I'm starting to get a little impatient with our AD.......Seriously we really need a BCS opponent if we got some blind sisters of the poor I will be pissed. The fact that he can't come to terms with a single BCS opponent for our spot next year is getting me angry

UltimateCFBfan Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:There is also talk of a potential Rutgers/LSU matchup. Rutgers is really beefing up their schedule!

No sadly that one won't come to light because LSU refused to come up for a game here so they signed a deal with App st

Man that sucks.

KnightLight Wrote:

bitcruncher Wrote:Screw LSU. One day they will be begging for a chance to come up and get some exposure in the New Jersey area for recruiting purposes or something.

Over the past 7 years, LSU has won:

2 National Titles (2 in the last 5 years)

3 SEC Championships

4 SEC West Titles and obviously made 4 SEC Champ Game Appearances

Plus....LSU has won 9 out of their last 11 Bowl Games (including 4 straight in BCS Bowl Games)

LSU also averaged 92,619 fans per game last year (only because the stadium only holds around 92,000 or so...maxed out for each and every game).

LSU has been able to do all the above with just mostly "Louisiana kids"...plus most of the others from the Deep South.

NJ has some very good football players...but LSU's model of success at this time...shows zero need to spend more $$$$ recruiting the Northeast.

It's amusing whenever a Big East fan says something here comes a UCF fan to preach about the greatness of the ACC/SEC. I think Tennessee's and Florida State's downward spirals shows that LSU's "model for success" doesn't guarantee permanent success.

UltimateCFBfan Wrote:I'm starting to get a little impatient with our AD.......Seriously we really need a BCS opponent if we got some blind sisters of the poor I will be pissed. The fact that he can't come to terms with a single BCS opponent for our spot next year is getting me angry

Rumor was that UCF asked Rutgers for a series and they only wanted a 1 and done. We had a matching open date. We almost took that 1 and done series before we starting talking with Lousville and Boston College.

When you have an open date you don't need to wait around forever and shop the field. I think Rutgers AD got greedy and now there isn't many options.

CatsClaw Wrote:It's amusing whenever a Big East fan says something here comes a UCF fan to preach about the greatness of the ACC/SEC. I think Tennessee's and Florida State's downward spirals shows that LSU's "model for success" doesn't guarantee permanent success.

The SEC is pretty close to pro ball. Some of their teams average 90-100k+. I think the point is they make so much money from home games it isn't worth traveling for teams like LSU. The mid tier BCS teams are going to have a tough time getting pay home games because of the price these days.

I really feel for Rutgers, they are just going to have to get that expansion done. 58,000 sounds good but even that isn't enough especially for a big state program like RU. You guys probably need to be 60k-66K like WVU and Oregon.

Size of the stadium has NOTHING to do with it when it comes to the SEZ. They will not, with rare exceptions, travel for non-conference games. They simply other BCS conferences as bargaining tools. Bottomline is even if your school signs a SEZ program to a home and home, don't look for it to happen if the SEZ program can figure out a way to screw you.
I have often thought that the Big East and other conferences should refuse to play basketball against the horrible SEZ until they sent their football teams on the road. Our basketball programs are our ace in the hole. We need to use our basketball power to force the SEZ to play fair.
CJ

CardinalJim Wrote:Size of the stadium has NOTHING to do with it when it comes to the SEZ. They will not, with rare exceptions, travel for non-conference games. They simply other BCS conferences as bargaining tools. Bottomline is even if your school signs a SEZ program to a home and home, don't look for it to happen if the SEZ program can figure out a way to screw you.
I have often thought that the Big East and other conferences should refuse to play basketball against the horrible SEZ until they sent their football teams on the road. Our basketball programs are our ace in the hole. We need to use our basketball power to force the SEZ to play fair.
CJ

Exactly. The SEC supporters or defenders complain about opposing conferences not having big enough stadiums but I don't see a lot of SEC teams going to Big Ten stadiums or ACC stadiums.

Sadly, they don't have to when they bring in enough fans to pay at least two non-AQ or FBS teams for one-n-done games.

Thats the bottomline. They are not going to sign 1-1 not because of a 750k pay off because in reality you dont get that. What you get is a quality opponent coming to your home.
But why would they do that when their fans will pack their stadium to see them play App State or Lou-Monroe teams that they will more than probably beat.
So its a higher chance at a win and no return game necessary.

KNIGHTTIME Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:It's amusing whenever a Big East fan says something here comes a UCF fan to preach about the greatness of the ACC/SEC. I think Tennessee's and Florida State's downward spirals shows that LSU's "model for success" doesn't guarantee permanent success.

The SEC is pretty close to pro ball. Some of their teams average 90-100k+. I think the point is they make so much money from home games it isn't worth traveling for teams like LSU. The mid tier BCS teams are going to have a tough time getting pay home games because of the price these days.

Glad someone was able to figure it out.

CardinalJim Wrote:Size of the stadium has NOTHING to do with it when it comes to the SEZ. They will not, with rare exceptions, travel for non-conference games. .
CJ

And do you know why?

Because many of them can bring in $3 Million - $6 Million plus per HOME GAME...which helps cover most of the cost for a majority of non-revenue sports programs...so why in the world would any of them give all those $$$$$$$$ up...just so they can travel and receive a small payday of $600,000 or so (MINUS expenses)...when they could of stayed at home...and earned $5 Million.

Of course the size and AMENITIES (scores of suites, thousands of premium club seats) of a stadium do play a role in REVENUE...but if a team can earn $5 Million plus playing in a small 10,000 seat stadium...they could stay home as well...but teams have found out its much easier hitting the $5 Million plus plateau if they build HUGE on-campus stadiums...throw in HIGH $$$$ amenities...and still be able to charge outrageous booster donation requirements...for those that sit on plain bleachers.

