We started out Saturday with the winner of ASU/MTSU headed to Liberty, loser to GoDaddy and Tech likely headed to the I-Bowl.

Then late Saturday evening it became ASU to Liberty, Tech to GoDaddy because MTSU concerned them and CUSA was talking about a new tie that would have put them in champion rotation. ULM vs MAC, probably Kent State.

Then word of the BCS standings starts filtering out, Iowa State was in play. Liberty supposedly under sponsor pressure and CUSA lobbying gets a handshake deal with Iowa State while the Sun Belt begins offering inducements via GoDaddy to get Iowa State to Mobile and offers more to Liberty to re-open the Liberty while the I-Bowl starts its own pitch. Liberty doesn't budge despite TicketCity their broker calling for ASU.

"wild"....I think you misspelled disappointing

Any efforts to blame our exclusion on one game, ie yesterday, is bull. Benson pissed off godaddy when he let New Orleans go ahead and extend the bid.

We can blame NIU in the BCS as was stated in another thread, or that we were concerning yesterday, but we can all see what happened here.

(12-03-2012 12:02 AM)MTowho Wrote:  Any efforts to blame our exclusion on one game, ie yesterday, is bull.

Unless we had won

(12-03-2012 12:02 AM)MTowho Wrote:  Any efforts to blame our exclusion on one game, ie yesterday, is bull. Benson pissed off godaddy when he let New Orleans go ahead and extend the bid.

We can blame NIU in the BCS as was stated in another thread, or that we were concerning yesterday, but we can all see what happened here.

Believe whatever you choose. I'm probably wrong.

(12-03-2012 12:47 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 12:02 AM)MTowho Wrote:  Any efforts to blame our exclusion on one game, ie yesterday, is bull. Benson pissed off godaddy when he let New Orleans go ahead and extend the bid.

We can blame NIU in the BCS as was stated in another thread, or that we were concerning yesterday, but we can all see what happened here.

Believe whatever you choose. I'm probably wrong.

arkstfan is never wrong when it comes to these matters, some ppl just don't understand.

Billy Bob "Slingblade" Benson is on the job.

(12-03-2012 12:02 AM)MTowho Wrote:  Any efforts to blame our exclusion on one game, ie yesterday, is bull. Benson pissed off godaddy when he let New Orleans go ahead and extend the bid.

We can blame NIU in the BCS as was stated in another thread, or that we were concerning yesterday, but we can all see what happened here.

You are correct that some in Mobile are not happy with the New Orleans Bowl jumping the gun with their bid. That won't happen again. But the real reason MTSU is sitting out is due to Iowa State being available due to NIU getting in the Orange Bowl. And because MTSU is leaving. I, and other continuing SBC members, would be livid if MTSU got that last bid. It would have been different had the bowl in question not had any tie to the Sun Belt.

BTW, stAte fans, have you guys calmed down about going to the Go Daddy Bowl? You're playing a ranked team in a bowl game. Where the fans will be on your side. And if you win, you might actually finish the season ranked.

I'm not sure the Liberty was on the table for you guys once Iowa State became available.

(12-03-2012 09:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 12:02 AM)MTowho Wrote:  Any efforts to blame our exclusion on one game, ie yesterday, is bull. Benson pissed off godaddy when he let New Orleans go ahead and extend the bid.

We can blame NIU in the BCS as was stated in another thread, or that we were concerning yesterday, but we can all see what happened here.

You are correct that some in Mobile are not happy with the New Orleans Bowl jumping the gun with their bid. That won't happen again. But the real reason MTSU is sitting out is due to Iowa State being available due to NIU getting in the Orange Bowl. And because MTSU is leaving. I, and other continuing SBC members, would be livid if MTSU got that last bid. It would have been different had the bowl in question not had any tie to the Sun Belt.

No, MT is out because Benson is full of it and stabbed us in the back.

This should serve as a warning shot to remaining Sun Belt members. If you didn't want out before, here's your sign.

Arkstfan - you know I'm usually pretty reasonable about things and I respect your opinion and insights because I know you have the connections.

