] That depends on several factors...around 16million [quote] Expected annual [i]increase[/i] in revenues expected if we move to FBS. [/quote] Again, that depends on other factors [quote] Expectation of the biggest non-conference team you expect we will host IN BEAUMONT each of the first five years of FBS. [/quote] Baylor, Okie st, Kansas, Iowa, BYU, Houston, Texas tech, Colorado st, TCU, all these are possible [quote] FBS requirements we will currently need to address in order to officially be eligible for FBS, and how long (months) it will take to make those adjustments.   [/quote]If we got the call today, LU would have 2-3 years to get ready. [quote] Expected enrollment increase if Lamar becomes an FBS program. [/quote]5k in 5 years. [quote] Expected season record of LU football over the first five years if we go FBS (list expected FCS season record next to each in parentheses) [/quote] I think LU can average 7-5 records in FBS or FCS [quote] These are basic questions from any feasibility study, with a couple added specific to the sport.  Please be prepared to justify your answers.  This is only for you, UNLV, so I'm hoping others don't reply with their estimates.  You are highly critical of others who want to take a slower, rational approach.  As a result, I would just like to see the logical basis for your obsession with Lamar moving up to FBS as quick as you want. [/quote]The slow approach huh...If your child is slow in the morning, he/she can miss the bus.

[quote name="SabineRavine" post="846437" timestamp="1284399214"] North--those are valid points you make, but I can assure you there's no hostility and I apologize if it appeared as such.  However, every time someone posts about other conferences or the future of Lamar football, UNLV jumps in with statements about how we need to immediately seek FBS status.  When others reply with the vast amount of work, detail, and requirements involved, not to mention the fact that we are a start-up program, UNLV interjects with how they are not 'forward thinkers', or evidently they are content with being second tier.  He has yet to provide evidence that we can afford/maintain FBS status while making tremendous assumptions of what will happen should the switch be made.  He's critical of the FCS approach others suggest, so I'm simply asking him to post the numbers and evidence he has for making the switch to FBS.  It currently appears that his justification is that the door is closing, and we need to move now.  Much like a real estate agent telling a prospective buyer that someone else is looking at the property, so you need to "sign now".  No matter whether you can afford it, just do it.   UNLV, I'm looking forward to analyzing your numbers tonight.   [/quote]Not true. Before that huge WAC door opened, I was ok with LU waiting 5 years to go FBS, if possible. Why? because there was nowhere for LU or UTSA or Texas st to go 6 months ago. I knew the door would open in the next 5 years but I didn't know it woud open this year.

[quote name="YouCanUseaMint" post="846381" timestamp="1284393561"]To those who are against the move, you all have very good points on why this does not make sense. Will revenues increase? They could, but probably not. Will travel expenses increase? Absolutely - especially if the WAC is your preferred destination. Could you become the next ULM? You very well could, even more so if you don't do something about increasing your budget. But at the end of the day, if your goal is to see healthy FBS/BCS programs play on your turf (which will have an extreme boost to school pride and identity), you are out of luck. [/quote]Why do you not use this to oppose Texas st moving up?

[quote name="SabineRavine" post="846369" timestamp="1284392695"] As I expected UNLV you delivered . . . two sentences.  And avoided the question I asked regarding your justifications.   So, to make it simpler for you, for the first round I will frame my questions so that you can simply reply and fill in under each.  This is regarding your justification for our need to quickly move up to FBS.  I am curious to see your rationale, or whether you have thought those out.   Expected average home attendance each year over the next five if we stay in FCS.  You can use SELU as a good comparson if you need a model. Expected average home attendance each year over the next five years if we go FBS (were we to begin play in 2012). Expected annual operating cost if we move to FBS (including travel).  You can list the difference between the current (FCS) budget if you'd like. Expected annual [i]increase[/i] in revenues expected if we move to FBS. Expectation of the biggest non-conference team you expect we will host IN BEAUMONT each of the first five years of FBS. FBS requirements we will currently need to address in order to officially be eligible for FBS, and how long (months) it will take to make those adjustments.   Expected enrollment increase if Lamar becomes an FBS program. Expected season record of LU football over the first five years if we go FBS (list expected FCS season record next to each in parentheses) These are basic questions from any feasibility study, with a couple added specific to the sport.  Please be prepared to justify your answers.  This is only for you, UNLV, so I'm hoping others don't reply with their estimates.  You are highly critical of others who want to take a slower, rational approach.  As a result, I would just like to see the logical basis for your obsession with Lamar moving up to FBS as quick as you want. [/quote]I don't have time to answer your questions now, maybe tonight. However I do expect all numbers to go up in FBS. 5 years from now playing FCS, I expect average 10k home average attendance playing non-conference Incarnate or Mississippi college. 5 years from now playing FBS, I expect average 25k home average attendance playing non-conference Baylor or Oklahoma st. The FBS door is open now, in 5 years that door maybe closed. Why is that so hard to undrertstand?

