
UTSA did play at GaSt last year during transition while the Panthers were still playing a full CAA slate.
But if you listen closely Benson said our declaring prior to 6-1 increases the Sun Belt's SOS and revenue streams. I'm betting we don't make the trip.Yosef wrote:I agree. I'm also all about upholding our end of the bargain and not setting a precedent that we'll just buy ourselves out of an agreement we made.T-Dog wrote:I say we go if they want us to. Lake Charles is a lot of fun. We're ineligible for bowl games so it's not like we need to protect our strength of schedule.
I think people saying stuff like this are afraid fans of other schools on message boards will criticize us. That's not a reason to lower our SOS and play a game that will cost us money.wb247 wrote:Backing out would be incredibly hypocritical
If I were McNeese, I'd take the $250K, and schedule a home game against another team. Perhaps, we can transfer the contract (it's a home and home) to Wofford or Furman.huskie3 wrote:keep the game as scheduled and move it to Boone! pay them $250,000 to come up. everyone is happy except the apps wanting to tailgate at McNeese.
huskie3 wrote:keep the game as scheduled and move it to Boone! pay them $250,000 to come up. everyone is happy except the apps wanting to tailgate at McNeese.
When I think back on all of the discussions about us not being able to get good OOC home games and never with a team from FBS, I can't help but think that we are in a position to put our money where our mouth is. As we know all too well, for every FCS team that gets a great home game, there's another team with an undesirable away game. That is, unless we think scheduling is only a one-way street where everyone else is expected to bend to our will. This isn't a case of actively seeking an away game at an FCS school and I'm certainly not suggesting that we make it a future practice. In this case, it's already contracted. I'd like to see us honor our commitment.TheMoody1 wrote:wb247 wrote:Backing out would be incredibly hypocritical
How so?
Understand the sentiment completely, but I don't think the Sun Belt will allow it.wb247 wrote:When I think back on all of the discussions about us not being able to get good OOC home games and never with a team from FBS, I can't help but think that we are in a position to put our money where our mouth is. As we know all too well, for every FCS team that gets a great home game, there's another team with an undesirable away game. That is, unless we think scheduling is only a one-way street where everyone else is expected to bend to our will. This isn't a case of actively seeking an away game at an FCS school and I'm certainly not suggesting that we make it a future practice. In this case, it's already contracted. I'd like to see us honor our commitment.TheMoody1 wrote:wb247 wrote:Backing out would be incredibly hypocritical
How so?
The contract (commitment) is to play the game, or to pay McNeese State $250,000. If we pay them $250,000 to not play the game, then that is honoring the commitment. Seems fairly straightforward to me.wb247 wrote:When I think back on all of the discussions about us not being able to get good OOC home games and never with a team from FBS, I can't help but think that we are in a position to put our money where our mouth is. As we know all too well, for every FCS team that gets a great home game, there's another team with an undesirable away game. That is, unless we think scheduling is only a one-way street where everyone else is expected to bend to our will. This isn't a case of actively seeking an away game at an FCS school and I'm certainly not suggesting that we make it a future practice. In this case, it's already contracted. I'd like to see us honor our commitment.TheMoody1 wrote:wb247 wrote:Backing out would be incredibly hypocritical
How so?