- 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: The Experts Are Wrong About Players Generating Revenue
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:39 pm to EricB
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:39 pm to EricB
quote:and the non-professional athletes are compensated. maybe not enough to satisfy some, but they are.
The point is that millions of dollars are made every year from a non-professional sport.
0
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:39 pm to Newbomb Turk
quote:
season ticket sales dropped below 30,000
You have a link to back that up?
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:39 pm to TigerEd
This claim of brand loyalty also only extends to your school. The money off of ticket sales and merchandising pales in comparison to the TV contracts. And this is just a simple fact of sports broadcast television: as the level of competition decreases, viewers tune out and advertising dollars plummet.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:40 pm to Catman88
quote:
How does that work? The same people making the claim about players generating revenue also want the little guys making bread.
For all of you who support "capitalism" I find it funny how quick you turn on it when your hometown college would be at a disadvantage from it.
Are you advocating socialism for collegiate sports now?
quote:
and the non-professional athletes are compensated. maybe not enough to satisfy some, but they are
Their benefits should easily trump low income students benefits, at the least.
This post was edited on 6/2/11 at 3:44 pm
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:40 pm to DocBugbear
quote:
And what would happen to the revenue generated by LSU and UF? They would plummet. It would not go to zero, but it certainly wouldn't be where it was before the players left. Certainly not all of the revenue can attributed to the players, but it's hard to deny that a significant portion comes from the players.
So LSU would be like most schools in that it would lose money on athletics.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:41 pm to Dead Mike
quote:
So LSU would be like most schools in that it would lose money on athletics.
So is the rules people are wanting to propose ONLY going to compensate teams that have a net profit?
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:42 pm to EricB
quote:
The point is that millions of dollars are made every year from a non-professional sport. The organizations that make all of this money, the schools, conferences and bowls... Nike, Reebok, Under Armour, make hundreds of millions from college atheletics... ESPN makes millions... not from airing TCU, but Andy Dalton, not OSU, but TP, not LSU, but PP7... etc. Stars are what generate revenue, period. In every other level of sports, the players are compensated for their efforts... in the NCAA, they work for free. If you're an in-state football player at LSU, what do you get from a full ride that TOPS doesn't already provide most other students? Some students at this university recieve food stamps, pell grants, tuition discounts and TOPS. Atheletes spend more time practicing for their sports than normal students do working part time jobs.
At the end of the day, atheletic scholarships hardly provide anything that normal students don't already get.
Good luck keeping the appeal of college football intact when it becomes a semi-professional enterprise.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:43 pm to EricB
quote:
Are you advocating socialism for collegiate sports now?
Do you even know what the frick you are talking about?
Im asking a basic question.. If the NCAA started paying players how does the argument about how LSU performs even matter? All universities will have to pay their players the same amount. So why does it matter what the attendence/record ratio is?
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:44 pm to EricB
BTW College Sports is already gone socialist.. Title IX being prime example..
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:47 pm to Catman88
quote:
Good luck keeping the appeal of college football intact when it becomes a semi-professional enterprise.
It already is a semi-professional enterprise. Wake up. With more student atheletes recieving benefits, less would be tempted to 'trade rings for tats'
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:48 pm to Cajun Revolution
quote:
So if they sucked you'd still go to every game? bullshite.
Why would LSU suck? Under this hypothetical situation, most of the star players for all schools would be elsewhere, playing minor league ball or something. So it would all be relative. This exact situation exists in college baseball.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:49 pm to Dead Mike
quote:
Good luck keeping the appeal of college football intact when it becomes a semi-professional enterprise.
Yeah. Nobody's going to watch that shite.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:50 pm to EricB
So my question is HOW.. How do you do it without being sued into paying Suzie softball player? How do you do it without larger schools being sued by smaller schools because they can spend the money to bring in the better players? Universities by in large are not private companies they are run by the States.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:50 pm to EricB
quote:
It already is a semi-professional enterprise. Wake up. With more student atheletes recieving benefits, less would be tempted to 'trade rings for tats'
No, it isn't a semi-professional enterprise, or at least it effectively maintains the image that it isn't (which is all that matters in this case).
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:50 pm to EricB
quote:and if we gave all students A's, less of them would cheat.
It already is a semi-professional enterprise. Wake up. With more student atheletes recieving benefits, less would be tempted to 'trade rings for tats'
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:54 pm to The_Pistol
So...is your argument that all of these instances pictured are not damaging to the product? There's a reason why the NCAA penalizes member institutions when the offense is blatant enough to warrant punishment.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 3:57 pm to EricB
quote:
For all of you who support "capitalism" I find it funny how quick you turn on it when your hometown college would be at a disadvantage from it.
Are you advocating socialism for collegiate sports now?
Holy God, you are dumb as all frick.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 4:02 pm to Hot Carl
First off Im guessing he doesnt support capitalism.. Second I dont see how in the world I was supporting some form of socialism in college sports.
This post was edited on 6/2/11 at 4:02 pm
Posted on 6/2/11 at 4:04 pm to Catman88
Video Games. NCAA makes money off of that.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 4:07 pm to mettematt9
quote:
Video Games. NCAA makes money off of that.
The ones without player names?
What was your point?
I just want to see how anyone thinks you can separate one sport from the rest of college athletics.
Its a nice thought but you can kill all college athletics if you do this.
Page 2 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News