So what about New Mexico or New Mexico State? San Diego State? Schools that have been relevant on the basketball map as mid majors but don't have tremendous recruiting bases. I know that San Diego State has a California population but they also have a ton of Universities and Juco's to fight over their players. How about Nevada? Not a basketball hotbed but all of a sudden, they are relevant. Houston is a comparison. Truth is, for every school we could name, there is likely a rebuttal as to why they shouldn't be named.
The "They don't have FBS football" argument is an excuse and a straw man diversion.
San Diego State and New Mexico St. are historically good at basketball. I would have loved to had NMST in the Sunbelt as a full member. They are probably the closest to a peer in all the ones listed so far.
I have only pointed out some of the differences in the situations of UL and the universities named. I pointed out that some of the teams named are more "mediocre" than UL.
Do you think San Diego state and Butler are peer universities of UL?
I agreed earlier that Nevada has been very good since Mussellmen got there. I also asked the question "Do you think it is solely the coach?"
VO- As a mid-major, you think splitting resources does not have a detrimental effect?
There are currently 25 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 25 guests)