To be so blind and naive to even say "Size of the stadium has NOTHING to do with it....." just shows how uneducated one actually is concerning the BUSINESS side of collegiate sports.

KNIGHTTIME Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:It's amusing whenever a Big East fan says something here comes a UCF fan to preach about the greatness of the ACC/SEC. I think Tennessee's and Florida State's downward spirals shows that LSU's "model for success" doesn't guarantee permanent success.

The SEC is pretty close to pro ball. Some of their teams average 90-100k+. I think the point is they make so much money from home games it isn't worth traveling for teams like LSU. The mid tier BCS teams are going to have a tough time getting pay home games because of the price these days.

Rutgers needs to expand to 80,000 and finish the bowl. They will then have the largest stadium in the BE or one of the largest stadiums in the B-10 behind Mich, O.St, and Penn State. Build it and they will come. The larger stadium will allow for bigger payouts bringing bigger name schools to NJ. It will allow of 1 for 1's with the big boys from other BCS conferences. Scheduling problems would go away even in an eight BE conference for them. The 80, 000 seat stadium would also make an attractive site for a post season bowl between semsters to draw additional revenue to the university athletic coffers. The increased revenue would also allow for more money for great coaching staffs that stay almost forever rather than building a reputation and moving on. Rutgers needs a solid coach like the one they have now to stay as long as the Paternos, Woody Hayes, Bowdens, and Bear Bryants to build and stabalize the FB program for the long term and to be successful in the long term too.

KnightLight Wrote:

CardinalJim Wrote:Size of the stadium has NOTHING to do with it when it comes to the SEZ. They will not, with rare exceptions, travel for non-conference games. .
CJ

And do you know why?

Because many of them can bring in $3 Million - $6 Million plus per HOME GAME...which helps cover most of the cost for a majority of non-revenue sports programs...so why in the world would any of them give all those $$$$$$$$ up...just so they can travel and receive a small payday of $600,000 or so (MINUS expenses)...when they could of stayed at home...and earned $5 Million.

Of course the size and AMENITIES (scores of suites, thousands of premium club seats) of a stadium do play a role in REVENUE...but if a team can earn $5 Million plus playing in a small 10,000 seat stadium...they could stay home as well...but teams have found out its much easier hitting the $5 Million plus plateau if they build HUGE on-campus stadiums...throw in HIGH $$$$ amenities...and still be able to charge outrageous booster donation requirements...for those that sit on plain bleachers.

To be so blind and naive to even say "Size of the stadium has NOTHING to do with it....." just shows how uneducated one actually is concerning the BUSINESS side of collegiate sports.

Sure it makes sense from a "Business" perspective, but it is also a sport as well.

It's getting to a point where teams are only playing conference teams and these "money-games". And when they can't get the home money-games, neutral games at huge stadiums where the money can be shared will likely be the next option.

Do you truly believe these scheduling practices, while sound from a business standpoint, are good for the sport?

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

KnightLight Wrote:

CardinalJim Wrote:Size of the stadium has NOTHING to do with it when it comes to the SEZ. They will not, with rare exceptions, travel for non-conference games. .
CJ

And do you know why?

Because many of them can bring in $3 Million - $6 Million plus per HOME GAME...which helps cover most of the cost for a majority of non-revenue sports programs...so why in the world would any of them give all those $$$$$$$$ up...just so they can travel and receive a small payday of $600,000 or so (MINUS expenses)...when they could of stayed at home...and earned $5 Million.

Of course the size and AMENITIES (scores of suites, thousands of premium club seats) of a stadium do play a role in REVENUE...but if a team can earn $5 Million plus playing in a small 10,000 seat stadium...they could stay home as well...but teams have found out its much easier hitting the $5 Million plus plateau if they build HUGE on-campus stadiums...throw in HIGH $$$$ amenities...and still be able to charge outrageous booster donation requirements...for those that sit on plain bleachers.

To be so blind and naive to even say "Size of the stadium has NOTHING to do with it....." just shows how uneducated one actually is concerning the BUSINESS side of collegiate sports.

Sure it makes sense from a "Business" perspective, but it is also a sport as well.

It's getting to a point where teams are only playing conference teams and these "money-games". And when they can't get the home money-games, neutral games at huge stadiums where the money can be shared will likely be the next option.

Do you truly believe these scheduling practices, while sound from a business standpoint, are good for the sport?

Cheers,
Neil

But schools, almost EVERY school is addicted to $$$$$$$$...especially when they know that one extra home football game can pay off the entirely yearly budget for Women's Softball, Women's Volleyball, and Women's Track & Field.

Host an 8th home game...and easily pay off other non-revenue programs like Baseball (most schools), Swimming Programs, Cheerleading (yes...many cases...they receive scholarships out of the athletic funds), men's and women's tennis & golf.

When you are responsibility for budgeting...its much easier to stay out of Title IX trouble...when you are able to keep womens and other non-revenue programs easily afloat...all by using Football Revenue to do so.

Case in point...Rutgers hosted 8 home games last yea, including the first 5 games of the year..and do you think that the AD didn't enjoy all that extra REVENUE from basically 8 soldout games?

Only a few teams "care" about playing good non-conf games...as teams like USC, FSU, and a few others will generally have some nice match-ups...most schools, not even by choice, have to pay attention to the bottom line.

Want true "sports"?

Check out Ivy League action or Div III.

There you will find the true meaning of "sport"...but Div I Collegaite Athletics are Businesses...first and foremost.