[quote name="SabineRavine" post="846325" timestamp="1284389086"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=72367.msg846292#msg846292 date=1284386738]Think small, win nothing. [/quote] UNLV, two things continue to amaze me on this board: your unfounded disdain for TexasTerror and your obsession with Lamar Football's status.  Wildcat58 comes along and makes a well-justified post about how Lamar needs to advance with caution, and as usual your reply brings nothing to the table other than Lamar's biggest football success that happened 30 years ago.  You obviously have no understanding of things like feasibility studies.  I, for one, am glad that the leadership of Lamar responsible for bringing football back does not have your "we just need to . . ." attitude--LU would likely be bankrupt with a lot of people asking where the justification was for doing what they did.  So, I'll ask you the same.  Whereas you haven't really ever provided backing to support your reasoning, please now provide us with some justification regarding LU's capacity to move up to FBS.  I'm looking for your financial estimates as well as your expectations of income and expectations of our results on the field after the move, in particular.  Let us decide if your criticisms for us not doing it match how easily you think it can be accomplished.  And please response with something more than your typical one or two sentence diatribe.  If you rather choose to attack me in your post, I'll assume you cannot provide these justifications.  [/quote]One of those LU leaders said it very clear, I-AA/FCS will not work in Beaumont. I know I know, lets pretend he didn't said it and go back to dreaming about big success and filled stands at the Lamar vs Kingsville game.

[quote name="wildcat58" post="846008" timestamp="1284347380"] I cant for the life of me figure out the stupid subject of lamar going FBS. For what? We have had no football for 21 years, now we are back with a great FCS! facility and some good local talent. We can recruit and take athletes from Mcneese and SFA and other schools and in a few years have an opportunity to establish a solid program at the FCS level. We could maybe become like Montana, Appalachian St,and Richmond and have a annually ranked team. In doing so we could have continued local excitement, success, and a full stadium, and compete for a real FCS championship settled on the field.I love texas football at all levels and understand somewhat the desire to play at a higher level , but to what end?  Your dreaming if you think lamar could ever recruit well enough to challenge any big schools. What is the purpose of playing on a FCS level and bringing big schools in to play here.yeah that would be great  TCU 68 Lamar 3,   Texas ATM 51 lamar 10,   Uof H 65 lamar 16  baylor 47  lamar 13, yeah that would be great fun. Hey look at us , look what we did, we went FCS and brought in big name schools for all to see, and in our first three years we went 5-31-0. We beat 2 FBS teams and UL monroe, North tx, and Ark state. wow! now the area fans we could have made happy being a solid FCS team now do not care to support a losing program. Complaints begin, meetings are held,football is to expensive and BOOM right back to 1989. No football. Be glad we are back let us prosper at this level in the SLC. Go Big RED. [/quote]The samething was said when football was dropped. LU dropping football means more money for basketball therefore LU can become this big time basketball school and the community will come out in support. The very same logic. BTW, Lamar beat national ranked Baylor, but lets forget that and pretend it away so we can focus on your fake " baylor 47  lamar 13". Think small, win nothing.

