Dennis Dodd of CBS decided to write an article after a bleak Hurricane Forecast for the New Orleans area. This was the same forecast that predicted many Hurricane hits last year that didnt occur. Now he is saying that the Sugar Bowl could be gone and replaced or moved out of New Orleans. He even made a BCS lineup with the Chick-Fil-A bowl replacing the Sugar Bowl. http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/10151462/1 I felt like he was rooting against N.O. in a way after reading this article and it seems others feel the same way. He took a few cheap shots at responses to his mailbag. He also wouldnt admit he was wrong about his prediction on JR before last season. But that is a different subject. Is it just me or do others feel he is being an A$$ and rooting against N.O. and the Sugar Bowl? http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/10166410
Well sure.........if a Katrina hits Miami, we won't be able to have an Orange Bowl either; or an earthquake in Pasadena and no Rose Bowl either. What an idiot. Do they realize we had the Sugar Bowl there already since Katrina?? The Hyatt is already booked up....I tried to book a room.
I wasnt going to post anything when I read it a few days ago but when he said it wasnt rah rah time it pissed me off. I guess he has no idea that the after effects of Katrina is not over for many LA citizens and it wont be for a long time.
did he miss that the saints were back and had great fan support this year? did he miss the hornets will be back next year? what a d bag!
Obviously this pr*ck hasn't even been to NOLA. Was down there last weekend, and the city looked great! I didn't even get panhandled, not even once! That's never happed to me in New Orleans. There was even a lot of activity in the 9th Ward. Idiot. Dave.
I don't think that was his argument. If Miami or Pasadena got hit by a natural disaster, those cities would get rebuilt and eventually recover. I don't think the same could be said for New Orleans if it was hit by another Katrina or worse since New Orleans has yet to recover from Katrina. If NO hadn't been already devasted by Katrina, it might be able to weather a hurricane to where it's currently at. But, to be hit by two hurricanes, when the city still hasn't recovered from the first one, would be devasting to the city. To use a boxing analogy, New Orleans is on the ropes and still staggering around and another blow would be the finishing knockout. And, it doesn't help that NO is still just as vulnerable to another Katrina given its special topography. Its insanity to keep on doing the exact same thing and expect different results. After Katrina, they really should have relocated the city to somewhere less vulnerable to flooding.
Should they have relocated San Fran after the earthquake or south Florida after hurricane Andrew? Maybe we should relocate the entire midwest to avoid all those tornadoes? You really aren't too bright...
What about NY then, aren't they still vulnerable and didn't it take a long time- if they're even finished, I don't know. That was ONE building, we're talking about a city. It will be rebuilt, there's been MUCH progress, still a lot to do but we're getting there. By your logic, any city that suffers a huge disaster should be "Relocated" to avoid a second? What about the ones ravaged by tornados. The more I think about "Relocating" really makes me chuckle.
