re: LSU view vs National view on Athletics

Your logic on naming players that came through the system in baseball doesnt work.

How many players are on a NCAA basketball team roster VS number of players on a NCAA baseball roster. Plus, baseball isnt the NFL where everygame has a starting lineup intro with each player repp'en his alma mater. Now, take into account that 98% of all your MLB players spend 1 to several years in the minors and it is easy for the general public/fan to forget about a notable player.

Tell me where James Beckham or Buster Posey went to school?

If you look at each LSU sport's national ranking we are higher across the board than any school in the Big 12.

quote:

---

It's not much of a surprise that Stanford has won 14 in a row and they have the largest athletic endowment of any school in the nation...

---

women's sports count too.

country club sports count too.
Stanford wins/competes in golf, tennis, which no one cares about at LSU.


North Carolina won it last year, first time Stanford did not win

Stanford was #2.

quote:

---

At most other schools I agree with this statement, but I would be willing to say (and I don't have the figures) that LSU's baseball program brings in as much as the basketball program.

---

I discussed this exact issue with Verge last year before an LSU basketball game. LSU basketball generates significantly more than LSU baseball. Baseball typically breaks even and may even bring in a few dollars which is remarkable compared to other schools.

quote:

---

Ummm did you miss the huge arse contract ESPN signed with the SEC? They show a shite load of baseball games now. Plus there are more LSU baseball games on TV then basketball games.

---

They signed that huge arse contract primarily for football and secondarily for basketball. That minor sport shite is practically a loss leader for the other two.

quote:

---

We went over the sports contracts in Karam's Sports Marketing class when I was still in undergrad. Although it was like 3-4 years ago, I'm about 95% positive that the only two revenue generating sports every year are football and men's basketball. All of the others operate around break even with many sports actually losing money and having to be carried by the success of those two profitable programs

---

This is correct. Outside of the major three sports, all of the other sports are a drain on the athletic budget.

quote:

---

i have issue with the directors cup because stanford has every single sport that is on it and we dont.

---

+1

Stanford dominates waterpolo and volleyball i believe

quote:

---

Gotta respectively disagree on that. College Baseball has become very popular in the last 20 years, and has exploded in the last 10 due to media coverage and because of the emergence of several key coaches and programs (yes, including Skip Bertman.)

---

I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment. Outside of football and basketball, college sports are very regional in nature. Someone located in Big 10 country would more than likely be inclined to rehash a men's hockey national title game than a CWS championship game. Last April, the Frozen four double-header drew over 34,000 fans. In the Northeast, they would likely know more about lacrosse than college baseball. The West fields great baseball teams but the following is sparse at best. Outside of the south, college baseball doesn't have a signficant following.

Revenue has nothing to do with fans interest. Look at the PMAC and then go to Alex Box. Tell me who has more fans. I've been to Omaha and the Final Four. LSU brought much more to Omaha. Therefore IMO it doesn't matter how good basketball is, the people of Baton Rouge just don't care a whole lot. Sure they get excited in March if LSU is still playing but up until then, most LSU fans don't care much.

Hell they barely followed football for 7-8 years in the 90s.