(12-12-2016 06:50 PM)nastybunch Wrote:  Wow, and I thought we had some weird ones on our board. Looking forward to playing the Cajuns Saturday in the Dome.

Dude, you got NOTHING on our boards. This is one crazy lot who whines about anything under the sun.

(12-12-2016 06:27 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-12-2016 04:46 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  I'm just glad to see my dream of a 50 page thread (which I called on page 44) come to fruition.

Kudos to Tom for making that happen.

No worries. Know that it took that many pages for your side to put up every argument under the sun as to why you deserved the NO Bowl in perpetuity.

First it was about attendance. Of course ULL didn't have the highest attended game this year. Or last year. Or the year before that.

Then it was 'USA sucks' and 'no one wants them'. We'll upon further review, it is pretty obvious that someone did want USA over our conference champion (a team that travels well and does so to places outside their footprint).

Then it was about keeping the bowls happy. Of course the very same bowls accept requirements from the other conference partner.

Then it was about some issue with our waiver. Of course, that ended when I asked why the New Orleans Bowl would care if Idaho were playing in Boise or Tucson...Never got an answer there.

Then it was about matchups...In other words ULL should have played USM because USM was the weakest team the Belt will face in a bowl. Oddly enough, it didn't follow that way for any of the other bowls.

---

Any other arguments that you guys put up there to defend your apparent permanent lock hold on one of the three Sun Belt ESPN bowls? I didn't think so. Took 50 pages to establish that there really isn't any reason for ULL to have the NO Bowl in perpetuity.

You're free to move the goal posts some more if you'd like.

You'd have a point if I raised any of those arguments.

The bowl picked us not the other way around. What do you want us to do, turn it down?

I also noticed you ignored my point that if we were bowl eligible in 2015 there was a plan to move us. Not exactly what one would call "in perpetuity".

But carry on. Your 50+ page tirade has been a joy to behold.

(12-12-2016 06:27 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-12-2016 04:46 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  I'm just glad to see my dream of a 50 page thread (which I called on page 44) come to fruition.

Kudos to Tom for making that happen.

No worries. Know that it took that many pages for your side to put up every argument under the sun as to why you deserved the NO Bowl in perpetuity.

First it was about attendance. Of course ULL didn't have the highest attended game this year. Or last year. Or the year before that.

Then it was 'USA sucks' and 'no one wants them'. We'll upon further review, it is pretty obvious that someone did want USA over our conference champion (a team that travels well and does so to places outside their footprint).

Then it was about keeping the bowls happy. Of course the very same bowls accept requirements from the other conference partner.

Then it was about some issue with our waiver. Of course, that ended when I asked why the New Orleans Bowl would care if Idaho were playing in Boise or Tucson...Never got an answer there.

Then it was about matchups...In other words ULL should have played USM because USM was the weakest team the Belt will face in a bowl. Oddly enough, it didn't follow that way for any of the other bowls.

---

Any other arguments that you guys put up there to defend your apparent permanent lock hold on one of the three Sun Belt ESPN bowls? I didn't think so. Took 50 pages to establish that there really isn't any reason for ULL to have the NO Bowl in perpetuity.

You're free to move the goal posts some more if you'd like.

Ok lying tom, I'm gonna destroy you one more time because it's the holidays and I'm feeling generous.

It is about attendance, bowl game attendance...never once said anything about home attendance...that's you lying and moving the goal post.

Upon further review your are in Tucson, so they didn't want you Over the champion...apparently the people that mattered didn't Tom..another attempt at you moving the goal post..you already admitted your own home town bowl dontbwabt you

It's not about keeping them happy tom, they do what makes them happy. Those conferences at the time agreeing to these bowls were agreeing to play against the most garbage conference this world has ever seen...and we are still perceived that way he oday ny most.


About your waiver, your argument is that we didn't have an OOC FBS win only 5 conference wins and an FCS win...if you don't see the irony and hypocrisy of that coming fr a team who had to get a waiver to get in with 2 FCS...well Lying Tom, you are definitely a liberal. And if you are somehow beating your chest about your OOC wins...nobody cares Tom if you follow it up with shitting your diaper and going 2-6 in conference.


It is about matchups and we are matched up with a team we have played 51 times in our history and haven't played in almost a decade. Half our roster is from Mississippi, half our coaching staff is from Mississippi, an OL coach was at USM on staff with their current head coach. See tom, there is more tonthis than you just getting your way. Theybwant good interesting matchups that put people in the stands. 4 of our 6 bowls will do exactly that.

