Letter: LSU bowl invite is for the birds

Scott Rabalais nailed it on the head! I do not know who picks the contenders in these bowl games, but our Tigers deserve and have earned a better game than the Chick-fil-A Bowl (aka the Chicken Bowl). Our team worked hard, and to receive such a consolation prize is beneath them.

I have no idea what the financial aspect of this “Chicken Bowl” appearance is to LSU, but if I were the deciding factor, I’d toss them a used chicken leg.

Can you imagine the potential revenue from the University of Texas versus LSU in Jerryville’s Texas Stadium in the Cotton Bowl? The “Battle of the Sabine!”

Tigers, decline the invite, stay home and enjoy the holidays! You guys have earned it!

Chris Buckner (LSU, 1970)

retired, Houston Public Works

Baytown, Texas

Comments

1) Comment by Bouncer - 11/12/2012

Well, since the Baton Rougeoisie turned out in droves to support Chick-Fil-A's opposition to same-sex marriage, then I would think that they would be thrilled as all get-out that LSU is participating in the bowl sponsored by those anti-homo Christian chicken-pluckers.

2) Comment by Springer98 - 10/12/2012

tradewinns is right about the "prevent defense" in the Alabama game. The LSU defense was shutting down Alabama. Also, Zach Mettenberger was having the best game of his career & was connecting on practically every pass. The Ala. defense had no answer for LSU's passing attack. Instead of playing to win (& continuing to pass to score a td), Miles chose to play not to lose, setting up for a field goal, by running the ball (which is Alabama's strength on defense, stopping the run).The players deserve to go to a much better bowl game, but Miles sure doesn't!!

3) Comment by bradartigue - 10/12/2012

Implying that LSU would turn down a dollar is a failure to understand the mission of the athletic department. In this case, a share of millions of dollars (in 2007 they paid out $5.9MM).

4) Comment by nimby? - 10/12/2012

and if LSU loses this lesser bowl the argument(excuse) will be ?

5) Comment by bourbon-soda - 10/12/2012

@tradewinns, retrospect is great, but "playing them loose" was justifiable under the circumstances. Analysis at the time was that a missed assignment by one player, was the lapse. If coach had decided to "play them tight" and gotten burned on a long pass, critics say he should have "played them loose." The sports chatter industry would die without the perfection of retrospection.

6) Comment by tradewinns - 09/12/2012

thank coach miles for allowing the "prevent defense"(or playing them loose) in the last couple of minutes of the game (1:42 i believe it was). the season would have ended been totally different if not for that.

7) Comment by bourbon-soda - 09/12/2012

Whatever else comes of it, don't teams get some legal extra practice days that non-bowl teams don't get? How many coaches are going to relinquish that voluntarily, and I doubt that many players would prefer staying home. How does anyone figure that #23 Texas would bring in more revenue than A&M and Oklahoma?