It's been beaten to death. Until Arkansas pulls in a higher rated class than us (they spent almost 700K in 2011) then I'm not buying it. Tennesee spends 1.5 mil annually, to not even crack the top ten. Georgia Tech spent 900K (fourth most of any school) to land... wait for it... the #41 rated class. Recruiting powerhouses Texas Tech and North Carolina also spent more than us in 2011 as we finished with one of our best classes ever. It might sound great, but when you really look at the numbers, the budget arguement doesn't hold water.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by BigEdLSU

All around the south

Member since Sep 2010

20268 posts

Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:12 am to TheDrunkenTigah

I'd be willing to bet the Patterson bro hiring won't go to the recruiting budget, but its obviously a fixed cost.

Stuff like that is refreshing to see IMO.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Duckie

Tippy Toe, Louisiana

Member since Apr 2010

24314 posts

Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:20 am to TheDrunkenTigah

quote:
It's been beaten to death. Until Arkansas pulls in a higher rated class than us (they spent almost 700K in 2011) then I'm not buying it. Tennesee spends 1.5 mil annually, to not even crack the top ten. Georgia Tech spent 900K (fourth most of any school) to land... wait for it... the #41 rated class. Recruiting powerhouses Texas Tech and North Carolina also spent more than us in 2011 as we finished with one of our best classes ever. It might sound great, but when you really look at the numbers, the budget arguement doesn't hold water.

I can agree to an extent, however, I also believe in keeping up with the Joneses.

I think it should increase significantly, because I don't want to be left behind. Keep it this way until we really notice a significant recruiting decline and it's too late. It's easier to keep things running smoothly through incremental increases in budgets than to try to catch up.

1 ...

Report Post

LSU Recruiting - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board