(12-29-2012 08:17 PM)GoGold Wrote:  

(12-29-2012 01:19 PM)winston70 Wrote:  Tech has a had a poor relationship with the Indy Bowl since '97. I would imgine that a stadium with fans in the stadium would help TV ratings especially in the smaller bowl games against 2 non-aq teams.

Look, bottom line....they went with ULM because they were not willing to wait on Tech. Despite the great crowd you guys took up there last time and despite the obvious fact they knew ULM would not match it. It reeks of you guys overplaying your hand. They had much more to gain with Tech being in that game. Something pissed them off. It wasn't ULM.

A poor relationship with the Indy Bowl since '97??? How does that happen? A pretty good bowl game, with a damn good pay out and in your home state. How many AD's have you had since then? None of them could repair that relationship?

Carry on with you hating of ULM. Never understood myself. You guys claim you are better than them, and in most ways you are. But you always feel the need to put them down. Its almost like you need to convince yourselves of it.

The poor relationship between Tech and the Indy Bowl is on both sides and I agree it should have been fixed years ago. The '97 Tech team won 9 games and should have played LSU that year but LSU didn't want to play Tech and that's when it started - lol.

The Indy Bowl really pissed of a lot of local folks with Tech ties that have been attending their bowl game for years and that really hurt attendance this year in addition to the poor matchup. It's really stupid on both sides. As long as we keep our current lousy AD I don't look for anything to change. It will be interesting to see if Advocare keeps sponsoring the bowl game too.

(12-29-2012 09:00 PM)winston70 Wrote:  It will be interesting to see if Advocare keeps sponsoring the bowl game too.

How many sponsors has it had over the last 10, 20 years? I seem to remember its been quite a few.

(12-30-2012 12:36 AM)GoGold Wrote:  

(12-29-2012 09:00 PM)winston70 Wrote:  It will be interesting to see if Advocare keeps sponsoring the bowl game too.

How many sponsors has it had over the last 10, 20 years? I seem to remember its been quite a few.

Poulan Weed-Eater
Sanford
MainStay Investments
PetroSun
Advocare

With no sponsor at all 2003-2005

Indy Bowl already working on a plan to get better teams in the future:

Jack Andres, chairman for the 2012 AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl, was “disappointed” to see another horde of empty seats at Independence Stadium on Friday afternoon. However, he “understands” the dilemma ticketholders faced for the matchup between Ohio and the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

For the second straight year, the area was blanketed with chilly, damp weather conditions. Friday, it appeared a little more than half of the 41,853 tickets paid for were used.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/2...e-s-future

(12-30-2012 01:22 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  Indy Bowl already working on a plan to get better teams in the future:

Jack Andres, chairman for the 2012 AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl, was “disappointed” to see another horde of empty seats at Independence Stadium on Friday afternoon. However, he “understands” the dilemma ticketholders faced for the matchup between Ohio and the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

For the second straight year, the area was blanketed with chilly, damp weather conditions. Friday, it appeared a little more than half of the 41,853 tickets paid for were used.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/2...e-s-future

Things just keep getting better for the Indy Bowl

(12-30-2012 01:22 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  Indy Bowl already working on a plan to get better teams in the future:

Jack Andres, chairman for the 2012 AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl, was “disappointed” to see another horde of empty seats at Independence Stadium on Friday afternoon. However, he “understands” the dilemma ticketholders faced for the matchup between Ohio and the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

For the second straight year, the area was blanketed with chilly, damp weather conditions. Friday, it appeared a little more than half of the 41,853 tickets paid for were used.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/2...e-s-future

So, that means the true game attendance was about 22K. That might be an all-time low for the Indy Bowl.

Attendance was low because Louisiana-Monroe (ULM) was in the game and not Louisiana Tech.

Haven't seen mention of it in this thread, but apparently Berry gave his team like two full weeks off, don't believe he used the full allotment of bowl practices and it showed. If you think the ULM team that showed up(or didn't show up rather) in Shreveport is indicative of the team they had most of the season, you just don't know football. As bad as Arkansas was this year, there's still a lot of talent on that team and you shouldn't be able to beat, even the underwhelming team Arkansas ran out this year and in the same season get blown out by Ohio the way they did. I'm no fan of ULM or the shoestring budget they operate on, but Kolton Browning is a hell of a player and the Warhawks were much better this year than they showed in their bowl.