(12-03-2012 09:18 AM)MTowho Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 09:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 12:02 AM)MTowho Wrote:  Any efforts to blame our exclusion on one game, ie yesterday, is bull. Benson pissed off godaddy when he let New Orleans go ahead and extend the bid.

We can blame NIU in the BCS as was stated in another thread, or that we were concerning yesterday, but we can all see what happened here.

You are correct that some in Mobile are not happy with the New Orleans Bowl jumping the gun with their bid. That won't happen again. But the real reason MTSU is sitting out is due to Iowa State being available due to NIU getting in the Orange Bowl. And because MTSU is leaving. I, and other continuing SBC members, would be livid if MTSU got that last bid. It would have been different had the bowl in question not had any tie to the Sun Belt.

No, MT is out because Benson is full of it and stabbed us in the back.

This should serve as a warning shot to remaining Sun Belt members. If you didn't want out before, here's your sign.

Arkstfan - you know I'm usually pretty reasonable about things and I respect your opinion and insights because I know you have the connections.

What would you have had Benson do in this case?

1) Spend resources from the Sun Belt to provide incentives so a team that is leaving can go to a bowl? I don't think he should be doing that. CUSA should have provided those incentives.

2) Try and get you guys into a bowl over WKU (who finished second last year but stayed home after losing to a FCS team)? Its not stabbing you in the back to try and help the teams that aren't leaving as of today.

3) What is the responsibility of your own Athletic Department? How about CUSA's responsibilities to you in this case (they have LOTS of bowl tie ins and theorhetically lots of relationships with their contracted bowls)?

If Benson had tried to kill your bowl bid after all SBC continuting members had been placed, then he would be 'stabbing you in the back'. But it simply came down to a resource constrained environment. I would have picked the same.

(12-03-2012 09:31 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 09:18 AM)MTowho Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 09:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 12:02 AM)MTowho Wrote:  Any efforts to blame our exclusion on one game, ie yesterday, is bull. Benson pissed off godaddy when he let New Orleans go ahead and extend the bid.

We can blame NIU in the BCS as was stated in another thread, or that we were concerning yesterday, but we can all see what happened here.

You are correct that some in Mobile are not happy with the New Orleans Bowl jumping the gun with their bid. That won't happen again. But the real reason MTSU is sitting out is due to Iowa State being available due to NIU getting in the Orange Bowl. And because MTSU is leaving. I, and other continuing SBC members, would be livid if MTSU got that last bid. It would have been different had the bowl in question not had any tie to the Sun Belt.

No, MT is out because Benson is full of it and stabbed us in the back.

This should serve as a warning shot to remaining Sun Belt members. If you didn't want out before, here's your sign.

Arkstfan - you know I'm usually pretty reasonable about things and I respect your opinion and insights because I know you have the connections.

What would you have had Benson do in this case?

1) Spend resources from the Sun Belt to provide incentives so a team that is leaving can go to a bowl? I don't think he should be doing that. CUSA should have provided those incentives.

2) Try and get you guys into a bowl over WKU (who finished second last year but stayed home after losing to a FCS team)? Its not stabbing you in the back to try and help the teams that aren't leaving as of today.

3) What is the responsibility of your own Athletic Department? How about CUSA's responsibilities to you in this case (they have LOTS of bowl tie ins and theorhetically lots of relationships with their contracted bowls)?

If Benson had tried to kill your bowl bid after all SBC continuting members had been placed, then he would be 'stabbing you in the back'. But it simply came down to a resource constrained environment. I would have picked the same.

1) No
2) No
3) Get us into a bowl. They had that, Benson lied, we got screwed. CUSA's help or lack thereof had nothing to do with anything.

Nothing to do with a resource constrained environment.

(12-03-2012 09:18 AM)MTowho Wrote:  This should serve as a warning shot to remaining Sun Belt members. If you didn't want out before, here's your sign.

The only warning is if you leave the conference, they won't help you. Sounds reasonable to me. We got the remaining four SBC teams in a bowl, there's nothing to be upset about.

