McNeese Week 2016

[TravlnCajun]

whats 8/30/14?

The day I'm sitting with a Makers on rocks, outside CF, having a blast and REALLY not caring what BrokeBack think about the University of Louisiana

[Cajunrunner]

I agree. I ain't talking till after the game.

This.

[Just1More]

This.

Better to be thought a loud fool, than to stay quiet and miss all the fun.

J1M

[Hammer58]

when all is said and done.. the cajuns better win the game.. enuff said

When is Tech even scheduling them?

[BeauCajun]

When is Tech even scheduling them?

Probably the year after they schedule Monroe. You know, that separation thing they have going on.

[NewsCopy]

The Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns and McNeese State University announced on Thursday a non-conference football game scheduled for Sept. 10, 2016 at Cajun Field.

The rest of the story

UL-SI

[JohnStOnge]

The best thing about that post is it comes from one of their fans who led the charge for decades telling us that we made a mistake in going D1A and we should know our place (which in their mind was to be like mcneese). Now of after decades of howling how wrong we were they are now eyeing our successes and saying they should emulate us.

Yes I remember that on the McNeese board and responded to it. There is an element of the McNeese fan base that wants to see McNeese go FBS. I completely disagree with that. There is this perception that going FBS improves a school's financial situation and it's just not true. The basic picture is that if you're not in (now) the "Big 5" conferences in FBS schools in FBS generally lose more money on their athletic programs than schools in FCS do. An example is provided by the 2013 numbers from the college athletic programs database at http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...ools/finances/ for your school and for McNeese. Note that "school funds" are counted as "revenue" to the athletic programs. But that's money the school is kicking in to sustain the athletic programs. It's not revenue for the school.

Once you delete that school subsidy from the revenues you see that your school's revenues from its athletic program fell short of expenses by $8.2 million while McNeese's revenues fell short of expenses by $4.4 million. And that was during a very good year for your school's athletic program.

Beyond that I want McNeese to compete at the highest level at which it can compete to be among the best. That's not FBS for McNeese and it's not FBS for your school either. Same with Louisiana Tech and ULM.

Bowl games? I don't know what the heck that means. More than half the teams in FBS go to bowl games. Going to a bowl game does not mean a team is "good" in the context of FBS. I'm not saying this just to aggravate you either. I'm saying the same thing I say on the McNeese board when people bring up wanting McNeese to go FBS with the post season hope being going to something like the New Orleans Bowl. Using the Sagarin ratings because they're easily accessible and give at least some idea: The 2011 New Orleans Bowl matched the team that finished 65th in FBS and the team that finished 77th. The 2012 New Orleans Bowl matched number 61 and number 80. The 2013 New Orleans Bowl matched 77 and 84.

I understand that a lot of people like that. But I don't. I'm in the minority for sure. But seeing the team I'm pulling for shoot for getting into games like that in the post season is not what I want.

[Cajunologist]

Yes I remember that on the McNeese board and responded to it. There is an element of the McNeese fan base that wants to see McNeese go FBS. I completely disagree with that. There is this perception that going FBS improves a school's financial situation and it's just not true. The basic picture is that if you're not in (now) the "Big 5" conferences in FBS schools in FBS generally lose more money on their athletic programs than schools in FCS do. An example is provided by the 2013 numbers from the college athletic programs database at http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...ools/finances/ for your school and for McNeese. Note that "school funds" are counted as "revenue" to the athletic programs. But that's money the school is kicking in to sustain the athletic programs. It's not revenue for the school.

Once you delete that school subsidy from the revenues you see that your school's revenues from its athletic program fell short of expenses by $8.2 million while McNeese's revenues fell short of expenses by $4.4 million. And that was during a very good year for your school's athletic program.

Beyond that I want McNeese to compete at the highest level at which it can compete to be among the best. That's not FBS for McNeese and it's not FBS for your school either. Same with Louisiana Tech and ULM.

