- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- 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: Tech/ULM football series
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:08 pm to CalBengal
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:08 pm to CalBengal
quote:Gonna be interesting if the Mountain West tries to expand to 12. Fresno and Boise (and probably Houston) would be on the speed dial. That would leave the WAC with seven teams, and hoping to expand. I wonder what conference they'd raid?
It would actually be your income statement, not your balance sheet. But could you cite some numbers supporting this? Just curious, how many of your conference away games are profitable. Other than probably Boise and maybe Fresno, chances are good it costs more to travel and play the game than is paid to you. I certainly can't imagine a trip to Nevada or Idaho being better than playing ULM in Monroe. No telling what a loss that a Hawaii trip causes.
Idaho, Utah State, and New Mexico State are already former SBC teams in the WAC. Give it up, Tech. You just can't outrun the Sun Belt.
We're looking at a WAC that looks like:
Arkansas State
Hawaii
Idaho
Louisiana Tech
Nevada
New Mexico State
North Texas
San José State
Utah State
Way to go, Tech. Not playing ULM really has you going in the right direction
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 1:13 pm
0
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:14 pm to CalBengal
We are talking about 2 different things.
We make more revenue playing in the WAC than we would in the Sunbelt. Economically we are better off in the WAC than the Sunbelt. I am not going to waste my time collecting the numbers just to post it on some retarded tiger-fan board. This issue has been beaten to death on BB&B.
I was specifically talking about the idea of scheduling a home-and-home with U-LAMO while we are members of the WAC. If we scheduled a home and home, they would bring a couple thousand fans to our stadium, and we would fill theirs. There is no equity in that deal. We are better off paying a little to bring in a 1AA and keep all of the gate, or a home and home with a team that actually will travel or generate interest.
We make more revenue playing in the WAC than we would in the Sunbelt. Economically we are better off in the WAC than the Sunbelt. I am not going to waste my time collecting the numbers just to post it on some retarded tiger-fan board. This issue has been beaten to death on BB&B.
I was specifically talking about the idea of scheduling a home-and-home with U-LAMO while we are members of the WAC. If we scheduled a home and home, they would bring a couple thousand fans to our stadium, and we would fill theirs. There is no equity in that deal. We are better off paying a little to bring in a 1AA and keep all of the gate, or a home and home with a team that actually will travel or generate interest.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:17 pm to xiv
quote:
Tech's nightmare:
Dear Louisiana Tech:
We were going to invite you to join us, but you play ULM every year. Sorreeeeee!
Sincerely,
The SEC
Now, see . . . that right there is what's called comedy.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:17 pm to LaTechIsBetter
quote:
We make more revenue playing in the WAC than we would in the Sunbelt. Economically we are better off in the WAC than the Sunbelt. I am not going to waste my time collecting the numbers just to post it on some retarded tiger-fan board. This issue has been beaten to death on BB&B.
I was specifically talking about the idea of scheduling a home-and-home with U-LAMO while we are members of the WAC. If we scheduled a home and home, they would bring a couple thousand fans to our stadium, and we would fill theirs. There is no equity in that deal. We are better off paying a little to bring in a 1AA and keep all of the gate, or a home and home with a team that actually will travel or generate interest.
quote:
LaTechIsBetter
Remember that elitism that everyone outside of Ruston laughs at that I was talking about earlier?
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:18 pm to LaTechIsBetter
quote:Elitist extraordinaire.
LaTechIsBetter
Tech was added to the WAC because they needed another warm body when the Mountain West was formed. Tech was a last resort--much like the MAC adding Central Florida in 2002. Here we are, years later, and the WAC gets nothing from Tech, but there's no glaring reason to get rid of them, so they'd rather not bother.
Just so you know.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:19 pm to xiv
Are you sure you don't have a dog in this fight?
7 pages is a lot for 'just an LSU fan'
7 pages is a lot for 'just an LSU fan'
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:19 pm to JJ27
Our student-athlete graduate rate is much better than yours. You guys really need to work on that.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:20 pm to JJ27
quote:
Remember that elitism that everyone outside of Ruston laughs at that I was talking about earlier?
You know, they do have the recruiting advantage of beautiful Ruston.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:22 pm to truthbetold
quote:
Are you sure you don't have a dog in this fight?
