Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money

Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money (/thread-16394.html)

Pages: 1 2

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Cinemalover - 09-13-2018

USC starts a true freshman at QB. Just sayin.

Yes, it will be a blowout.

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - CrazedZooChimp - 09-13-2018

What I am now annoyed by is that we're paying Davis $650k for this game. I don't care if it makes us more likely to lose, schedule a third real game that I'll enjoy going to, and then give away free tickets for a couple games. That would be such a better use of that money.

(In case you haven't read the over-arching article on the feature here: https://www.sfchronicle.com/collegesports/article/College-football-mismatches-Why-do-they-play-13221029.php)

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - JPR36 - 09-14-2018

(09-13-2018, 11:30 PM)CrazedZooChimp Wrote: What I am now annoyed by is that we're paying Davis $650k for this game. I don't care if it makes us more likely to lose, schedule a third real game that I'll enjoy going to, and then give away free tickets for a couple games. That would be such a better use of that money.

(In case you haven't read the over-arching article on the feature here: https://www.sfchronicle.com/collegesports/article/College-football-mismatches-Why-do-they-play-13221029.php)

How much would we have to pay to have a team good enough to come in here and give us a "real game"?
Don't know, but I suspect with travel costs and all. it would be more than $650K.
(While I don't think we are going to lose, I have a feeling this might not be the blow out some people are expecting, especially since we are Love-less).

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Cinemalover - 09-14-2018

Cardinal pressure on the QB will affect their offense, and our O line will dominate.

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - stupac2 - 09-14-2018

(09-13-2018, 11:30 PM)CrazedZooChimp Wrote: What I am now annoyed by is that we're paying Davis $650k for this game. I don't care if it makes us more likely to lose, schedule a third real game that I'll enjoy going to, and then give away free tickets for a couple games. That would be such a better use of that money.

(In case you haven't read the over-arching article on the feature here: https://www.sfchronicle.com/collegesports/article/College-football-mismatches-Why-do-they-play-13221029.php)

The problem with that is then you have to do a home and home, and with our schedule (de facto 10 conference games, stupidly timed to be 6 at home one year and 4 the next) that's very challenging. Many years it works out that we can get at least 6 home games with home-and-homes, but often it doesn't, and to get a one-off team to come in you generally have to pay them.

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons I want to drop ND, or figure out a way to switch it so we're at least timing it up with the conference schedule and have 5 home/away all years. It would just make things simpler.

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - martyup - 09-14-2018

My fallback school was Davis. Had I gone there, I would have played football and would have been really excited to play a top 10 ranked team like Stanford. Expect the Aggies to come fired up and ready for a fight. Don't, however, expect them to win.

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Mick - 09-15-2018

Interesting that Stanford is paying Davis $650k for the game. I have a vague memory that a core reason why the SJSU vs. Stanford series stopped was because Stanford would pay just $250k for subsequent SJSU games (after the 2013 game, for which Stanford paid just $215k). Wilner said Stanford was irked because SJSU cancelled their 2010 game for the million dollar payday at Alabama, which SJSU deparately needed to keep their program afloat.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2013/09/12/stanford-and-san-jose-state-the-end-of-the-bill-walsh-legacy-game-series-at-least-for-now/

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Cinemalover - 09-15-2018

If Davis brings 5-10,000 fans, that is a partial explanation.

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - SF_Cardinal_Fan - 09-15-2018

(09-15-2018, 05:19 PM)Cinemalover Wrote: If Davis brings 5-10,000 fans, that is a partial explanation.

It looked to me like the Davis "official section" had approximately 1,500 patrons.

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - 82lsju - 09-15-2018

during halftime of the TCU/OSU game they said Nebraska paid Troy $1.1m to play this week......and Troy won.......

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Mick - 09-16-2018

I think we'd get better attendance if we paid SJSU the $650k. Personally, I'd prefer it. I have seven relatives who attended Stanford and five who attended San Jose State. And I remember the games quite well from the early and mid-1970s with Bokamper and DeBerg and Kane and Chaney and Ekern and Wright and Faumina and Small and Manumaleuga.

Back in those days, we'd have about 25 people at our ongoing tailgate and another 25 or so would stop by. Best time of my young life, covering my teen years, then when I went to college, it was Elway and Stanford vs. Elway and SJSU (Dennis Erickson was his OC).

I really miss the SJSU series.

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Goose - 09-16-2018

(09-16-2018, 11:04 AM)Mick Wrote: I really miss the SJSU series.

I do also. However, it might be a bit hard to get a good non-conference schedule if two of our games are "permanently" Notre Dame and SJSU. Right now, SJSU isn't going to help our strength of schedule any. Those who complain about playing Davis would certainly not like that situation.

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Extra Point - 09-16-2018

(09-16-2018, 11:04 AM)Mick Wrote: I really miss the SJSU series.

The SJSU series was OK when the game was always played at Stanford, even though Stanford was in a position to schedule more attractive games. When San Jose wanted split home and away games, the series became much less desirable. When Ted Leland decided to continue the series, with some games at San Jose, "because it was necessary to keep them D1 eligible," I was not happy about it. (This was done at a time when there was talk of Stanford leaving the Pac 10.) When San Jose backed out of a scheduled game at the last minute to play a body bag game, it made me mad. (UC Davis was the replacement.) When San Jose then insisted that Stanford was obligated to play them every year out of tradition, with a much bigger payout, and with games at San Jose, I totally lost interest in the series.

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - CompSci87 - 09-16-2018

Tedford? Where did he come in?

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Cinemalover - 09-16-2018

SJSU alumni not very happy right now, tough slog. Davis would draw more with a better start time, and Hawkins appears to have the program on an upward trend. Or how about Boise State?

RE: Revenue Games, Mismatch for Money - Extra Point - 09-16-2018

(09-16-2018, 04:00 PM)CompSci87 Wrote: Tedford? Where did he come in?

Sorry! Fixed it. I meant to say Ted Leland.