No doubt, Kolton Browning IS ULM football. I like that kid a lot, and if he stays healthy, ULM should have a good 2013.

The irony in all this chatter about Tech's relationship with the I-Bowl, or "I-BLOW" as it certainly demonstrated on Friday, is reflected by some people in this thread touting that Tech is in "no position of power" with the committee are the same folks that said we were in ULTIMATE authority with them in alledgedly keeping ULL out of the 2008 bowl game.

Tech is either POWERFUL or POWERLESS, depending on whatever position a Sun Belt school finds itself. It's pretty annoying to most of us Techies, because you guys keep us guessing..."do we defend Tech's OMNIPOTENCE or do we minimize Tech's IMPOTENCE?" LOL

In all seriousness, there was and is PLENTY of blame to go around for what was an abomination of a bowl game on Friday. Tech/Ohio would have been a better game, while Tech/ULM would have had a great attendance.

(12-30-2012 01:43 AM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 01:22 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  Indy Bowl already working on a plan to get better teams in the future:

Jack Andres, chairman for the 2012 AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl, was “disappointed” to see another horde of empty seats at Independence Stadium on Friday afternoon. However, he “understands” the dilemma ticketholders faced for the matchup between Ohio and the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

For the second straight year, the area was blanketed with chilly, damp weather conditions. Friday, it appeared a little more than half of the 41,853 tickets paid for were used.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/2...e-s-future

So, that means the true game attendance was about 22K. That might be an all-time low for the Indy Bowl.

Tech fans can keep nattering on about attendance but the OFFICIAL attendance for the ULM/Ohio game was 41,853 which is greater than the the Tech/NIU game in 2008 at 41,567.

(12-30-2012 09:16 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 01:43 AM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 01:22 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  Indy Bowl already working on a plan to get better teams in the future:

Jack Andres, chairman for the 2012 AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl, was “disappointed” to see another horde of empty seats at Independence Stadium on Friday afternoon. However, he “understands” the dilemma ticketholders faced for the matchup between Ohio and the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

For the second straight year, the area was blanketed with chilly, damp weather conditions. Friday, it appeared a little more than half of the 41,853 tickets paid for were used.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/2...e-s-future

So, that means the true game attendance was about 22K. That might be an all-time low for the Indy Bowl.

Tech fans can keep nattering on about attendance but the OFFICIAL attendance for the ULM/Ohio game was 41,853 which is greater than the the Tech/NIU game in 2008 at 41,567.

Do you believe there were 41k people at that game?

(12-30-2012 09:16 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 01:43 AM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 01:22 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  Indy Bowl already working on a plan to get better teams in the future:

Jack Andres, chairman for the 2012 AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl, was “disappointed” to see another horde of empty seats at Independence Stadium on Friday afternoon. However, he “understands” the dilemma ticketholders faced for the matchup between Ohio and the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

For the second straight year, the area was blanketed with chilly, damp weather conditions. Friday, it appeared a little more than half of the 41,853 tickets paid for were used.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/2...e-s-future

So, that means the true game attendance was about 22K. That might be an all-time low for the Indy Bowl.

Tech fans can keep nattering on about attendance but the OFFICIAL attendance for the ULM/Ohio game was 41,853 which is greater than the the Tech/NIU game in 2008 at 41,567.

The actual attendance was slightly less than 20k. The Shreveport Times has a couple of articles about it - just google it...

Good game by Ohio

(12-30-2012 10:07 PM)winston70 Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 09:16 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 01:43 AM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 01:22 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  Indy Bowl already working on a plan to get better teams in the future:

Jack Andres, chairman for the 2012 AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl, was “disappointed” to see another horde of empty seats at Independence Stadium on Friday afternoon. However, he “understands” the dilemma ticketholders faced for the matchup between Ohio and the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

For the second straight year, the area was blanketed with chilly, damp weather conditions. Friday, it appeared a little more than half of the 41,853 tickets paid for were used.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/2...e-s-future

So, that means the true game attendance was about 22K. That might be an all-time low for the Indy Bowl.

