Page 93 of 113 FirstFirst ... 83 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 103 ... LastLast
Results 921 to 930 of 1123

Thread: 2008 Bowl Season Louisiana Snubbed by Indi Bowl

  1. Default Trade Shreveport


      The decision to ignore the UL Ragin' Cajuns when picking teams for the Independence Bowl proves what I have long said. The bowl game is in Shreveport, right? Shreveport is a fair to middling town but has more of a Texas flavor than does Lafayette and other great municipalities. Long ago, someone advocated trading Shreveport to Texas for Port Arthur. What a great idea, then and now.

    The rest of the story

    Randolph M. Alfred


  2. #922

    Default Re: I-Bowl Has A bleak Future: Auditor

    Quote Originally Posted by cjr3888 View Post
    _ If they are truly trying to increams sponsorship revenues, wouldn't they invite a regional team. Not just the Cajuns, but Arkansas State would have worked. I doubt they will bring in many sponsorship dollars from Illinois when compared to what they could have brought in rom Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Of couse, what do I know. I'm drinking beer and watching the Saints on a Thursday night.


    igeaux.mobi _
    If they didn't want an in-state match-up, they could have with a straight face walked into the committee room in Baton Rouge in January after inviting Arkansas State and explained they were using tourism dollars and wanted an out-of-state team and ASU would have brought more fans than any other out-of-state team they had to pick from. They could explain that Little Rock is basically equidistant from Shreveport and the Mississippi casinos but is Shreveport is getting killed in that market and it provided a chance to draw first time visitors from that region.

    Of course that assumes the game is going to try to carry on.

    I think they are in a pickle for the future. There is no doubt that ESPN is going to throw money into the Birmingham game and try to move to at least #8 in the SEC pick order and may try to scoot past Memphis and/or Nashville as well. They are looking at the #9 from the SEC.

    On the Big XII side, Houston is going to likely try to move up the order as well and with NFL Network's fight to become relevant, they may invest the money to try to snag the #7 pick away from Shreveport. Likewise, ESPN trying to keep NFL Net from being relevant may choose to throw money into their game in Fort Worth to grab the #7 pick as well. Shreveport could end up falling to a #8 or #9 pick from the Big XII.

    If they go into 2010 as SEC #9 vs. Big XII #8 or #9 they are likely to be vacant more years than not.

  3. #923

    Default Re: I-Bowl Has A bleak Future: Auditor

    Quote Originally Posted by Arkstfan View Post
    _ If they didn't want an in-state match-up, they could have with a straight face walked into the committee room in Baton Rouge in January after inviting Arkansas State and explained they were using tourism dollars and wanted an out-of-state team and ASU would have brought more fans than any other out-of-state team they had to pick from. They could explain that Little Rock is basically equidistant from Shreveport and the Mississippi casinos but is Shreveport is getting killed in that market and it provided a chance to draw first time visitors from that region.

    Of course that assumes the game is going to try to carry on.

    I think they are in a pickle for the future. There is no doubt that ESPN is going to throw money into the Birmingham game and try to move to at least #8 in the SEC pick order and may try to scoot past Memphis and/or Nashville as well. They are looking at the #9 from the SEC.

    On the Big XII side, Houston is going to likely try to move up the order as well and with NFL Network's fight to become relevant, they may invest the money to try to snag the #7 pick away from Shreveport. Likewise, ESPN trying to keep NFL Net from being relevant may choose to throw money into their game in Fort Worth to grab the #7 pick as well. Shreveport could end up falling to a #8 or #9 pick from the Big XII.

    If they go into 2010 as SEC #9 vs. Big XII #8 or #9 they are likely to be vacant more years than not.
    Ergo, they will either die or become increasingly dependent on the alleged secondary bowl tie in with the sunbelt.

    Which, again shows how incredibly short sighted those fools in S____port are.

    Wouldn't it be great in 2009 to have the luxury of telling the I bowl to take hike?

  4. #924

    Default Re: Lawmakers upset UL snubbed by Independence Bowl

    Northern Illinois will do well to bring a 1,000 fans.

    Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!


  5. UL Football TiC: Who’s to blame for UL’s bowl snub?


     Coach Rickey Bustle takes responsibility for not winning a seventh game, but we have a few thoughts of our own.

    After its best season in years and finishing a close second behind Sun Belt Conference champion Troy, this was supposed to be the year the Ragin’ Cajuns snapped their 38-year bowl spell. But on bowl selection day, the Ragin’ Cajuns didn’t get an invite, a snub that has sparked outrage and bewilderment across all UL sports fan outlets from the Raginpagin blog to Jay Walker’s radio show. The Motor City Bowl passed over UL for the Sun Belt’s fourth place finisher, Florida Atlantic. Even more puzzling was the Shreveport Independence Bowl reaching all the way to the Mid-American Conference’s fifth place team, Northern Illinois, to play against Louisiana Tech rather than selecting UL. With the Sun Belt having contracts in place that should have guaranteed its runner-up a bowl spot, politics clearly came into play.

    The rest of the story

    By Nathan Stubbs
    The Ind


    *TiC = Tongue in Cheek


  6. #926

    Default Re: TiC: Who’s to blame for UL’s bowl snub?

    I hate this article.


  7. #927

    Default Re: TiC: Who’s to blame for UL’s bowl snub?

    Quote Originally Posted by UL_Cajuns View Post
    _ I hate this article. _
    Agree.

  8. #928

    Default Re: TiC: Who’s to blame for UL’s bowl snub?

    all I can say is Why? I hate these little attempts on the part of sports writers to make jokes about UL's misshaps. All they do is stir the pot and mark up another jab at the football program that (besides us) everyone in the state loves to hate. And of course cue the LSU fans with the usual "accept what you are" and the "UL will never be good. Period". But we wanted more media coverage, we got it.


  9. #929

    Default Re: TiC: Who’s to blame for UL’s bowl snub?

    The Independent has always had an anti-UL spin. An amateurish article like this one is not the least bit surprising.


  10. #930

    Default Re: TiC: Who’s to blame for UL’s bowl snub?

    Quote Originally Posted by ljr3721 View Post
    _ The Independent has always had an anti-UL spin. An amateurish article like this one is not the least bit surprising. _
    Not sure why you say that?

    Did you forget about the main article about the upcoming UL football season in August 2008? How about the great story by Dan McDonald in October 2008 (I think October) about Tyrell Fenroy?

    That's just what I remember from the past couple months. I know there have been more positive articles about UL in The Independent.

    Also, how about the fact that the 2 owners of the Independent have a relative on Cajun football team?

    Theory debunked....


    But other than that, I didn't like this particular article.

Page 93 of 113 FirstFirst ... 83 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 103 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 15 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 15 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Bowl season starting up
    By HelmutVII in forum RagePage
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 19th, 2024, 04:17 pm
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 9th, 2024, 11:11 am
  3. 2008 bowl projections
    By Zeebart21 in forum Football
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: November 3rd, 2008, 12:55 pm
  4. Winning season still possible, bowl unlikely
    By NewsCopy in forum Football
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 15th, 2006, 10:48 pm

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •