- 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: LSU vs UM 2018 (Making progress)
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:17 am to barry
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:17 am to barry
quote:
I look at it as an opener on the road against a quality opponent OR a home opener against St. Mary's Sister of the poor.
I would have far fewer objections if instead of playing in Houston we played in New Orleans.
I assume current television contracts have something to do with why ESPN is brokering these games. If the TV contracts have no impact, then I'm not sure why ESPN doesn't broker the games as a home and home.
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 10:18 am
1
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:30 am to TheRookbird
quote:
I assume current television contracts have something to do with why ESPN is brokering these games. If the TV contracts have no impact, then I'm not sure why ESPN doesn't broker the games as a home and home.
The Cowboys pay the teams for the Cowboy classic.
LSU got $3.5 million in 2011 while Oregon received $2.
Bama and Michigan got a compined $9.4 million.
It isn't just the TV contract, they make a lot of money off the suites and sponsorship of the game
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 10:32 am
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:44 am to Old Money
I will not attend any more neutral site away games. That just ruins the college football game experience.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 10:44 am to TigerBait1127
quote:
The Cowboys pay the teams for the Cowboy classic.
LSU got $3.5 million in 2011 while Oregon received $2.
Bama and Michigan got a compined $9.4 million.
It isn't just the TV contract, they make a lot of money off the suites and sponsorship of the game
That's not completely accurate. ESPN pays the money directly to the teams and they get a guarantee from the Cowboys Stadium Limited Partnership. If you dig deep enough you'll find that ESPN is the driving factor for all of the neutral site games. This isn't to say that the stadium owners (I believe the City of Arlington is majority owner of the Cowboys Stadium) don't come out well ahead, but ESPN is generating tons of money on advertisement for the game.
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 10:47 am
Posted on 6/30/14 at 11:58 am to Earn Your Keep
quote:
Now consider paying for three of these each year while watching Oregon, TCU, North Carolina, Wisconsin, etc. play hundreds of mile away.
Not sure what part of your post to reply to since I disagreed with it all. So I picked that part...I would be ok with what you described if you throw in 4 SEC games a year. Bama, Auburn, Fla, Ole Miss, any teams really.
I will gladly trade you Wisconsin for 3 cupcakes and 4 SEC games, with the increased cost.
I think people forget how many LSU alumni and supporters live in Texas.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 12:02 pm to Old Money
I was hoping that UM = University of Michigan.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 1:05 pm to 12Pence
quote:
LSU athletics would not exist if not for the state sponsored school so it's kind of a moot point that the athletics give back to the university.
Oh god, not another one of these "we'd have nothing if it wasn't for mother government" types. And you think all the college football fans would have just disappeared if the all knowing government hadn't supplied us with a team
Posted on 6/30/14 at 1:26 pm to tigerbait2010
quote:
the jerrydome is a great venue to watch a game
So what? College football games should be played on a college campus.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:05 pm to AaronDeTiger
quote:
Oh god, not another one of these "we'd have nothing if it wasn't for mother government" types. And you think all the college football fans would have just disappeared if the all knowing government hadn't supplied us with a team
I'll ignore the idiotic reframing of my point and allow you the chance to describe a situation where Louisiana State University football would exist without Louisiana State University.. I'll wait.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 3:48 pm to TheRookbird
quote:
This is untrue. Texas AD gives more back to the university and takes no public funds. Also, there are a few schools who take money from the University for accounting purposes only.
Do you have a link of them giving back more to the university?
Found it, they give $1.5 back to the university annually. Also, Texas receives money from student fees or did until very recently. LSU and Nebraska were the only 2 schools that didn't
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 4:12 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 4:03 pm to jose canseco
quote:
I think people forget how many LSU alumni and supporters live in Texas.
I'm sure everyone here is aware of the number of alumni and supporters we have in Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta. I'm glad you can have an occasional game in your backyard but if it's ALWAYS going to be the best OOC game...then go ahead and take the other three as well. I don't want to continue paying full TAF fees and full season ticket prices for leftovers.
Maybe this is the future of college football. If so then nobody should complain when thousands of diehard fans who have carried the program for years just walk away.
No quality OOC games at home and "maybe" one quality conference game at night each season is going to run off a lot of people. Don't complain when the stadium is half empty.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 4:27 pm to TigerBait1127
quote:
Do you have a link of them giving back more to the university?
Found it, they give $1.5 back to the university annually. Also, Texas receives money from student fees or did until very recently. LSU and Nebraska were the only 2 schools that didn't
Again untrue. They also did not receive student fees as of 2013 and there were about 10 other schools who also did not. Also, as I was saying, there are a few more who took very small subsidies which can be allocated to either accounting reasons or shared facilities between the AD and the University (ex. a dual purpose rec center or something like that).
quote:
The athletic department gives the university about $9 million a year.
LINK
The University also gets half of what's left of the $15 million LHN deal after their previous 3rd tier rights owner gets their cut (which I think is about 4 million).
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 4:30 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 4:35 pm to TheRookbird
Just a side note that Texas also charges its student body a lot more than we do for their athletic events.
