Started By
Message
re: Do You Want Your Team To Stop Playing FCS & other Lower Tier Teams?
Posted on 9/7/12 at 2:15 pm to undecided
Posted on 9/7/12 at 2:15 pm to undecided
yeah I get where he is coming from, he want's to make his conference better and more prominent. Trouble is, the above board conferences have bigger faster players and higher rates of attrition. I have no problem with big conference teams scheduling a cupcake here or there. I do not however, like all 4 OOC games to be pushovers. There needs to be some competition from the other big conferences. LSU last year was a perfect example of how teams should schedule OOC games. also It is not like those who made last years sched. knew that WV was going to be that good nor Oregon for that matter. It's just how it worked out.
0
Posted on 9/7/12 at 2:24 pm to allin2010
One of the problems is the high stakes of the $ game.
It is more profitable to schedule Jacksonville St., Missouri St., SE Missouri, Tennessee Tech. over 4 years than it is to have home and homes with Kansas and Memphis.
Kansas and Memphis are teams we'd schedule in a heartbeat but they won't play unless they get a home game in return where they know our fanbase will ensure a sell out.
It is more profitable to schedule Jacksonville St., Missouri St., SE Missouri, Tennessee Tech. over 4 years than it is to have home and homes with Kansas and Memphis.
Kansas and Memphis are teams we'd schedule in a heartbeat but they won't play unless they get a home game in return where they know our fanbase will ensure a sell out.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 3:26 pm to allin2010
quote:
They are NOT D-II schools that most folks play...
It is
FBC
FCS (App state, Savanah State, Alabama A&M)
D-II would be North Alabama and god knows who else...
You're correct, Thx
I'll amend my OP to say that I do not want my team playing FCS opponents.
This post was edited on 9/7/12 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 9/7/12 at 3:30 pm to undecided
Finebuam is having this discussion (trolling my thread).
But apparently Saban is mad that Western Kentucky has not sold out? A decent FBC team will produce better revenue.
CzRazorbak(sp?)
Would there be a big difference in revenue from playing a home & home series vs paying a team like Western Kentucky and not selling out the game?
But apparently Saban is mad that Western Kentucky has not sold out? A decent FBC team will produce better revenue.
CzRazorbak(sp?)
Would there be a big difference in revenue from playing a home & home series vs paying a team like Western Kentucky and not selling out the game?
Posted on 9/7/12 at 4:36 pm to undecided
quote:
It's an interview with the new Sun Belt Commissioner. In it, he states that:
I'm glad he's going that direction. I know the Sun Belt is pretty much the basement but there have been some decent teams recently. It sucked being stuck at 5 home games a year and your OOC road games were against high level SEC teams. One year, Troy opened with Florida and Arkansas. They were pummeled in both games before beating OK state at home. Then lost to Georgia later in the year. While it was nice to win one against the big boys, it still made for a 8-4 season and no bowl game. The next year we had Ohio State and OK state in back to back weeks and a trip LSU in November. The next year it was Florida and Arkansas. After that OK state and S Carolina. And last year we opened against Clemson and Arkansas. And a beat down against Navy later in the year. At least this year we have 6 home games and get Ms state and Navy as home games. But it was a rough stretch of OOC games for a while, all for a payday.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 4:39 pm to undecided
quote:
Do You Want Your Team To Stop Playing FCS & other Lower Tier Teams?
Yes, but with Ole Miss, Ms. State, and aTm being in the west, it is unavoidable.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 4:51 pm to undecided
wait, when did it get changed from FBS to FBC?
frick me can't we just go back to D1-A?
frick me can't we just go back to D1-A?
Posted on 9/7/12 at 4:52 pm to TU Rob
quote:
One year, Troy opened with Florida and Arkansas. They were pummeled in both games before beating OK state at home. Then lost to Georgia later in the year. While it was nice to win one against the big boys, it still made for a 8-4 season and no bowl game.
This is what I find so interesting. Other than the payout, there's no advantage for these teams to play the power conferences.
Aside from the NFL, college football has no comeptetion in the sports world and College careers are often a precusor to NFL popularity. It's an in demand product and conferences like the Sun Belt can benefit by strengthening their brand.
This post was edited on 9/7/12 at 4:55 pm
Posted on 9/7/12 at 4:55 pm to undecided
The epicness that was the 2007 Gump LaMo game makes me say no.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:01 pm to CaptainBrannigan
quote:
The epicness that was the 2007 Gump LaMo game makes me say no.
La Mo has a decent program for their level of competition.
I think you still have those upsets but it wont be to a 70 1/2 point underdog. If you loose that type of game you should be banned
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:04 pm to CaptainBrannigan
I'd personally like to see more LSU schedules like last season. Well, maybe not quite as brutal, but still having 2 of the 4 non-conf games against BCS conf schools.
And to think, we were originally supposed to play Southern Miss instead of WKU last year. Ridiculous.
As a season ticket holder, I don't like LSU playing an 1AA schools, regardless if they're in state or not. I don't mind the lower tier Sun Belt and MAC schools, because they're still 1A, afterall. And besides, playing Ark St, ULL, or WKU is probably tougher than playing Syracuse, UConn, or Pitt right now.