7 pages is a lot for 'just an LSU fan'
For the record, the only reason I'm in here is because Lolly Polly and their fans are so funny.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:26 pm to LaTechIsBetter
If you can't cite numbers to support your statement, you shouldn't state one is more profitable that the other. You don't know and are repeating what you've been told. You should simply say you don't want to play a ULM (or ULL for that matter) because of "higher aspirations", for which you expect the state to subsidize as much as a third via taxpayer subsidy, i.e., Direct Institutional Support. It's questionable that is good stewardship of scarce resources in today's economy.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:27 pm to truthbetold
quote:Grew up in West Monroe. I went to LSU. I love LSU. I like ULM. I hate Tech.
Are you sure you don't have a dog in this fight?
7 pages is a lot for 'just an LSU fan'
But in all honesty, I'd argue the same against Penn State for not playing Pitt.
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:27 pm to CalBengal
quote:
If you can't cite numbers to support your statement, you shouldn't state one is more profitable that the other. You don't know and are repeating what you've been told. You should simply say you don't want to play a ULM (or ULL for that matter) because of "higher aspirations", for which you expect the state to subsidize as much as a third via taxpayer subsidy, i.e., Direct Institutional Support. It's questionable that is good stewardship of scarce resources in today's economy.
Uh oh. A grownup is talking.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:32 pm to xiv
PSU doesn't even play Pitt? 
Hell, even Tennessee plays Memphis every other year.
Hell, even Tennessee plays Memphis every other year.
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:33 pm to LaTechIsBetter
quote:
We make more revenue playing in the WAC than we would in the Sunbelt. Economically we are better off in the WAC than the Sunbelt.
You may make more (from bowl ties andwhat not) but you also spend wayyy more than if you were in the Sun Belt. Also, if you were in the Sun Belt, attendance in Football, Basketball and baseball would go way up with the added meaning to games against teams in state. That, combined with not having to pay to travel to Hawaii, San Jose, Fresno, Idaho, and Sacramento, would put you in a much better economic situation.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:38 pm to UTVolCountry
quote:Nope. I'll actually defend PSU a bit here, though. Sometime in the 1980's, they approached WVU, Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, Temple, Virginia Tech, and Boston College about forming a football conference. They all declined and remained independent. But then they all formed the Big East with Miami a few years later, and PSU simultaneously agreed to join the Big Ten.
PSU doesn't even lay Pitt?
Pitt and PSU have played almost 100 times, but none in the last 15 years. I don't care what the circumstances are--I hate when old rivalries die. LSU/Tulane, Pitt/PSU, Pitt/WVU, WVU/VT, SCarolina/ACC, Bama/GT, AU/GT, AU/FL, OU/NE, Arky/SWC...many great ones died.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:46 pm to LaTechIsBetter
quote:
It is better for our balance sheet...
I assume this means it is financially better for LaTech (not trying to correct you, just making sure I understand).
quote:
to have a 1 and done with a 1AA
Really? How is that? I assume LaTech will be paying these "rent-a-wins" (as I've seen them called) something to just come to Ruston for 1 year. Is that correct?
So it's better financially to have thousands less fans AND have to pay the other team to pay you than to have thousands more fans and not pay the other team?
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:56 pm to LaTechIsBetter
quote:
I was specifically talking about the idea of scheduling a home-and-home with U-LAMO while we are members of the WAC. If we scheduled a home and home, they would bring a couple thousand fans to our stadium, and we would fill theirs. There is no equity in that deal. We are better off paying a little to bring in a 1AA and keep all of the gate, or a home and home with a team that actually will travel or generate interest.
You can't possibly be serious. The only time LTU comes close to selling out is when an SEC school comes to town. Other than that, what do you average? Maybe 17,000 people. Not much better than ULM.
By the way, what is U-LAMO? Never seen that one before. Same as LA-Poly-Tech-Inst?
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 8/23/09 at 1:58 pm to twoliter
quote:
beautiful Ruston
Actually, I like Ruston, just not that eyesore on the west side of town.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 2:07 pm to xiv
1997: 28,714 @ Ruston ( #1 all-time attendance at Joe-Aillet)
1998: 28,725 @ Monroe ( #2 all-time attendance at Malone Stadium
Yeah, I can see why Tech wouldn't want to play ULM. The fans can't have full out picnics that take up 10 seats per person during the game.
1998: 28,725 @ Monroe ( #2 all-time attendance at Malone Stadium
Yeah, I can see why Tech wouldn't want to play ULM. The fans can't have full out picnics that take up 10 seats per person during the game.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 2:15 pm to twoliter
twoliter, where did you find those figures. I would have thought that the 1981 game at La Poly would have been the record. I had to sit on the hill towards the locker rooms because the stadium was full. By the way, it was 35-0 NLU.
Page 7 of 75
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News