[quote name="YouCanUseaMint" post="845449" timestamp="1284306441"] [quote author=UNLV link=topic=72726.msg844453#msg844453 date=1284215462]This is what get at me. UTSA and Texas st joining the WAC helps stabilize the WAC. However getting more schools in the region like LU, ULL, UNT, Ark st, etc etc would be better than UTSA and Texas st alone. Therefore Texas st should be cheering on a LU invite but yet our Texas st friend here is not smart enough to understand this logic. Must be a bobcat IQ thing. [/quote] No doubt more regional teams would help us out. But, if the whole freaking Southland moves to the WAC with us, then it would not be worth it - might as well stay FCS. If Lamar moves up, Sam won't want to be left behind.. and then we are back where we started. [/quote]I see Terror has your mind in thinking Sam has tied itself to LU. Knock on wood, wake up. If the WAC invites LU, there is no law that says the WAC must invite Sam. Stop being so naive to everything Terror tells you.

[quote name="HoopInsider_Cooper" post="845222" timestamp="1284260138"] [font=Courier]Great atmosphere! Very hot tho. Heard dozens were treated by EMS for heat including band members. Actually glad it was a close win, bring some people back down to earth and remember its a 1st year program. Remember, teams now have film on the Cards so it will not get any easier! PS...anyone here the PA announcer keep telling the fans to stand up and make noise when LU had the ball? LOL...then LU got a false start. [/font] [/quote]Oh come on dude. When LU lost by 3 to Mcneese you were quick to point out how Mcneese could have scored more if not for a few fumble. However LU could have score 28 points more if not for a few red zone fumbles and ints. Why the double standard?

[quote name="NorthoftheBorder" post="844069" timestamp="1284176709"] [quote author=coachacola link=topic=72726.msg843968#msg843968 date=1284175037] Going FBS is more of a long term goal than a short term goal.  A year or two ago Dr. Simmons said it probably wouldn't happen while he was president of LU.  Then just this past year either him or the AD said they were looking to go FBS in 4 or 5 years.  It's all about money so Lamar still needs to be talking to FBS conferences behind the scenes, even if they don't plan on moving up for a while. [/quote] Absolutely, positively right Coachacola.  And if the right deal comes up, then the powers that be need to be in a position to move.  That means that they should be having meaningful discussions with the money power broker supporters now so that they could be lining up the proper support in case the right opportunity opens up.  That said, one of the best things that can also happen is that this first team surpasses any expectations for a start up program and really generates and maintains major support from the Golden Triangle.  Lets don't let a SWT alum try to throw water on our parade. [/quote]This is what get at me. UTSA and Texas st joining the WAC helps stabilize the WAC. However getting more schools in the region like LU, ULL, UNT, Ark st, etc etc would be better than UTSA and Texas st alone. Therefore Texas st should be cheering on a LU invite but yet our Texas st friend here is not smart enough to understand this logic. Must be a bobcat IQ thing.

[quote name="YouCanUseaMint" post="844343" timestamp="1284187387"] [quote author=NorthoftheBorder link=topic=72726.msg844069#msg844069 date=1284176709] [quote author=coachacola link=topic=72726.msg843968#msg843968 date=1284175037] Going FBS is more of a long term goal than a short term goal.  A year or two ago Dr. Simmons said it probably wouldn't happen while he was president of LU.  Then just this past year either him or the AD said they were looking to go FBS in 4 or 5 years.  It's all about money so Lamar still needs to be talking to FBS conferences behind the scenes, even if they don't plan on moving up for a while. [/quote] Absolutely, positively right Coachacola.  And if the right deal comes up, then the powers that be need to be in a position to move.  That means that they should be having meaningful discussions with the money power broker supporters now so that they could be lining up the proper support in case the right opportunity opens up.  That said, one of the best things that can also happen is that this first team surpasses any expectations for a start up program and really generates and maintains major support from the Golden Triangle.  [b]Lets don't let a SWT alum try to throw water on our parade.[/b] [/quote] ::) What is Lamar doing to prepare for FBS? Just me, but it sounds like yall want the invite before the hard work... [/quote]What hard work? Texas st can't average above 13k for it's home games.