Selling out the LSU game a once in a 100 year priority.
On October 5th 2002 an away game is scheduled to be played between Louisiana's Ragin' Cajuns and Louisiana State's Tigers.
This is a special game. A little known and non publicized fact (except here) is that this is the 100 year anniversary of the two schools very first meeting.
Interestingly the attendance issue was mentioned in a line from the October 18th 1902 Lafayette Gazette which focused on the first ever 1902 football meeting on October 16th, it stated "Quite a large crowd witnessed the game…"
Here we are exactly 100 years later and some UL fans would love to have less than a large crowd witnessing the game. On the 100-year anniversary of Louisiana vs. LSU football there is actually ridiculous talk of boycotting the game due to a slight that occurred in a totally unrelated sport.
Still others take the stance that since the two schools haven't played football in over 60 years, then nothing is missed if they never play again.
Still others conclude that a boycott of the Louisiana-LSU game will hurt only LSU and not Louisiana. This is no doubt based on the fact that the Ragin' Cajun athletic program is going to get it's 2002 guarantee regardless of attendance.
This is a case of when being right does not make one right. Being right for the 2002 ramifications does not make the decision the right one long term.
So where will the above logic lead? Let's think long term. . . .
If it became fact that Louisiana couldn't sell 7000 tickets for a game 40 miles away, there isn't a bowl selection committee that would listen to the illogic of why and what public sentiment was like the October after a baseball series was cancelled.
Forget the New Orleans bowl. Focus instead on the fact that coach Bustle is trying to raise Louisiana's national perception. Ok, lets say there is another season where Louisiana has a fantastic record but just happens to come in second in conference, it has happened before.
There isn't a bowl committee in existence that would venture an invite to a school with a non-traveling fan base. How do you think LSU got the invite to the Peach Bowl in 2001? I'll tell you, it was their traveling fan base.
Or how about this, once the minimum attendance criteria is enacted, how many schools in the first place would want to play a school, any school that can't sent at least a few fans their way? This would kill any chances of home and home or even home/home and home. Think of the future money lost if we can't sell out the LSU game.
Forget that LSU would lose interest in playing Louisiana, all they are asking for is a complete sellout, nothing more. If Louisiana can't bring that one criterion to the equation then Ragin Cajun fans have nothing to offer that a school from Nantucket couldn't offer.
Is there a University in Nantucket? A question which brings me to my point, in the long term, not playing LSU will hasten to kill national exposures, which is the only way many people ever hear about a school. Non exposure will end up hurting enrollment, recruiting, and perhaps even research dollars. Never do you want the masses to ask, is there a University in Lafayette, Louisiana?
Athletic expenditures in the 21st Century will continue to become Universities number one exposure medium. Athletics is the only true successful frontal lobe attack, because if a University can reach the frontal lobe, it has a chance of being a memory. Don't let the only memory of playing LSU be the 1902 game.
I say let's not be fair weather fans, we need to mentally separate the temporary ending of the baseball rivalry from the football centennial's resurrected engagement. Also lets not boycott the LSU game, as this will create the perception that Louisiana brings nothing to the table. The perception that a game with Louisiana is no different (attendance wise) than if LSU had played just about any far off school. Lets sell out the 7000 and ask for another 100, you know for anniversary sake.
Quote
