- 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
1
Posted on 4/17/11 at 6:57 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
No actually George they wouldn't.
How many WNIT games did you see on TV this month other than the championship game? Also, if you think no one watches the women's NCAA tournament, how many do you think actually watch the women's NIT? If you think making either tournament is the same, in terms of exposure, you're in denial. When TAMU won the NCAA tournament this month, they were the lead in story on Sportscenter AND they were on the front page of ESPN.com for two days. That's basically free (national) advertising for them and Notre Dame.
And yes, the mission statement pretty much tells you why Joe Alleva runs the department the way he does. When interpreted through the lense of that mission statement, everything he does.......for the most part.........makes perfect sense, for those who wish to see it.
How many WNIT games did you see on TV this month other than the championship game? Also, if you think no one watches the women's NCAA tournament, how many do you think actually watch the women's NIT? If you think making either tournament is the same, in terms of exposure, you're in denial. When TAMU won the NCAA tournament this month, they were the lead in story on Sportscenter AND they were on the front page of ESPN.com for two days. That's basically free (national) advertising for them and Notre Dame.
And yes, the mission statement pretty much tells you why Joe Alleva runs the department the way he does. When interpreted through the lense of that mission statement, everything he does.......for the most part.........makes perfect sense, for those who wish to see it.
This post was edited on 4/17/11 at 6:59 pm
Posted on 4/17/11 at 7:06 pm to lsualum96
That's all good and well. Really. That exposure is not worth a 700K coach running a program with a 2.3 million deficit. We disagree. TV contract money will be split evenly among SEC teams no matter how many times LSU is on the air.
I still can't comprehend 700k for that kind of deficit. I'm done with this thread though. I'll try to keep in mind the mission statement, unicorns and rainbows and ignore the financial net worth of a program.
I still can't comprehend 700k for that kind of deficit. I'm done with this thread though. I'll try to keep in mind the mission statement, unicorns and rainbows and ignore the financial net worth of a program.
Posted on 4/17/11 at 7:47 pm to lsualum96
We should bring back Pokey. She is the only person not named Kim Mulkey that can bring the Lady Tigers back to the Final Four.
Posted on 4/17/11 at 8:08 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
That's all good and well. Really. That exposure is not worth a 700K coach running a program with a 2.3 million deficit. We disagree.
Actually, you not only disagree with me. You also disagree with the LSU athletic department administration, which has stated that this investment was worth it. So, since it's been decided and there's nothing that you or I can do about it, why not just support the team? Who cares what the coach is making if it's not your money being spent?
quote:
I'll try to keep in mind the mission statement, unicorns and rainbows and ignore the financial net worth of a program.
That's probably a good thing. I'm not sure why a unicorn or rainbow has anything to do with it but, the financial net worth of the program is UNIMPORTANT.
What's important is what's stated in that mission statement.
Posted on 4/17/11 at 8:14 pm to lsualum96
Because I'm critical of the money paid for the hire that means I don't support the program? Being critical must now mean unsupportive? This is why its hard to argue with people. No objectivity.
And since when is financial net worth unimportant in anything in this country?
Ok ok now I'm done.
And since when is financial net worth unimportant in anything in this country?
Ok ok now I'm done.
This post was edited on 4/17/11 at 8:16 pm
Posted on 4/17/11 at 8:43 pm to lsualum96
quote:
Who cares what the coach is making if it's not your money being spent?
Maybe the season ticket holders of the sports that do make money.
quote:
the financial net worth of the program is UNIMPORTANT.
You've made some good points, and I like your enthusiasm and optimism, but this statement is TOTALLY PREPOSTEROUS.
quote:
What's important is what's stated in that mission statement.
You need to re-read it. I'm pretty sure I saw something about sound fiscal principles.
Posted on 4/17/11 at 9:19 pm to HonoraryCoonass
Trust me, season ticket holders of the sports that "make money" have no beef with sports at LSU that don't make money. Why......................? Because even after paying the staff and expenses of all the "non-revenue" sports at the university, the athletic department still ends up in the black. So, if the "revenue producing" sports' season ticket holders have a concern, it should be why their ticket prices are going up, even though LSU is still making a profit?
Yes, the financial net worth of the women's basketball program is unimportant. The financial net worth of the athletic department as a whole is important.............as long as its making a profit..........................which it is. So, again I'm sure that Alleva and his staff are not concerned with the "net worth" of the women's basketball program because the athletics program as a whole at LSU has a tremendous "net worth".