(12-03-2012 09:15 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  BTW, stAte fans, have you guys calmed down about going to the Go Daddy Bowl? You're playing a ranked team in a bowl game. Where the fans will be on your side. And if you win, you might actually finish the season ranked.

I'm not sure the Liberty was on the table for you guys once Iowa State became available.

Tom,

Many are still dissappointed but I already see lots of fans starting to come around and accept the GoDaddy.com bowl. I had a great time last year in Mobile and my daughters were really wanting Mobile instead of Memphis because they say it's a "destination" whereas Memphis is "boring". But that's young girls viewpoint. I am excited to play Kent State #25. Tulsa has more name recognition,the Liberty bowl has more name recognition and Liberty is much closer so we would have taken a ton to Memphis....but in reality the ASU vs. Kent State is going to be a much higher rated game (in terms of rankings...ISU 6-6 and no votes) than Tulsa vs. Iowa State.

Kent is #25 & ASU is roughly 33 whereas Tulsa is roughly equal to ASU and 6-6 Iowa State has no votes.

The media won't see it that way but I expect a great game! I'll be there and I know lots of other ASU fans who will be there. Our admin. has a goal of taking the most fans ever to Mobile to show off our fan support for the future.

(12-03-2012 09:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  It would have been different had the bowl in question not had any tie to the Sun Belt.

The pizza bowl, if that's the bowl you're referring to, doesn't have ties to the Sun Belt.

(12-03-2012 10:07 AM)tyler90wm Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 09:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  It would have been different had the bowl in question not had any tie to the Sun Belt.

The pizza bowl, if that's the bowl you're referring to, doesn't have ties to the Sun Belt.

I thought the Sun Belt had a secondary tie in with the Little Caesar's Bowl. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Caesars_Bowl

As the B1G usually never gets enough teams eligible to participate in this bowl, it is effectively a contractual tie between the Belt and the Pizza Bowl in most years.

(12-03-2012 09:18 AM)MTowho Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 09:05 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 12:02 AM)MTowho Wrote:  Any efforts to blame our exclusion on one game, ie yesterday, is bull. Benson pissed off godaddy when he let New Orleans go ahead and extend the bid.

We can blame NIU in the BCS as was stated in another thread, or that we were concerning yesterday, but we can all see what happened here.

You are correct that some in Mobile are not happy with the New Orleans Bowl jumping the gun with their bid. That won't happen again. But the real reason MTSU is sitting out is due to Iowa State being available due to NIU getting in the Orange Bowl. And because MTSU is leaving. I, and other continuing SBC members, would be livid if MTSU got that last bid. It would have been different had the bowl in question not had any tie to the Sun Belt.

No, MT is out because Benson is full of it and stabbed us in the back.

This should serve as a warning shot to remaining Sun Belt members. If you didn't want out before, here's your sign.

Arkstfan - you know I'm usually pretty reasonable about things and I respect your opinion and insights because I know you have the connections.

@kbcommish works for the presidents, as with WW, and can't make a move without their approval. If you have a problem, look no farther than the vote from the weekend. When asked to vote for or against, the membership chose not to vote and let the chips fall where they may. And that's what happened. MT stood on their own merit and a pass on a sure thing. Your AD gambled and lost...might wanna put the blame where it really lies...

(12-03-2012 10:09 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I thought the Sun Belt had a secondary tie in with the Little Caesar's Bowl. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Caesars_Bowl

As the B1G usually never gets enough teams eligible to participate in this bowl, it is effectively a contractual tie between the Belt and the Pizza Bowl in most years.

Ah, you're right I was looking at THIS link and didn't see it.

(12-03-2012 10:21 AM)tyler90wm Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 10:09 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I thought the Sun Belt had a secondary tie in with the Little Caesar's Bowl. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Caesars_Bowl

As the B1G usually never gets enough teams eligible to participate in this bowl, it is effectively a contractual tie between the Belt and the Pizza Bowl in most years.

Ah, you're right I was looking at THIS link and didn't see it.

We don't have a secondary tie in with Little Caesar's. That expired last year or the year before I think. Irrelevant anyway.