Bowl games? I don't know what the heck that means. More than half the teams in FBS go to bowl games. Going to a bowl game does not mean a team is "good" in the context of FBS. I'm not saying this just to aggravate you either. I'm saying the same thing I say on the McNeese board when people bring up wanting McNeese to go FBS with the post season hope being going to something like the New Orleans Bowl. Using the Sagarin ratings because they're easily accessible and give at least some idea: The 2011 New Orleans Bowl matched the team that finished 65th in FBS and the team that finished 77th. The 2012 New Orleans Bowl matched number 61 and number 80. The 2013 New Orleans Bowl matched 77 and 84.

I understand that a lot of people like that. But I don't. I'm in the minority for sure. But seeing the team I'm pulling for shoot for getting into games like that in the post season is not what I want.

If you've been to the nola bowl in front of 55k fans from your school, you'd change your mind. Cajuns own that town for the whole week. Half do make a bowl game but only 35 teams win it.

[Turbine]

... Note that "school funds" are counted as "revenue" to the athletic programs. But that's money the school is kicking in to sustain the athletic programs. It's not revenue for the school.

Once you delete that school subsidy from the revenues you see that your school's revenues from its athletic program fell short of expenses by $8.2 million while McNeese's revenues fell short of expenses by $4.4 million. And that was during a very good year for your school's athletic program.

Its $8.2 million in advertising dollars.

Very good use of the money.

[Zeebart21]

Yes I remember that on the McNeese board and responded to it. There is an element of the McNeese fan base that wants to see McNeese go FBS. I completely disagree with that. There is this perception that going FBS improves a school's financial situation and it's just not true. The basic picture is that if you're not in (now) the "Big 5" conferences in FBS schools in FBS generally lose more money on their athletic programs than schools in FCS do. An example is provided by the 2013 numbers from the college athletic programs database at http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...ools/finances/ for your school and for McNeese. Note that "school funds" are counted as "revenue" to the athletic programs. But that's money the school is kicking in to sustain the athletic programs. It's not revenue for the school.

Once you delete that school subsidy from the revenues you see that your school's revenues from its athletic program fell short of expenses by $8.2 million while McNeese's revenues fell short of expenses by $4.4 million. And that was during a very good year for your school's athletic program.

Beyond that I want McNeese to compete at the highest level at which it can compete to be among the best. That's not FBS for McNeese and it's not FBS for your school either. Same with Louisiana Tech and ULM.

Bowl games? I don't know what the heck that means. More than half the teams in FBS go to bowl games. Going to a bowl game does not mean a team is "good" in the context of FBS. I'm not saying this just to aggravate you either. I'm saying the same thing I say on the McNeese board when people bring up wanting McNeese to go FBS with the post season hope being going to something like the New Orleans Bowl. Using the Sagarin ratings because they're easily accessible and give at least some idea: The 2011 New Orleans Bowl matched the team that finished 65th in FBS and the team that finished 77th. The 2012 New Orleans Bowl matched number 61 and number 80. The 2013 New Orleans Bowl matched 77 and 84.

I understand that a lot of people like that. But I don't. I'm in the minority for sure. But seeing the team I'm pulling for shoot for getting into games like that in the post season is not what I want.

Apparently no one wants to see any Mcneese post season... 8k at your last playoff game? Lame. Hell, you dont even go to your games. I have seen your own people call you out on it. Pal, we are in the middle of a 115 million dollar athletic upgrade, NO state money. We brought 45k to the NO bowl last year. You guys will take most of the season to total 45k. You are so pathetic.

[ZoomZoom]

Apparently no one wants to see any Mcneese post season... 8k at your last playoff game? .

Talking serious LHSAA attendance there. Getting up there with the Barbe and WMHS crowd.

[cypremort]

Apparently no one wants to see any Mcneese post season... 8k at your last playoff game? Lame. Hell, you dont even go to your games. I have seen your own people call you out on it. Pal, we are in the middle of a 115 million dollar athletic upgrade, NO state money. We brought 45k to the NO bowl last year. You guys will take most of the season to total 45k. You are so pathetic.

Look at the teams on their schedule....Incarnate Word, Abilene Christian, Prairie View, Arkansas Tech. Seriously, these may be fine schools but I had no idea that they even had football teams. Hard to get 8K to attend games with that kind of schedule. Sounds like a D-III lineup.