So if we win we are in?

[Boomer]

Thought about that today---With their win over the MS dogs, it would bring a good situation of respect from the current MSU players----but he said he would stay a Tech to get things accomplished---right!!!

[KAjunRaider]

Latest word from MT is that your poster was indeed correct, the NCAA OK'd the contracts.

But...... now the WAC, Big East, maybe even ESPN are appealing it, and it'll take a couple of days.

Word on the street is they think ESPN may get what it wants.

There should definitely be some wheeling and dealing going on.

Waters in a tough position.

My opinion-- maybe the NCAA should approved back in July and we would not have this mess.

I wonder if SBC wins the appeal, if contracts will remain that way for the duration of the contract, or the contracts will be re-written (for 7-win SBC teams).

If SBC gets screwed, methinks Waters is in deep doodoo with the Belt AD's, specifically UL, MT, stAte, and FAU (and close relationships with other AD's, such as MT and WKU, whose AD's were roommates in college).

[johnnylightnin]

But...... now the WAC, Big East, maybe even ESPN are appealing it, and it'll take a couple of days.

WAC and the Big East? That makes no sense. This is between Waters, Indy, and ESPN. If anything, this should tell you that nothing is "iron-clad".

Not sure why Waters would be in hot water. The rule about contingency bowls and 6-6 teams is an NCAA rule and would take precedence over anything in the belt/indy contract anyway.

[DestinCajun]

_ I guess I'm sparky. Feel free to show me where I've made a BS post. _

Pick any post you've made that says the Independence Bowl is not contracturally obligated to take an SBC team if circumstances really are as being discussed here. Based on what I've read on your forum, why would you LaTexster fans even care who is in the Independence Bowl?

What's most of your elite Textser internet fans' problem with playing so called "belch teams" - as you refer to UL, MT and Ark St - in a bowl game? If it's that big an issue then play in a WAC bowl somewhere out west and leave the Independence Bowl to southern region football programs.

Wright Waters a LaTex grad..... lmao!!!!

[johnnylightnin]

_ Pick any post you've made that says the Independence Bowl is not contracturally obligated to take an SBC team if circumstances really are as being discussed here. Based on what I've read on your forum, why would you LaTexster fans even care who is in the Independence Bowl?

Those aren't my words, those are the words of the I-Bowl Chairman. Apparently the guy at St. Pete's said the same thing. Sure, WW says the contract is "iron-clad", but that's clearly not true. It's, at best, unclear. At worst, WW is grasping at straws after hoping his position would allow him to push his teams through despite NCAA rules that prohibit contingency agreements from going into affect with 6-6 teams.

We care for the same reason you'd care if you were in this position. Honestly, would you rather play a mid-major in your bowl game (and clearly, this is hypothetical) or a BCS conference team?

[CajunZ1]

_ Those aren't my words, those are the words of the I-Bowl Chairman. Apparently the guy at St. Pete's said the same thing. Sure, WW says the contract is "iron-clad", but that's clearly not true. It's, at best, unclear. At worst, WW is grasping at straws after hoping his position would allow him to push his teams through despite NCAA rules that prohibit contingency agreements from going into affect with 6-6 teams.

We care for the same reason you'd care if you were in this position. Honestly, would you rather play a mid-major in your bowl game (and clearly, this is hypothetical) or a BCS conference team? _

I don't think anything you're saying here is unreasonable.

[CajunT]

_ WAC and the Big East? That makes no sense. This is between Waters, Indy, and ESPN. If anything, this should tell you that nothing is "iron-clad".

Not sure why Waters would be in hot water. The rule about contingency bowls and 6-6 teams is an NCAA rule and would take precedence over anything in the belt/indy contract anyway. _

Actually ESPN should have nothing to do with this either! They are a freakin private corporation trying to manipulate a bowl game to their pleasure. There is a contract in place, honor it or the Indy Bowl shouldn't have signed it. All the Indy Bowl has done is further tarnish what little reputation is has left as a rag tag organization and Bowl. They are broke!

[Arkstfan]

_ Because Wright Waters is who he is I put a lot of weight on what he says. If he said something will happen (a certain way) it probably will.

But, and, however, I do not put a lot of weight on his decision making process, he doesn’t always think things through... In an eerily similar situation to what the Big-12 is going through right now, (Sun Belt 2005) Wright Waters said the #1 criteria for determining the Sun Belt Champion was whether or not they were bowl eligible.

The Sun Belt Champion should be decided separate, apart and completely prior to bowl consideration.

jmo _

Thank North Texas for that. The AD's and presidents changed the football tie-breaking at the first meeting after the 2001 season.

BUT in 2005 if the tie-breakers had been allowed to play out, ASU would have won the tie-breakers. This year if you beat MT and ASU wins, ASU would have won the tie-breakers.

The bowl eligible only rule has never determined a different New Orleans Bowl rep, it has changed when it was determined.

[DestinCajun]

We care for the same reason you'd care if you were in this position. Honestly, would you rather play a mid-major in your bowl game (and clearly, this is hypothetical) or a BCS conference team? _

What position is that? LaTex is an elite WAC program so go play in an elite WAC bowl in California or wherever.

As for "sunbelch program" UL , I don't care what bowl or what opponent we play. JUST GET IT DONE and I'll be there.

[johnnylightnin]

_ What position is that? LaTex is an elite WAC program so go play in an elite WAC bowl in California or wherever.

The position of securing a bowl bid and speculating on who the opponent would be. As far as playing in a Western bowl, we would gladly do that if it was needed. The WAC has 55% of it's teams with 7 wins, so we can stay local. We're not keeping the belt out of the bowl, the I-Bowl is. Apparently, they think a team from the ACC will draw a bigger TV audience than one from the Belt.

You know, this wouldn't be an issue if y'all had a few more 7 win teams.

[CharlieK]

_ Apparently, they think a team from the ACC will draw a bigger TV audience than one from the Belt. _

Then they shouldn't have signed a contract. Why would the belt have bothered to sign a contract if it didn't give them priority over anyone? That's the freakin point of the agreement!

[johnnylightnin]

_ Then they shouldn't have signed a contract. Why would the belt have bothered to sign a contract if it didn't give them priority over anyone? That's the freakin point of the agreement! _

It does give them priority if they have 7 wins...just like every other contingency agreement.