This quote is from the Cyber Side Chat: ____________________________________________________ FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: There are financial factors as well. Each game in Tiger Stadium means about $1.8 million in net revenue for LSU. Because football is the biggest revenue generator for our department, that revenue is critical. A home-and-home agreement means at least one game away from Tiger Stadium. And that's one less home game for our season ticket holders. 12-GAME SCHEDULE: In years when we are allowed by the NCAA to play 12 games, we can schedule attractive home-and-home matchups. That's why we played Virginia Tech last year and Arizona (who was scheduled in 1999, the year after the Wildcats went 12-1) this year. That's why you are seeing games like Oklahoma vs. Alabama and Southern Cal vs. Auburn this season. Unfortunately, we can play 12 games only in those years when the calendar has 14 Saturdays during the traditional football season. In the next two decades, we can play 12 games only in 2008, 2013, 2014 and 2019. ____________________________________________________ From this it looks like LSU will only be able to schedule home and home games with big time opponents from the BSC conferences in those years that the NCAA in all its wisdom allows teams to schedule 12 regular season games. What the hell is the big deal about those years when the callender falls a certain way? Some teams play more than 11 regular season games every year. If you play Hawaii at Hawaii you get and extra game. If you play in one of the "Kickoff Classic" games you get an extra game. BYU seems to have 12 or 13 regular season games every year. Last year Nebraska played 13 regular season games plus a bowl game. If the Huskers had won the Big 12 North Division they would have played 13 regular season games plus the Big 12 Title game plus a bowl game for 15 games. Thats one game short of an NFL regular season schedule. If LSU is to keep playing 7 home games every year and be able to schedule home and home games with national quality teams the NCAA will have to start allowing teams to play 12 games every year. I don't see what the big deal is. Teams that make the playoffs in every other division except 1A can end up playing up to 16 games if they go all the way to the championship game. If the NCAA would allow 12 regular season games every year LSU might even have 8 home games in the years that it was Notre Dames or Miamis or Oklahomas turn to play in Tiger Stadium.. And by the same token the home and home opponent could have an extra home game in the years when it was LSUs turn to be the road team. It would be a win-win situation for everybody. For LSU it would mean an extra $1.8 million every other year and for the fans of all the teams it would mean an extra big game every year. I don't want to hear any crap about how it would take more time away from their studies for the "student athletes" involved. The "student athletes" at lower division schools in the playoffs play more games. The "student athletes" involved in March Madness can spend an extra 3 weeks playing basketball if they make it all the way to the Final 4. Does the NCAA consider the "student athletes" who are football players at the D1 level to be dumber than the "student athletes" in other D1 sports and the lower divisions?
Well, a lot of speculation is going around about how the BCS conferences are going to agitate to get the 12 game schedule permanently fixed. I think this is going to happen. Now that ADs have seen the cash cow potential of 12 games and eight home games, they won't want to give that up. What I also think should happen is that one of these years, LSU should play EIGHT home games and put the money from home game #8 into a fund to sustain the athletic dept. in a year when they only schedule six home games, to ensure quality opponents remain on the schedule even in 11 game years. We have really backed ourselves into a corner by having to depend on seven home football games a year. Other universities don't have this much of a problem. If we were smarter with our money and maximized revenue in other sports, we wouldn't have to do this. A lot of schools get serious profit from the basketball programs for example. We don't. If we put some effort into seriously marketing and building up our basketball teams, we could make some serious dough off of them. I think we're starting to see this a little, but it needs to continue. Having the Tigers go to a Final Four and the Lady Tigers win a national title this year would help a bunch. Baseball is the same. If our baseball attendance was just a little more consistent, we could make a killing off of baseball. The big games sell out, but games against lower level opponents have a lot of empty seats. We are already one of the few baseball programs in America that makes money, but it could be even better if we tried harder. Both the baseball and basketball programs could benefit from new facilities, but those cost money unfortunately. I think a little more planning, more aggressive fund-raising, and being smarter with money and building up a rainy day fund and looking to maximize profit in basketball and baseball would be smart ideas for the athletic dept. to get off the "We need seven games" problem. D1-A programs are going to be pushing for the 12 game schedule every year really soon. I expect the change to be made, especially after a bunch of athletic depts. see their profit margins drop very low in 2004 when the 11 game schedule returns.
I don't see LSU having 8 home games every year unless they use the 12th game for another rent a win team but it would let them schedule home and homes with nationally ranked teams and give LSU an 8th home game every other year. Basketball will probably start producing more revenue now that LSU has an incoming class of freshman that rival Michigan's Fab 5 of a few years ago. But even it the PMAC is filled to capacity every game its not going to come close to the revenue football produces. Maybe somebody like Duke with a great BB program and crappy football supports their athletic department with basketball revenue but I don't see that at LSU other than BB contributing more than in the recent past. Womens basketball will lose less money by being a national contender than if they were just mediocre but I can't see that there is enough interest here in womens BB to actually put them in the black side of the ledger. LSU might be the only place in the USA where baseball makes money instead of operating at a loss but Alex Box has a capacity of less than 8,000 seats. National interest in college baseball is growing by leaps and bounds but unless it grows to the level where it is feasable for LSU to build a 30,000 or 40,000 seat baseball stadium with the confidence that they can fill it up on a regular basis we should be happy that baseball at least pays for itself and makes a little extra $$. I would love to see college baseball become at least as big compared to Major League baseball as college football is compare to the NFL. The Yankees regularly put more than 50,000 butts into Yankee Stadium seats. Wrigley Field is filled to capacity even for weekday daytime games during working hours even during most years when the Cubs suck. College baseball compared to MLB is at a level now almost as good as college football compare to the NFL so I can see the bigtime baseball programs eventually building big stadiums but that is probably at least 10 years away. That leaves it up to football to bring in the big bucks that support the whole athletic department. Its great that basketball and baseball are self supporting but the extra money they bring in now won't support the other money losing sports like tennis, golf and womens softball. Pat Henry has built a dynasty in both mens and womens track and field. I haven't seen any figures about how much money they bring in compare to what their operating costs are but I doubt that the track program operates in the black.
I was thinking about this 12th game issue yesterday. If the NCAA wanted it permanent I think it could happen. There is room every year if you drop from 2 open dates back to 1. Sure the coaches wouldn't like it but it is doable.