Anything else you say is sour grapes, a lie, or moving the goal post. Keep your regulation and rules Tom, let the adults figure this out.

(12-12-2016 06:27 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-12-2016 04:46 PM)AstroCajun Wrote:  I'm just glad to see my dream of a 50 page thread (which I called on page 44) come to fruition.

Kudos to Tom for making that happen.

No worries. Know that it took that many pages for your side to put up every argument under the sun as to why you deserved the NO Bowl in perpetuity.

Can't you just argue facts instead of putting words in other's mouths?

I didn't see a single Laffy fan make the claim that they "deserve the NO Bowl in perpetuity". Making the claim that they get invited and re-invited because they have a history of bringing good crowds to New Orleans who rent hotel rooms, dine out, and party is merely stating fact.

When they finally fail to deliver, I'm sure Laffy will get sent to the middle of nowhere like you guys this year.

Oh no, things not looking good in Lazyland. Laffy versus USM had a total of 35,061 fans in attendance making that game attendance the 4th largest ever. Not bad for two 6-6 teams. Laffy now has the top 5 attendance records for the NO Bowl.

See ya again in New Orleans next year Laffy if you can cobble together 6 wins.

(12-19-2016 09:50 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Oh no, things not looking good in Lazyland. Laffy versus USM had a total of 35,061 fans in attendance making that game attendance the 4th largest ever. Not bad for two 6-6 teams. Laffy now has the top 5 attendance records for the NO Bowl.

See ya again in New Orleans next year Laffy if you can cobble together 6 wins.

Just shut up, sit in a corner and lick your balls.....

(12-19-2016 11:08 AM)swampbear Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 09:50 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Oh no, things not looking good in Lazyland. Laffy versus USM had a total of 35,061 fans in attendance making that game attendance the 4th largest ever. Not bad for two 6-6 teams. Laffy now has the top 5 attendance records for the NO Bowl.

See ya again in New Orleans next year Laffy if you can cobble together 6 wins.

Just shut up, sit in a corner and lick your balls.....

Pretty sure he's picking at Tom.

Shh, I like the idea of him licking his balls.

(12-19-2016 12:47 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Shh, I like the idea of him licking his balls.

That is a very strange sentence you just typed. LOL

(12-19-2016 12:47 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Shh, I like the idea of him licking his balls.

Dude, you just took this thread in a TOTALLY different direction....

(12-19-2016 12:53 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 12:47 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Shh, I like the idea of him licking his balls.

Dude, you just took this thread in a TOTALLY different direction....

Maybe a direction that finally kills it.

Hope so, better than this endless bickering...

(12-19-2016 09:50 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Oh no, things not looking good in Lazyland. Laffy versus USM had a total of 35,061 fans in attendance making that game attendance the 4th largest ever. Not bad for two 6-6 teams. Laffy now has the top 5 attendance records for the NO Bowl.

See ya again in New Orleans next year Laffy if you can cobble together 6 wins.

USM brought fans too. They're actually closer to New Orleans than ULL.

How was this a "win" for the conference? Everyone watched USM beat a Belt team.

See ULL in NO next year if they cobble together 6 wins. So the conference can reward a team that has lost 7 straight FBS OOC games (and 10 of 11), even if they go 0-3 next year vs the FBS OOC (which is likely) with the best bowl game (with the best coverage and timeslot). Unless the conference acts.

I continue to argue that the conference should revise how it allocates its bowl slots. Top 3 bowls should go to the top 3 teams, and the top 3 bowls should rotate who picks first among those top 3 teams.

(12-19-2016 04:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 09:50 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Oh no, things not looking good in Lazyland. Laffy versus USM had a total of 35,061 fans in attendance making that game attendance the 4th largest ever. Not bad for two 6-6 teams. Laffy now has the top 5 attendance records for the NO Bowl.

See ya again in New Orleans next year Laffy if you can cobble together 6 wins.

USM brought fans too. They're actually closer to New Orleans than ULL.

How was this a "win" for the conference? Everyone watched USM beat a Belt team.

See ULL in NO next year if they cobble together 6 wins. So the conference can reward a team that has lost 7 straight FBS OOC games (and 10 of 11), even if they go 0-3 next year vs the FBS OOC (which is likely) with the best bowl game (with the best coverage and timeslot). Unless the conference acts.

I continue to argue that the conference should revise how it allocates its bowl slots. Top 3 bowls should go to the top 3 teams, and the top 3 bowls should rotate who picks first among those top 3 teams.

Because like with everything else you don't speak for everyone, a bowl isn't the top bowl because tom says so. That same bowl had us kickoff at 10am 2 years ago. How would us losing to Toledo or UCF and stAte or app handing USM a loss been better for the conference? Let me guess, because you say so?

(12-19-2016 04:52 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 09:50 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Oh no, things not looking good in Lazyland. Laffy versus USM had a total of 35,061 fans in attendance making that game attendance the 4th largest ever. Not bad for two 6-6 teams. Laffy now has the top 5 attendance records for the NO Bowl.

See ya again in New Orleans next year Laffy if you can cobble together 6 wins.

USM brought fans too. They're actually closer to New Orleans than ULL.

How was this a "win" for the conference? Everyone watched USM beat a Belt team.

See ULL in NO next year if they cobble together 6 wins. So the conference can reward a team that has lost 7 straight FBS OOC games (and 10 of 11), even if they go 0-3 next year vs the FBS OOC (which is likely) with the best bowl game (with the best coverage and timeslot). Unless the conference acts.

I continue to argue that the conference should revise how it allocates its bowl slots. Top 3 bowls should go to the top 3 teams, and the top 3 bowls should rotate who picks first among those top 3 teams.

Because like with everything else you don't speak for everyone, a bowl isn't the top bowl because tom says so. That same bowl had us kickoff at 10am 2 years ago. How would us losing to Toledo or UCF and stAte or app handing USM a loss been better for the conference? Let me guess, because you say so?

I define better as 'having more exposure', which I define as ratings and likelihood of people watching it. Most people aren't going to even know that CBSSN is on their cable package. Or where it is. ESPN didn't hype the game or its results either. It went into the ether largely. That was a missed opportunity for the conference IMHO.

The UCF team didn't even go through the pre-bowl activities. I'm not sure it was a real reward for stAte winning the conference.

You're free to define it using some other metric.

(12-19-2016 04:58 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:52 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 09:50 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Oh no, things not looking good in Lazyland. Laffy versus USM had a total of 35,061 fans in attendance making that game attendance the 4th largest ever. Not bad for two 6-6 teams. Laffy now has the top 5 attendance records for the NO Bowl.

See ya again in New Orleans next year Laffy if you can cobble together 6 wins.

USM brought fans too. They're actually closer to New Orleans than ULL.

How was this a "win" for the conference? Everyone watched USM beat a Belt team.

See ULL in NO next year if they cobble together 6 wins. So the conference can reward a team that has lost 7 straight FBS OOC games (and 10 of 11), even if they go 0-3 next year vs the FBS OOC (which is likely) with the best bowl game (with the best coverage and timeslot). Unless the conference acts.

I continue to argue that the conference should revise how it allocates its bowl slots. Top 3 bowls should go to the top 3 teams, and the top 3 bowls should rotate who picks first among those top 3 teams.

Because like with everything else you don't speak for everyone, a bowl isn't the top bowl because tom says so. That same bowl had us kickoff at 10am 2 years ago. How would us losing to Toledo or UCF and stAte or app handing USM a loss been better for the conference? Let me guess, because you say so?

I define better as 'having more exposure', which I define as ratings and likelihood of people watching it. Most people aren't going to even know that CBSSN is on their cable package. Or where it is. ESPN didn't hype the game or its results either. It went into the ether largely. That was a missed opportunity for the conference IMHO.

The UCF team didn't even go through the pre-bowl activities. I'm not sure it was a real reward for stAte winning the conference.

You're free to define it using some other metric.

You went to Orlando? Again you seem to think you speak for everyone...the stAte guy whose team went to Nola last year and Orlando this year disagrees with you but let's be honest this is only about you Tom. Ask the stAte players if they hated Orlando.

(12-19-2016 05:03 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:58 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:52 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 09:50 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Oh no, things not looking good in Lazyland. Laffy versus USM had a total of 35,061 fans in attendance making that game attendance the 4th largest ever. Not bad for two 6-6 teams. Laffy now has the top 5 attendance records for the NO Bowl.

See ya again in New Orleans next year Laffy if you can cobble together 6 wins.

USM brought fans too. They're actually closer to New Orleans than ULL.

How was this a "win" for the conference? Everyone watched USM beat a Belt team.

See ULL in NO next year if they cobble together 6 wins. So the conference can reward a team that has lost 7 straight FBS OOC games (and 10 of 11), even if they go 0-3 next year vs the FBS OOC (which is likely) with the best bowl game (with the best coverage and timeslot). Unless the conference acts.

I continue to argue that the conference should revise how it allocates its bowl slots. Top 3 bowls should go to the top 3 teams, and the top 3 bowls should rotate who picks first among those top 3 teams.

Because like with everything else you don't speak for everyone, a bowl isn't the top bowl because tom says so. That same bowl had us kickoff at 10am 2 years ago. How would us losing to Toledo or UCF and stAte or app handing USM a loss been better for the conference? Let me guess, because you say so?

I define better as 'having more exposure', which I define as ratings and likelihood of people watching it. Most people aren't going to even know that CBSSN is on their cable package. Or where it is. ESPN didn't hype the game or its results either. It went into the ether largely. That was a missed opportunity for the conference IMHO.

The UCF team didn't even go through the pre-bowl activities. I'm not sure it was a real reward for stAte winning the conference.

You're free to define it using some other metric.

You went to Orlando? Again you seem to think you speak for everyone...the stAte guy whose team went to Nola last year and Orlando this year disagrees with you but let's be honest this is only about you Tom. Ask the stAte players if they hated Orlando.

If stAte wishes to punt on an ESPN bowl to playing in a game that isn't well promoted, isn't watched at the same level as an ESPN bowl, and where the results aren't going to be prominently discussed...that's their deal. I understand that CBSSN did a good job with the production, but there's still a huge gap in exposure.

Troy to NO, App to Mobile and stAte to Montgomery would have been better for the conference IMHO.

Placing a team that has lost SEVEN straight FBS OOC games and has lost TEN of their last ELEVEN in a higher profile tier isn't a good way to promote the conference. Especially if they really didn't earn it in conference play.

You seem to try and pretend that the NO Bowl is just the same as the Cure or Tucson Bowls. But then you spend a lot of effort defending ULL's stranglehold on it.

How many tickets did the ULL office sell for the game?

(12-19-2016 05:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 05:03 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:58 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:52 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  USM brought fans too. They're actually closer to New Orleans than ULL.

How was this a "win" for the conference? Everyone watched USM beat a Belt team.

See ULL in NO next year if they cobble together 6 wins. So the conference can reward a team that has lost 7 straight FBS OOC games (and 10 of 11), even if they go 0-3 next year vs the FBS OOC (which is likely) with the best bowl game (with the best coverage and timeslot). Unless the conference acts.

I continue to argue that the conference should revise how it allocates its bowl slots. Top 3 bowls should go to the top 3 teams, and the top 3 bowls should rotate who picks first among those top 3 teams.

Because like with everything else you don't speak for everyone, a bowl isn't the top bowl because tom says so. That same bowl had us kickoff at 10am 2 years ago. How would us losing to Toledo or UCF and stAte or app handing USM a loss been better for the conference? Let me guess, because you say so?

I define better as 'having more exposure', which I define as ratings and likelihood of people watching it. Most people aren't going to even know that CBSSN is on their cable package. Or where it is. ESPN didn't hype the game or its results either. It went into the ether largely. That was a missed opportunity for the conference IMHO.

The UCF team didn't even go through the pre-bowl activities. I'm not sure it was a real reward for stAte winning the conference.

You're free to define it using some other metric.

You went to Orlando? Again you seem to think you speak for everyone...the stAte guy whose team went to Nola last year and Orlando this year disagrees with you but let's be honest this is only about you Tom. Ask the stAte players if they hated Orlando.

If stAte wishes to punt on an ESPN bowl to playing in a game that isn't well promoted, isn't watched at the same level as an ESPN bowl, and where the results aren't going to be prominently discussed...that's their deal. I understand that CBSSN did a good job with the production, but there's still a huge gap in exposure.

Troy to NO, App to Mobile and stAte to Montgomery would have been better for the conference IMHO.

Placing a team that has lost SEVEN straight FBS OOC games and has lost TEN of their last ELEVEN in a higher profile tier isn't a good way to promote the conference. Especially if they really didn't earn it in conference play.

You seem to try and pretend that the NO Bowl is just the same as the Cure or Tucson Bowls. But then you spend a lot of effort defending ULL's stranglehold on it.

How many tickets did the ULL office sell for the game?

You seem to speak for everyone...a troy southern miss rematch huh? StAte playing Toledo AGAIN??? For what th 5th time in a couple years? Keep talking you are proving my point of your knowledge of the situation and your intentions. They both went Georgia solid wins and we had a shot but came up short.

(12-19-2016 05:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 05:03 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:58 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:52 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  USM brought fans too. They're actually closer to New Orleans than ULL.

How was this a "win" for the conference? Everyone watched USM beat a Belt team.

