Guess I will bring my own "snacks" from the tailgate
Guess I will bring my own "snacks" from the tailgate
I Hope my comments were not mis-interpreted. Tech needs to hire a marketing guru (or asssitant guru) from another BCS program or a larger city (preferably an alumnus). Then, under the direction of the A.D., allow that individual to coordinate with professors from our College of Business to participate & help select a number of students for "unpaid" internships in varous areas as outlined by the marketing professional. Spirit & other groups at the University should also be called on to lend there voice, expertise & help. This is not "rocket science." Has been going on for years at other colleges. Students need to have a stake in the process or this will never work. The students must have somebody with marketing expertise to guide the entire operation. Pay this person & fund his/her operations well.
My 32 year veteran of section 107, Row A, Kathy (formerly Kincannon) was sent a video from someone on the end of the floor where the incident took place. As Dwayne said, it was pretty obvious that Michael "sinned" with great vigor on the play. I'm not sure if she kept the video. We were commenting last night that we may be the only two original seat owners left in section 107. Can anybody think of others who have been there since the beginning?
The showed the incident during the broadcast of the Marshall game. I was wrong. It was a legitimate flagrant 2.
Have you considered those Dogs?
It's not like Sec 107 makes these things up -
We just happen to sit in the best section in the TAC
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
After the two technical foul shots following the flagrant 2 call, the clock was restored to 1.2 seconds remaining in the half. No problems with the call, except to say that poor officiating may have contributed to Kyser's frustration. That's no excuse, however, for the action taken. I agree with ejection and suspension for flagrant 2 fouls.
However, I don't understand why the inbound play was on Charlotte's end of the court. Normally after a technical on the other end, the officials inbound it on the other end. The inbound play on Charlotte's end gave Charlotte a reasonable opportunity for two more points.
I didn't think about this until after the inbound play resulted in a missed shot. There might be some rule I don't know or forgot, but it's probably another mistake by a very inconsistent crew.
Yep -
They just keep getting worse...
''Don't be a bad dagh..."