They have something called the "Big Plan" where you pay around $215 bucks for access to all sporting events. My fees at LSU are no more than $90 for season tickets and access to all sporting events.
Let's not forget our product is a lot better. I just thought it'd be relevant with the student fees debate arising
They have something called the "Big Plan" where you pay around $215 bucks for access to all sporting events. My fees at LSU are no more than $90 for season tickets and access to all sporting events.
Let's not forget our product is a lot better. I just thought it'd be relevant with the student fees debate arising
Posted on 6/30/14 at 4:42 pm to tigerbait2010
quote:
Just a side note that Texas also charges its student body a lot more than we do for their athletic events.
They have something called the "Big Plan" where you pay around $215 bucks for access to all sporting events. My fees at LSU are no more than $90 for season tickets and access to all sporting events.
Let's not forget our product is a lot better. I just thought it'd be relevant with the student fees debate arising
Oh no doubt. They also charge their on campus students for the LHN which I find hilarious.
I'm just noting that we're not the "only" AD giving this much money to our university. I've also thought for a long time that the argument about not taking subsidies was only telling part of the story for some of the other schools.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 4:42 pm to Earn Your Keep
quote:Even though I'm on the other side of the fence about the neutral site games (i.e. I think they're ok and is the way CFB game is going) I think you're dead on with your points.
I'm sure everyone here is aware of the number of alumni and supporters we have in Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta. I'm glad you can have an occasional game in your backyard but if it's ALWAYS going to be the best OOC game...then go ahead and take the other three as well. I don't want to continue paying full TAF fees and full season ticket prices for leftovers.
Maybe this is the future of college football. If so then nobody should complain when thousands of diehard fans who have carried the program for years just walk away.
No quality OOC games at home and "maybe" one quality conference game at night each season is going to run off a lot of people. Don't complain when the stadium is half empty.
Even if the OOC, neutral site, games aren't "that bad" and all the other potential positives are true, there are still downsides and consequences. You stated those possible consequences obviously.
If those consequences you listed do come to fruition what we will see is a short term gain (maybe?) for a long-term loss. And coupled with a down season that someone before now posted, it could be very bad. As much as I hate to admit it.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 4:48 pm to abellsujr
quote:
As a Dallas, TX resident, this makes me happy.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 5:09 pm to TheRookbird
quote:
Again untrue. They also did not receive student fees as of 2013 and there were about 10 other schools who also did not. Also, as I was saying, there are a few more who took very small subsidies which can be allocated to either accounting reasons or shared facilities between the AD and the University (ex. a dual purpose rec center or something like that).
According to USA Today, only 7 schools didn't receive subsidies last year. Only 11 schools take less than $1.5 million a year in subsidies
quote:
Also, as I was saying, there are a few more who took very small subsidies which can be allocated to either accounting reasons or shared facilities between the AD and the University (ex. a dual purpose rec center or something like that).
LSU AD completely took over running shared facilities.
But this basically proves my point about going above and beyond. Texas just started catching up to us in this department despite being the richest AD in the country with $165 million in total revenue compared to $117 for LSU.
LSU gives more than $7.2 million per year too, that was just the minimum of the agreement.
quote:
I'm just noting that we're not the "only" AD giving this much money to our university. I've also thought for a long time that the argument about not taking subsidies was only telling part of the story for some of the other schools.
So we've come to a conclusion that their might be 1 with a similar agreement to us who just started doing it? That 1 is the richest program by far
They can afford to do it. Eventually it will hurt LSU athletics.
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 5:16 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 5:15 pm to TigerBait1127
quote:
LSU gives more than $7.2 million per year too, that was just the minimum of the agreement.
The agreement is only for 5 years and started in 2012.
quote:
But this basically proves my point about going above and beyond. Texas just started catching up to us in this department despite being the richest AD in the country with $165 million in total revenue compared to $117 for LSU.
They have been giving to the university for quite a while and you could also make the argument that with the PUF, UT doesn't even need that money.
quote:
LSU AD completely took over running shared facilities.
Other schools don't do it that way. Some ADs own all facilities, some athletic foundations own the facilities and some universities own the facilities. It's an apples to oranges comparison and simply looking at who is taking subsidies really doesn't tell you much unless you dig deeper.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 5:20 pm to TheRookbird
quote:
The agreement is only for 5 years and started in 2012.
Yet we were giving millions years before that. More than UT's $1.5 million while charging fees (which they still basically do)
quote:
They have been giving to the university for quite a while and you could also make the argument that with the PUF, UT doesn't even need that money.
They don't. They are in a different class than almost everyone else when it comes to money. The fact that we are with them is pretty damn impressive.
Only 11 ADs took less than $1.5 million. ULL took $7.8. It is pretty impressive company for LSU to be in when comparing universities. LSU gave back $8.2 million in 2012.
quote:
unless you dig deeper
giving back to the school is a good place to start. So far, we're at 2 programs giving a financially significant amount
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 5:26 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 5:25 pm to Old Money
Is UM University of Miami or University of Michigan? COnfused
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News