And to think, we were originally supposed to play Southern Miss instead of WKU last year. Ridiculous.
As a season ticket holder, I don't like LSU playing an 1AA schools, regardless if they're in state or not. I don't mind the lower tier Sun Belt and MAC schools, because they're still 1A, afterall. And besides, playing Ark St, ULL, or WKU is probably tougher than playing Syracuse, UConn, or Pitt right now.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:27 pm to ProjectP2294
quote:
And besides, playing Ark St, ULL, or WKU is probably tougher than playing Syracuse, UConn, or Pitt right now.
Exactly. . . Poll voters aren't deep thinkers. They will give more credit for a win over a bad UConn team than they will for a good team from Ark St.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:29 pm to undecided
quote:
Bama is playing Western Kentucky
Hilltoppers are better than the Cats this year so it will be a closer game.
Can I get a Kige Amen!
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:31 pm to allin2010
The NCAA should make the non conference schedules for all Division 1 teams.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:31 pm to volfan30
quote:
I enjoy games like these. Almost like another bye week.
Can't stand bye weeks or rent a wins. Awful, and yest...schools should be penalized for scheduling shitty non conference teams, as they have already penalized their fans by doing so.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:36 pm to undecided
quote:
a 70 1/2 point underdog
Id take the under ther. Jimbo is not that douche Gundy, he will not run up the score like that.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:39 pm to CtotheVrzrbck
quote:
It is more profitable to schedule Jacksonville St., Missouri St., SE Missouri, Tennessee Tech. over 4 years than it is to have home and homes with Kansas and Memphis.
College football programs are in the very beginning stages of seeing a bit of a revolt from fans about schedules. I'm seeing more and more big-time schools struggling with filling stadiums up for rent-a-wins.
I have LSU season tickets and I can't give away my tickets to Towson and Idaho. A lot of people say they want to go to games, but in reality, they really only want to go to the big games.
With every game on TV, the games being televised in HD stereo surround sound, and the costs of going to games getting higher and higher, attendance for low-level games are taking a toll.
In time, too many rent-a-wins on a schedule, will become a big problem.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:39 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Western Kentucky, Florida Atlantic, Western Carolina. I dont know why you would need 3 of these type games. I can undestand one, i could live with 2, but 3 is fricking ridiculous. Why cant they schedule nevada, minnesota, rutgers, wake forest etc. At least you know something about these schools and they have a few decent players.
They are still guaranteed wins and actually better for the backups to practice up against.
They are still guaranteed wins and actually better for the backups to practice up against.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 5:51 pm to undecided
For teams that make up most of the SEC the FCS game is sold in the season ticket package. Many D1 schools don't even make single game tickets available. They only come on the market through brokers and fans.
What you give up when doing a home and home is huge. in 2009 Arkansas earned over $28MM on ticket sales alone on 7 home games, averaging over $4MM per game in revenue. 2 of those 7 home games were played in LR costing us $150K in stadium rental while losing the parking fees, % of the concessions (if the concession vendor is a flat rate rights deal then having 2 games in LR lessens the value of that deal drastically), having less games in your home stadium also lessens the value of signage and in game advertising and also decreases the value of the overall marketing rights package that companies like Learfield and IMG pay to sell sponsorships and signage space.
So yea, playing Buttfrick St. at home and only 85% of capacity shows up and paying BFSU $400K when the game generates $6MM and there are no travel expenses as would be occured in the home and home every other year is a fiscal boon. It's one of the reasons the lower tier D1 schools want that home game, they need the revenue of the marquee home game badly. The FCS schools can bankroll their entire athletic department by playing 2 money games a season. Arkansas St. nearly got a Million for playing at Oregon last week and they'll get another huge payday to play Nebraska.
What you give up when doing a home and home is huge. in 2009 Arkansas earned over $28MM on ticket sales alone on 7 home games, averaging over $4MM per game in revenue. 2 of those 7 home games were played in LR costing us $150K in stadium rental while losing the parking fees, % of the concessions (if the concession vendor is a flat rate rights deal then having 2 games in LR lessens the value of that deal drastically), having less games in your home stadium also lessens the value of signage and in game advertising and also decreases the value of the overall marketing rights package that companies like Learfield and IMG pay to sell sponsorships and signage space.
So yea, playing Buttfrick St. at home and only 85% of capacity shows up and paying BFSU $400K when the game generates $6MM and there are no travel expenses as would be occured in the home and home every other year is a fiscal boon. It's one of the reasons the lower tier D1 schools want that home game, they need the revenue of the marquee home game badly. The FCS schools can bankroll their entire athletic department by playing 2 money games a season. Arkansas St. nearly got a Million for playing at Oregon last week and they'll get another huge payday to play Nebraska.
Posted on 9/7/12 at 7:18 pm to undecided
I think so...why not stick to WAC, Big East ACC bottom feeders etc..there is plenty of terrible FBS teams
But money talks bullshite walks is the case here most of the time
But money talks bullshite walks is the case here most of the time
This post was edited on 9/7/12 at 7:19 pm
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News