Tech fans can keep nattering on about attendance but the OFFICIAL attendance for the ULM/Ohio game was 41,853 which is greater than the the Tech/NIU game in 2008 at 41,567.

The actual attendance was slightly less than 20k. The Shreveport Times has a couple of articles about it - just google it...

Good game by Ohio

Tech vs. Ohio would've been a good game.

(12-30-2012 10:14 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 10:07 PM)winston70 Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 09:16 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 01:43 AM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 01:22 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  Indy Bowl already working on a plan to get better teams in the future:

Jack Andres, chairman for the 2012 AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl, was “disappointed” to see another horde of empty seats at Independence Stadium on Friday afternoon. However, he “understands” the dilemma ticketholders faced for the matchup between Ohio and the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

For the second straight year, the area was blanketed with chilly, damp weather conditions. Friday, it appeared a little more than half of the 41,853 tickets paid for were used.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/2...e-s-future

So, that means the true game attendance was about 22K. That might be an all-time low for the Indy Bowl.

Tech fans can keep nattering on about attendance but the OFFICIAL attendance for the ULM/Ohio game was 41,853 which is greater than the the Tech/NIU game in 2008 at 41,567.

The actual attendance was slightly less than 20k. The Shreveport Times has a couple of articles about it - just google it...

Good game by Ohio

Tech vs. Ohio would've been a good game.

Well, Tech would have played like they had been there before and wouldn't have spent the first quarter pissing down their legs.

frankly, I don't care how many people were at the game. And I can assure you NOBODY outside of some jealous LA (Tech/La/etc) fans cares either. I root for a MAC team, if I cared about attendance I would have gone mental years ago. I'm more interested in seeing what the TV ratings were.

I don't think anyone who watched the Ohio ULM game and then watched VT and Rutgers afterwards came away more impressed with the second game because the stands were more full. That game was totally unwatchable. The Rutgers QB was 17/40 for 129 yds. good grief talk about an embarrassment, and they're going to the B1G. that shows how screwed up college football.

(12-30-2012 11:34 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  And I can assure you NOBODY outside of some jealous LA (Tech/La/etc) fans cares either.

You'd be wrong. The I-Bowl is already talking about getting a hotel tax passed so they can increase their payout and get a higher priority in the SEC/ACC to get better future matchups:

"Jack Andres, chairman for the 2012 AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl, was “disappointed” to see another horde of empty seats at Independence Stadium on Friday afternoon. However, he “understands” the dilemma ticketholders faced for the matchup between Ohio and the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

For the second straight year, the area was blanketed with chilly, damp weather conditions. Friday, it appeared a little more than half of the 41,853 tickets paid for were used."

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/2...e-s-future

(12-30-2012 11:34 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  frankly, I don't care how many people were at the game. And I can assure you NOBODY outside of some jealous LA (Tech/La/etc) fans cares either. I root for a MAC team, if I cared about attendance I would have gone mental years ago. I'm more interested in seeing what the TV ratings were.

I don't think anyone who watched the Ohio ULM game and then watched VT and Rutgers afterwards came away more impressed with the second game because the stands were more full. That game was totally unwatchable. The Rutgers QB was 17/40 for 129 yds. good grief talk about an embarrassment, and they're going to the B1G. that shows how screwed up college football.

Still couldn't be more wrong... We don't have a problem with ULM playing in the bowl just a problem with how the bowl adminstration handled the invitation process. They figured inviting ULM would be just like inviting Tech and they were dead wrong. Not too hard to figure out.

Also, our AD is an idiot and should have already been canned and is very much to blame as well.

(12-31-2012 12:52 AM)winston70 Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 11:34 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  frankly, I don't care how many people were at the game. And I can assure you NOBODY outside of some jealous LA (Tech/La/etc) fans cares either. I root for a MAC team, if I cared about attendance I would have gone mental years ago. I'm more interested in seeing what the TV ratings were.

I don't think anyone who watched the Ohio ULM game and then watched VT and Rutgers afterwards came away more impressed with the second game because the stands were more full. That game was totally unwatchable. The Rutgers QB was 17/40 for 129 yds. good grief talk about an embarrassment, and they're going to the B1G. that shows how screwed up college football.