And yes, the mission statement does indeed speak to financial responsibility. But also keep in mind that that has to be done WITHIN the context of "creating an environment conducive to the development of student-athletes with strong core values and personal integrity that will contribute to success throughout their lives and to provide the resources necessary to pursue championships, to graduate and to become productive citizens".
Under those stated goals, Alleva's being very financially responsible. Ain't it great that we have such an astute athletic administration that can provide the resources that their individual teams need, but still turn a profit as an athletic department? There's not too many other Division I programs that do it better. We should appreciate what we have here.
Yes, the financial net worth of the women's basketball program is unimportant. The financial net worth of the athletic department as a whole is important.............as long as its making a profit..........................which it is. So, again I'm sure that Alleva and his staff are not concerned with the "net worth" of the women's basketball program because the athletics program as a whole at LSU has a tremendous "net worth".
And yes, the mission statement does indeed speak to financial responsibility. But also keep in mind that that has to be done WITHIN the context of "creating an environment conducive to the development of student-athletes with strong core values and personal integrity that will contribute to success throughout their lives and to provide the resources necessary to pursue championships, to graduate and to become productive citizens".
Under those stated goals, Alleva's being very financially responsible. Ain't it great that we have such an astute athletic administration that can provide the resources that their individual teams need, but still turn a profit as an athletic department? There's not too many other Division I programs that do it better. We should appreciate what we have here.
This post was edited on 4/17/11 at 11:41 pm
Posted on 4/17/11 at 9:34 pm to lsualum96
red = losing money
black = making profit
black = making profit
Posted on 4/17/11 at 9:40 pm to TigahRag
I need more women's basketball...now!!! Layups excite me!
Posted on 4/17/11 at 10:35 pm to Cajun Revolution
especially when they occasionally go in ..
Posted on 4/17/11 at 11:10 pm to TigahRag
quote:
especially when they occasionally go in ..
Agree. so if they become contenders next season, will you watch them?
Posted on 4/17/11 at 11:43 pm to TigahRag
quote:
red = losing money black = making profit
I just noticed that I typed that.
I fixed it. Thanks for pointing out my "Freudian Slip".
Posted on 4/17/11 at 11:47 pm to Cajun Revolution
quote:
I need more women's basketball...now!!! Layups excite me!
Exactly!
They certainly excite the LSU faithful at this NCAA game.
Reverse, Reverse!
But wait...................nobody at LSU "cares" about women's basketball!
Posted on 4/17/11 at 11:49 pm to lsualum96
wow... a layup 
Posted on 4/18/11 at 6:51 am to lsualum96
IWHI
Posted on 4/18/11 at 7:03 am to Bel Air Tiger
quote:
Agree. so if they become contenders next season, will you watch them?
no .. just doesn't interest me at all .. in fact, i watched the last five minutes of their last national semi final game and that is the only five minutes i have watched in many years ... when van chancellor let candace parker dribble the length of the court by herself with time winding off the clock all the way to the basket and then no one bothered to box out on the backside and UT won, i realized that was about 15 minutes of my life i would never get back ... one of the dumbest coaching decisions with a possible championship on the line from someone making the money he did ... the old frick should have been fired as soon as he finished shaking summit's hand ..
Posted on 4/18/11 at 11:23 am to TigahRag
Well, I can't argue with that!
Posted on 4/18/11 at 11:30 am to urinetrouble
quote:
I can't wait for another season of missed layups and set shots that don't even hit the rim. Women's college basketball is so exciting.
So you must have enjoyed the men's national championship game.
BTW, the women's was much more exciting and they could actually put the ball in the hoop.
This post was edited on 4/18/11 at 11:31 am
Posted on 4/18/11 at 11:38 am to spslayto
Actually that's not too surprising.
The top ten women's teams and top ten men's teams, in terms of shooting percentage, are not that far off. So, if the women are "missing layups" then it stands to reason that they'd be much better jump shooters than the men.
Women's Team FG Percentages
Men's Team FG Percentages
The top ten women's teams and top ten men's teams, in terms of shooting percentage, are not that far off. So, if the women are "missing layups" then it stands to reason that they'd be much better jump shooters than the men.
Women's Team FG Percentages
Men's Team FG Percentages
Page 5 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News