See ULL in NO next year if they cobble together 6 wins. So the conference can reward a team that has lost 7 straight FBS OOC games (and 10 of 11), even if they go 0-3 next year vs the FBS OOC (which is likely) with the best bowl game (with the best coverage and timeslot). Unless the conference acts.

I continue to argue that the conference should revise how it allocates its bowl slots. Top 3 bowls should go to the top 3 teams, and the top 3 bowls should rotate who picks first among those top 3 teams.

Because like with everything else you don't speak for everyone, a bowl isn't the top bowl because tom says so. That same bowl had us kickoff at 10am 2 years ago. How would us losing to Toledo or UCF and stAte or app handing USM a loss been better for the conference? Let me guess, because you say so?

I define better as 'having more exposure', which I define as ratings and likelihood of people watching it. Most people aren't going to even know that CBSSN is on their cable package. Or where it is. ESPN didn't hype the game or its results either. It went into the ether largely. That was a missed opportunity for the conference IMHO.

The UCF team didn't even go through the pre-bowl activities. I'm not sure it was a real reward for stAte winning the conference.

You're free to define it using some other metric.

You went to Orlando? Again you seem to think you speak for everyone...the stAte guy whose team went to Nola last year and Orlando this year disagrees with you but let's be honest this is only about you Tom. Ask the stAte players if they hated Orlando.

If stAte wishes to punt on an ESPN bowl to playing in a game that isn't well promoted, isn't watched at the same level as an ESPN bowl, and where the results aren't going to be prominently discussed...that's their deal. I understand that CBSSN did a good job with the production, but there's still a huge gap in exposure.

Troy to NO, App to Mobile and stAte to Montgomery would have been better for the conference IMHO.

Placing a team that has lost SEVEN straight FBS OOC games and has lost TEN of their last ELEVEN in a higher profile tier isn't a good way to promote the conference. Especially if they really didn't earn it in conference play.

You seem to try and pretend that the NO Bowl is just the same as the Cure or Tucson Bowls. But then you spend a lot of effort defending ULL's stranglehold on it.

How many tickets did the ULL office sell for the game?

About half of the stadium was red (about 17K-18K). Maybe slightly more. My supposition is that most of those were purchased thru Ticketmaster and not the local ticket office like previous years, mostly due to costs and a large drive up business.

(12-19-2016 05:34 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 05:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 05:03 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:58 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-19-2016 04:52 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  Because like with everything else you don't speak for everyone, a bowl isn't the top bowl because tom says so. That same bowl had us kickoff at 10am 2 years ago. How would us losing to Toledo or UCF and stAte or app handing USM a loss been better for the conference? Let me guess, because you say so?

I define better as 'having more exposure', which I define as ratings and likelihood of people watching it. Most people aren't going to even know that CBSSN is on their cable package. Or where it is. ESPN didn't hype the game or its results either. It went into the ether largely. That was a missed opportunity for the conference IMHO.

The UCF team didn't even go through the pre-bowl activities. I'm not sure it was a real reward for stAte winning the conference.

You're free to define it using some other metric.

You went to Orlando? Again you seem to think you speak for everyone...the stAte guy whose team went to Nola last year and Orlando this year disagrees with you but let's be honest this is only about you Tom. Ask the stAte players if they hated Orlando.

If stAte wishes to punt on an ESPN bowl to playing in a game that isn't well promoted, isn't watched at the same level as an ESPN bowl, and where the results aren't going to be prominently discussed...that's their deal. I understand that CBSSN did a good job with the production, but there's still a huge gap in exposure.

Troy to NO, App to Mobile and stAte to Montgomery would have been better for the conference IMHO.

Placing a team that has lost SEVEN straight FBS OOC games and has lost TEN of their last ELEVEN in a higher profile tier isn't a good way to promote the conference. Especially if they really didn't earn it in conference play.

You seem to try and pretend that the NO Bowl is just the same as the Cure or Tucson Bowls. But then you spend a lot of effort defending ULL's stranglehold on it.

How many tickets did the ULL office sell for the game?

About half of the stadium was red (about 17K-18K). Maybe slightly more. My supposition is that most of those were purchased thru Ticketmaster and not the local ticket office like previous years, mostly due to costs and a large drive up business.

So ULL and the Belt won't even get much of the money from the supposed ULL attendance at the game? Well then there's that too. I thought that was one of the reasons why ULL deserved this game. If all ULL did through its ticket office was sell 10k, then the argument that ULL in the NO Bowl helps the Belt because they sell more tickets and make more money for the conference isn't particularly valid. Okay.