Still couldn't be more wrong... We don't have a problem with ULM playing in the bowl just a problem with how the bowl adminstration handled the invitation process. They figured inviting ULM would be just like inviting Tech and they were dead wrong. Not too hard to figure out.

Also, our AD is an idiot and should have already been canned and is very much to blame as well.

Yeah, the I Bowl invite process really sucks. They issued an invite to Tech who did not accept at the time telling the bowl they were looking into better opportunities and would decide later (in other words I Bowl would get consideration if nothing better developed). Bowl still didnt hear from Tech thus called them for a decision, Tech still wanted more time so the bowl marked them off the list and moved on. Just cant believe the I Bowl would have the nerve or audacity to do that, after all you are talking about La Tech here.

(12-31-2012 09:38 AM)eager eagle Wrote:  

(12-31-2012 12:52 AM)winston70 Wrote:  

(12-30-2012 11:34 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  frankly, I don't care how many people were at the game. And I can assure you NOBODY outside of some jealous LA (Tech/La/etc) fans cares either. I root for a MAC team, if I cared about attendance I would have gone mental years ago. I'm more interested in seeing what the TV ratings were.

I don't think anyone who watched the Ohio ULM game and then watched VT and Rutgers afterwards came away more impressed with the second game because the stands were more full. That game was totally unwatchable. The Rutgers QB was 17/40 for 129 yds. good grief talk about an embarrassment, and they're going to the B1G. that shows how screwed up college football.

Still couldn't be more wrong... We don't have a problem with ULM playing in the bowl just a problem with how the bowl adminstration handled the invitation process. They figured inviting ULM would be just like inviting Tech and they were dead wrong. Not too hard to figure out.

Also, our AD is an idiot and should have already been canned and is very much to blame as well.

Yeah, the I Bowl invite process really sucks. They issued an invite to Tech who did not accept at the time telling the bowl they were looking into better opportunities and would decide later (in other words I Bowl would get consideration if nothing better developed). Bowl still didnt hear from Tech thus called them for a decision, Tech still wanted more time so the bowl marked them off the list and moved on. Just cant believe the I Bowl would have the nerve or audacity to do that, after all you are talking about La Tech here.

They never said, "better opportunites." Tech just asked for time to "vet the situation." The vetting ended on Sunday at 4:30 (when NIU was invited to the Orange Bowl, knocking all Big XII teams down 1 bowl notch). The Independence Bowl's deadline for Tech was Saturday around 3:00. Tech did not have enough information at that time to make an informed decision (because all games had not been finished).

The Independence Bowl was pressuring Tech to make a premature decision. They could have been more reasonable and they would have gotten the game they wanted.

Still couldn't be more wrong... We don't have a problem with ULM playing in the bowl just a problem with how the bowl adminstration handled the invitation process. They figured inviting ULM would be just like inviting Tech and they were dead wrong. Not too hard to figure out.

Also, our AD is an idiot and should have already been canned and is very much to blame as well.
[/quote]

Yeah, the I Bowl invite process really sucks. They issued an invite to Tech who did not accept at the time telling the bowl they were looking into better opportunities and would decide later (in other words I Bowl would get consideration if nothing better developed). Bowl still didnt hear from Tech thus called them for a decision, Tech still wanted more time so the bowl marked them off the list and moved on. Just cant believe the I Bowl would have the nerve or audacity to do that, after all you are talking about La Tech here.
[/quote]

They never said, "better opportunites." Tech just asked for time to "vet the situation." The vetting ended on Sunday at 4:30 (when NIU was invited to the Orange Bowl, knocking all Big XII teams down 1 bowl notch). The Independence Bowl's deadline for Tech was Saturday around 3:00. Tech did not have enough information at that time to make an informed decision (because all games had not been finished).

The Independence Bowl was pressuring Tech to make a premature decision. They could have been more reasonable and they would have gotten the game they wanted.
[/quote]
Let the spin continue. "waiting for better opportunity" or "time to vet the situation which actually took 4-5day when all games were concluded" means the same to me. Throw out the spin, boil it down to just a few simple words-Tech was called with an invite, they wanted to wait (whatever reason they want to give)l, I Bowl called them again few days later, Tech still wanted to wait so I Bowl voted to move on.