PDA

View Full Version : Question for debate.....



TUrocks
07-24-2008, 07:35 PM
I was just reading the other thread with the LATECH link in it and I saw someone from Tech propose a question I thought was interesting now that we have this new Sunbelt Bowl arrangement......

Would this be a good time for Troy and for Sunbelt teams to start easing down on the money, body-bag games to one or two a year, possibly even affording us the opportunity to schedule mid tier OOC programs in more 2 for 1 deals and not expect such a huge payout, if it has to come to that??? This would help help make the possibility of going to a bowl game every year a little higher. It will also help bring a larger fan base to any school that is consistently sending their team to a bowl, especially since these bowls are regionally close to most Sunbelt schools. Plus, I assume that any Sunbelt team that gets filled into one of those slots will get the normal payout.....so you can say that giving up one money team a year in scheduling can be replaced by the greater chance of making a bowl payout... but it's not guaranteed. Also, don't forget that the stars have to align with the other conferences to get placed into a bowl.

Or would you like to continue the 2-3 body bag games a year and recieve the guaranteed payout for the better of the future of the program and school, and get the exposure and thrill of playing the likes of 2-3 Florida's and Georgia's (and chances in favor of a regular season loss) that comes with it????

Thoughts....debates?????

If you've already discussed this in another thread and I missed it....my apologies.

BlueRaiderFn
07-24-2008, 07:49 PM
My uneducated opinion: Keep the body bag games for now. We just don't have the income at this point. One bowl game (unless it's a big one) won't make up for several BCS games in a year. We will still have several bowl eligible teams that will go to these bowl games regardless of playing the body bag games. Besides, we are starting to win a few of those "body bag" games.

Hemi Man
07-24-2008, 08:14 PM
My uneducated opinion: Keep the body bag games for now. We just don't have the income at this point. One bowl game (unless it's a big one) won't make up for several BCS games in a year. We will still have several bowl eligible teams that will go to these bowl games regardless of playing the body bag games. Besides, we are starting to win a few of those "body bag" games.

I agree with you. I don't see the need for more than two money games a year though. Also scheduling is made tough by winning games you shouldn't and playing teams close, when they think you shouldn't. Remember those other mid majors are looking for wins also. You think ECU would consider a Troy or FAU an easy win?

Troy87
07-24-2008, 09:56 PM
Ulitmately, I think it IS the goal of the university to not have so many $$$$ games, but as was pointed out, until the Sunbelt has more than one bowl tie-in, it's really not a financial feasability right now.

If and when the Sunbelt gets another bowl tie-in, I can see backing off the big $$$$ games. My preferred scenario as a next step would be to have one "cupcake" game to start the year, two $$$$ games against BCS teams and one home-home series (UAB for instance). I think this is the direction we are currently going, and eventually I see a need for only one big $$$$ game.

In the near term scenario (1 easy, 2 $$$$ & 1 home/home), if you have a hot season, you can reasonably expect at least an 8-win season, with 10 wins a real target plus a bowl game.

arkstfan
07-25-2008, 06:20 AM
Multiple bowl ties won't solve financial issues from bowl revenue. Few bowl trips are profitable.

Most (probably all) SEC schools clear more money off a single home football game than from their 1/12th share of BCS revenue.

Even with their huge television deal their home slate income in football is worth more than their share of TV money.

For a typical SEC school their share of conference money (bowls, TV, NCAA) represents roughly the same percentage of their total income that money games represent for us.

The financial game is about generating ticket sales, donations, and sponsorship because that's where the real money is.

There are only two sane approaches to money games.
1. Stop gap funding while focusing on improving self-generated revenue.
2. Creating a supplement for funding program extras.

Slip into making it a permanent, important revenue source and the program is crippled.

Troy87
07-25-2008, 07:56 AM
Multiple bowl ties won't solve financial issues from bowl revenue. Few bowl trips are profitable.

Most (probably all) SEC schools clear more money off a single home football game than from their 1/12th share of BCS revenue.

Even with their huge television deal their home slate income in football is worth more than their share of TV money.

For a typical SEC school their share of conference money (bowls, TV, NCAA) represents roughly the same percentage of their total income that money games represent for us.

The financial game is about generating ticket sales, donations, and sponsorship because that's where the real money is.

There are only two sane approaches to money games.
1. Stop gap funding while focusing on improving self-generated revenue.
2. Creating a supplement for funding program extras.

Slip into making it a permanent, important revenue source and the program is crippled.

You're points are valid, but the added bowl ties are not necessarily about the payout from participating in them, but the exposure that comes with them, and the backside benefits.

Right now, Troy and FAU are the new standards our conference mates are measuring themselves against. That sounds high and mighty coming from a Troy person, but the mindset changed in this conference after Troy went to New Orleans and beat down Rice so badly when Rice was expected to do just that to us. Last year FAU went and beat down Memphis. The conference is benefitting from these wins.

Make no mistake....WW would not have been able to get these interim agreements with PJ Bowl, St.Pete Bowl and Indy Bowl had the last two bowl wins not occurred, and in the fashion they occurred. The success of the last two years in the New Orleans Bowl, by two different Sunbelt teams against two different CUSA teams has made the conference more attractive, not to mention the OOC wins against BCS schools.

The next step, once some of the current bowl contracts expire in '09/'10, is to get first position tie-ins to one or two more bowls. The bowl results the last two years have been great for the conference. As much as I hate to admit it, in hindsight, FAU going to New Orleans last year may have been the best thing for the conference and its future bowl tie-ins. That and Troy being 8-4 and getting left out of the bowls. No one howled louder than us, but there have been a number of sportswriters and analysts that have made note of that oversight. That gave WW some ammunition to work with the three bowls for secondary tie-ins until some of these contracts expire. Once they expire, the bowls will have the opportunity to "shop around", so to speak.

What that means is that we have one more year to audition to the bowl committees to make our case as to why they should be looking to tie in Sunbelt teams. Now why do we covet bowls? Obviously, the reward for the kids for a year well played, but it also puts the school on stage for their Athletic Directors to thump their chest to their alumni about going to a bowl. Getting more butts in the seats is about creating interest in the school's athletic programs. Get them interested, and they will come. When they come they spend money, and there is your attendance, sponsorship and donation carrot.

I submit that this ball got rolling when Troy beat Rice on December 21, 2006. If the Sunbelt has 4 teams bowl eligible this year, like last year, I think we will see those added bowl tie-ins coming. Maybe only 1, but hopefully 2, and then you will see the conference grow and become the primary mid-major conference in the South. CUSA is on the verge of disintegration. We have the potential to expedite that. Once realignments begin again in a few years, I'm not sure CUSA will exist.

JonesOxygen
07-25-2008, 08:04 AM
From the bosses mouth last week, he said our goal is to get down to 1 money game per year. The ultimate goal is to have home and home games with larger schools & as we all know once we get them to Troy we are in good shape.

Troy87
07-25-2008, 10:09 AM
From the bosses mouth last week, he said our goal is to get down to 1 money game per year. The ultimate goal is to have home and home games with larger schools & as we all know once we get them to Troy we are in good shape.

Roger that!

That is the ultimate goal, and I have had that same conversation with him about that. Buuuutttttt, it takes time. Which is why I said, the near-term goal would be to get to 2 $$$$ games, and then eventually, down to 1. I'm not sure we ever get to no money games. If we do, it's waaay on out there, and at that point, Troy has more than 20K students on the campus in Troy, and a 65K seat stadium. BTW, that was phase 6 of the original renovation plans of the stadium....to have around 64K capacity.