You said...a band that can play music vs. a band that can dance. Misunderstanding or misrepresentation? Either way, the end. Have a great day.
As an SU alumnus, I would say NO because unlike the occasional basketball and baseball win against LSU, football is a no-win game for SU. BUT, at the same time, why not SU? It's a big payday for crosstown school...one that is also an ag school. I understand playing no patsies, but knowing the patsies WILL be scheduled every year, why not SU? Why McNeese or ULL, but not SU?
PLAY THEM. BEAT THEM LIKE A RAG DOLL.HEN I CAN STOP HEARING ABOUT HOW SOUTHERN CAN BEAT LSU IN FOOTBALL.
Really, I have never heard this before. I think I might google it just to see how many times it shows up.:rofl:
cant you read, grad? apparently all the hens are saying it. probably just mad cause i keep sacrificing live chickens to the sports gods.:grin:
One game every season would. $4 million coaches do not come cheaply. Football pays for everything including the new baseball stadiums and all the minor sports. The AD has said it flatly before--LSU cannot break even on a 6 home game schedule and must have 7 to have any profit available to expand, repair, pay raises, etc. It's the reality of playing football at the level that we play. All of those other top-10 money teams have to have the home games, too.
First, I believe LSU should NEVER play FCS schools. There are enough FBS schools, including BCS conference bottom feeders, that games could and should be found. Hell, I'd rather keep playing Sun Belt teams or Tech rather than FCS schools. Second, since LSU is going to play FCS schools, I would rather keep that money in the state of Louisiana and give it to those schools rather than App State, Wofford, W. Carolina or W. Illinois. I'll give LSU some credit though for the 2010 season. The Tigers have State, W. Virginia, Tenn., Bama, Ole Miss - which is really good, so I'll take McNeese and ULM in exchage for those five quality games.
