- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Woman’s basketball does not match these ridiculous salaries mentioned
Posted on 4/23/21 at 5:18 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Posted on 4/23/21 at 5:18 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Also do any of you business majors have any clue about the concept of brand equity?
Yes, the LSU brand will be greatly affected by women’s basketball!!!!!!!!! So much so, that’s you’ll be able to hang profitability banners from all that TV revenue you’ll be generating with the renewed brand interest.
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 5:19 pm
1
Posted on 4/23/21 at 5:21 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
Yes, the LSU brand will be greatly affected by women’s basketball
Having teams across all sports competing at a high level absolutely does positively impact your brand equity and as we’ve established the move will be cost neutral at worst so there’s no reason not to do it.
Since your profitability angle doesn’t have any merit, maybe you can tell us why you’re really so opposed to this?
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 5:22 pm
Posted on 4/23/21 at 5:26 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Since your profitability angle doesn’t have any merit, maybe you can tell us why you’re really so opposed to this?
Without addressing the first part of your post, because “establishing” isn’t done with multiple assumptions, I’m against this because Woodward has a history of over spending and not getting results.
You brought up Pelini, that was a dogshit over spend as well.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 5:28 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
I’m against this because Woodward has a history of over spending and not getting results.
You really can’t take a step back and see that this is about as slam dunk of a hire as can be made? I mean really?
Posted on 4/23/21 at 5:30 pm to Draconian Sanctions
I can, but it’s Women’s basketball that doesn’t generate revenue ... so here we go again. It’s a circular argument. We can just agree to disagree. I see your side, I understand it - I just disagree with you and that’s fine.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 5:33 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
but it’s Women’s basketball that doesn’t generate revenue
If it’s losing $5 million now, but paying an extra $2 million is extremely likely to bring in an extra $2.5 million, then isn’t that a risk worth taking?
quote:
I just disagree with you
And you’re doing so from a position of small minded and risk averse thinking that is disregarding the big picture in multiple ways.
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 5:34 pm
Posted on 4/23/21 at 5:34 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Man, I don’t care enough to keep arguing. I hope we get Mulkey if that’s what we’re trying to do.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 6:26 pm to zed44
Depends, but I'd rather lose $1mm a year instead of $4mm.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 6:33 pm to junkfunky
If you win, they will come. Nothing proves that more than gymnastics. Gymnastics ! Besides, women's basketball has been there before. Let's ride.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 6:58 pm to zed44
If it’s not coming out of your pocket shut the frick up
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:22 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
If it’s losing $5 million now, but paying an extra $2 million is extremely likely to bring in an extra $2.5 million, then isn’t that a risk worth taking?
quote:
And you’re doing so from a position of small minded and risk averse thinking that is disregarding the big picture in multiple ways.
Bruh, I've been making this same argument in other threads. The only lens some can see paying a womens basketball coach a big salary is if the sport is "profitable" or "generates revenue". Thankfully, LSU sees the big picture that you describe above. There is MUCH MORE benefit to having successful sports at the university than how much money it / they generate. Some refuse to see it though because what this is really about is that they don't believe womens basketball DESERVES that kind of investment. As I've said numerous times on this board, folks need to stop trying to count LSU's money and telling them what is "fiscally responsible".
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 7:23 pm
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:29 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:Athletics exists on an entirely different financial plane than the university itself.
Also it’s a University, not a GAP outlet that needs to hit its quarterly numbers.
Athletics DOES need to meet its quarterly numbers. And it WILL gouge football and men's basketball ticket holders--or even the students themselves--to make sure it does.
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 7:34 pm
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:32 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:That's the thing. Paying an extra $2M is not "extremely likely" (or even somewhat likely) to bring in even another $500K, let alone another $2.5M.
paying an extra $2 million is extremely likely to bring in an extra $2.5 million
Football and men's basketball donations and prices will go up. Women's basketball tickets will go up too, but still lose a comparable amount of money overall. That's why many people on this board have a legitimate opinion on this issue.
Comments like this show you have no clue how college athletics finances actually work.
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 8:59 pm
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:41 pm to jrctiger84
Baylor WBB made over $9M in year 2018 and was 3rd in the nation. Stanford made $21M (per Sports Business Journal report. LSU made less than $3M.
You think paying a coach $2.5-$3M, who has won 3 nattys in the past 20 years wouldn't be able to substantially improve LSU WBB revenue? Could def become profitable. No reason KM can't do here what she did in Waco.
You think paying a coach $2.5-$3M, who has won 3 nattys in the past 20 years wouldn't be able to substantially improve LSU WBB revenue? Could def become profitable. No reason KM can't do here what she did in Waco.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:45 pm to Gravitiger
quote:
Women's basketball tickets will go up too, but still lose a comparable amount of money overall.
Would be willing to pay more than not paying any at all.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:48 pm to rumination
quote:But most LSU fans aren't willing to pay anything at all to watch WBB either way. Any additional WBB season tix will not even begin to cover the additional costs. They will be passed along to FB and MBB season ticket holders. Which again affects many on this board
Would be willing to pay more than not paying any at all.
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 7:50 pm
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:49 pm to zed44
Need to factor-in that we are spending a million on trash coach. At least now we will have the top coach in America.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:51 pm to zed44
quote:
Why would Lsu pay that kind of money for woman’s basketball (really)
For several reasons. But one I haven't seen mentioned is that if Woodward and the LSU administration are as woke as they're said to be, it would make complete sense to throw big money at a great female coach.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:52 pm to LongTime Tiger
quote:Private schools don't report honestly, if they report at all.
Baylor WBB made over $9M in year 2018 and was 3rd in the nation. Stanford made $21M (per Sports Business Journal report. LSU made less than $3M.
You think paying a coach $2.5-$3M, who has won 3 nattys in the past 20 years wouldn't be able to substantially improve LSU WBB revenue? Could def become profitable. No reason KM can't do here what she did in Waco.
There is no way Baylor or Stanford WBB revenue is that high, let alone profit.
In their federally required EADA reports last year (and the several years previous), both Baylor and Stanford reported massive losses in WBB.
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 8:58 pm
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:55 pm to Gravitiger
You gotta pay to play. I'd rather pay to have winners, than watch losers. Besides that, it's a great PR move and we need some good news nationally. KM will have us competing for Natty's.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News