I thought he was getting rid of the "good ole boy" network at the U of A, and he showed great leadership and guts when he fired Bobby Petrino. But there is no reason for this stupid rule to continue that U of A doesn't play other D1 schools in the state. It's just wrong. So I say Jeff needs to grow a pair and make the logical decision to play ASU in football and the other D1 teams in other sports. This would have been a great step by even suggesting that the UALR ladies play in Fayetteville instead of sending them clear across the country. Some legislator might want to look into that which costs a state school $10,000 when they could have saved that money and created a historic event in our state's sports history.

(03-19-2013 03:10 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  I thought he was getting rid of the "good ole boy" network at the U of A, and he showed great leadership and guts when he fired Bobby Petrino. But there is no reason for this stupid rule to continue that U of A doesn't play other D1 schools in the state. It's just wrong. So I say Jeff needs to grow a pair and make the logical decision to play ASU in football and the other D1 teams in other sports. This would have been a great step by even suggesting that the UALR ladies play in Fayetteville instead of sending them clear across the country. Some legislator might want to look into that which costs a state school $10,000 when they could have saved that money and created a historic event in our state's sports history.

So I take it that you also don't believe our not playing UAF was simply a "coincidence".

HELL NO! I don't believe in coincidences. Not when it comes to the U of A's policy of not playing other in state schools!

Don't know why it had to come to this, but maybe the legislature will finally take care of it and make it happen.[/i]

That's what the Alabama legislature had to do when Alabama and Auburn hadn't played in 40 years. They legislated that they play each other. That was obviously before they were both in the SEC. It's time that took place in Arkansas. I really believe that most people in the state would want that policy changed if they understood how archaic it is and we're the only state in the country that has this type of rule. It's a shame that the U of A will eventually be forced to do something that they should have stepped up and done anyway.

Now THAT was the last straw for me. What remaining respect I have for the Razorback Nation is forever flushed down the toilet. It is now documented that I am 100% entrenched in the UALR Trojan Neighborhood! UALR Athletics...#1 in da 'Hood, G!

(03-19-2013 06:15 PM)UALRSuperFan Curtis Wrote:  Now THAT was the last straw for me. What remaining respect I have for the Razorback Nation is forever flushed down the toilet. It is now documented that I am 100% entrenched in the UALR Trojan Neighborhood! UALR Athletics...#1 in da 'Hood, G!

Curtis, I never doubted you were 100% UALR.

What benefit would the UofA have in playing in state schools. None. And don't give me the "rivalry" crap. The smaller in state schools have everything to gain and nothing to loose and the UofA has nothing to gain and something to loose.

Additionallt it would divide the fan base. Right now one can be a fan of the UofA and either stAte or UALR (but obviously not both). If the in state schools play it forces people to choose one, not be a fan of two.

No it doesn't. Hogs will be #1 in this state, no matter what. If anything it would make more Hog fans, because they no longer can say UA is holding them down by refusing to acknowledge their existence.

You can still be a fan of Arkansas, except the one game when they play your team. And only ASU plays football, so it would just be basketball with UALR and UAPB. And as far as recruiting, the recruiting is pretty well national anyway, so it would have very little effect. The Razorbacks lose Arkansas players to Ole Miss and others anyway so that would have little or no effect. I understand why they have the policy. It just isn't a good one, IMO. People move here from other parts of the country and the can't understand how that policy takes place. It's time for the legislature to step in. Keep the money in state.

The money issue is a wash. If stAte plays the UofA in football they would just be loosing the opportunity to go play a Tennessee or someone and bring more money into the state. And of I'm the UofA and o am forced to play an in state school I for sure not paying them as much as I would someone i wasn't forced to play.

The payment would be determined by the legislature to make sure they didn't do that. You pay Lousiana Monroe $400,000, you pay ASU $400,000. Just an example. Since it's probably not happening anytime soon or ever, it's all just speculation anyway.

(03-20-2013 04:42 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  The payment would be determined by the legislature to make sure they didn't do that. You pay Lousiana Monroe $400,000, you pay ASU $400,000. Just an example. Since it's probably not happening anytime soon or ever, it's all just speculation anyway.

At this point, I really don't care one way or the other about UAF's "policy". Still they have always said they will play any State team if they match up in a postseason tournament. Well, there appears to be some pretty good evidence that this is just simply not true. If they really did manipulate the WNIT in some way that is just cowardice beyond belief. I've stopped calling the men Chickenhawgs. Maybe the ladies deserve Ladychickenhawgs.

(03-20-2013 10:59 AM)tweaky1 Wrote:  The money issue is a wash. If stAte plays the UofA in football they would just be loosing the opportunity to go play a Tennessee or someone and bring more money into the state. And of I'm the UofA and o am forced to play an in state school I for sure not paying them as much as I would someone i wasn't forced to play.

False. First, ASU doesnt need the money game like we used to, we are trying to get out of them as it is. Second, Any potential loss in dollars would be made up in exposure. Pigletville has full control of the state media, a game against an instate school would draw large amounts of media coverage, and that media is watched by potential fans and recruits.

Second, if the legislature forced such a game, they would also most likely set financial terms for such a contest, meaning that the UA would have very little say in what they could give. Legislature controls both schools, its not like one can just threaten to ignore what they say.

(03-20-2013 07:43 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 10:59 AM)tweaky1 Wrote:  The money issue is a wash. If stAte plays the UofA in football they would just be loosing the opportunity to go play a Tennessee or someone and bring more money into the state. And of I'm the UofA and o am forced to play an in state school I for sure not paying them as much as I would someone i wasn't forced to play.

False. First, ASU doesnt need the money game like we used to, we are trying to get out of them as it is. Second, Any potential loss in dollars would be made up in exposure. Pigletville has full control of the state media, a game against an instate school would draw large amounts of media coverage, and that media is watched by potential fans and recruits.

Second, if the legislature forced such a game, they would also most likely set financial terms for such a contest, meaning that the UA would have very little say in what they could give. Legislature controls both schools, its not like one can just threaten to ignore what they say.

I ready for the legislature to force UA to play ASU in football. Let's start with just one time like has been proposed. No doubt ASU would have won if they played this year. Might well be the better team next year as well. All ASU has to do is win once and the "policy" will be gone forever. Always wonder what would have happened if ASU could have held on the lead in the NIT game 20 years ago. May have totally changed Arkansas sports history.

If ASU had won it might have reinforced the policy. I just think it's a shame that we had to cross two time zones to play our game this weekend when we could have certainly played somewhere a lot closer. Whether the Hogs had anything to do with it or not, it isn't fair to our program. But since when has anyone been fair to UALR?

(03-20-2013 11:27 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  If ASU had won it might have reinforced the policy. I just think it's a shame that we had to cross two time zones to play our game this weekend when we could have certainly played somewhere a lot closer. Whether the Hogs had anything to do with it or not, it isn't fair to our program. But since when has anyone been fair to UALR?

When Dean Lee moved the beches after Steve Shields run in with a fan and a water bottle in Jonesboro. We were way too fair to you guys then.

Not talking specifics. Just the world in general. I have always been treated nicely on my visits to ASU. In fact, the last two years, we didn't even have to pay for tickets. Nice folks outside the arena just gave us some tickets and wouldn't take any money for them. So you are obviously the exception to the rule. Except you beat us like a drum up there this year, which was not being a gracious host, but thats a different story.

(03-20-2013 07:43 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 10:59 AM)tweaky1 Wrote:  The money issue is a wash. If stAte plays the UofA in football they would just be loosing the opportunity to go play a Tennessee or someone and bring more money into the state. And of I'm the UofA and o am forced to play an in state school I for sure not paying them as much as I would someone i wasn't forced to play.

False. First, ASU doesnt need the money game like we used to, we are trying to get out of them as it is. Second, Any potential loss in dollars would be made up in exposure. Pigletville has full control of the state media, a game against an instate school would draw large amounts of media coverage, and that media is watched by potential fans and recruits.

Second, if the legislature forced such a game, they would also most likely set financial terms for such a contest, meaning that the UA would have very little say in what they could give. Legislature controls both schools, its not like one can just threaten to ignore what they say.

My biggest concern is that a few idiot fans of both schools (and I know I am biased here, ASU fans in particular) will do something stupid and classless to embarrass the whole state. I don't know, like publicly urinating on a hog hat or dragging a stuffed wolf behind your vehicle on a chain or some whacko immature tasteless crap. Or worse. It would embarrass our state. That's one argument I can get behind against such a contest because, chiefsfan, you saw what happened at the WNIT vs the Hogs in Jboro.

As recently as five years ago the worst things our fans would do if we played the hogs is throw their walkers and hoverounds onto the court but now that we've got the makings of a realt student section it might get better than that.