sandman. nothing is concrete, but you better expect it.
gator92. call it greed or whatever. It's about make additional revenue which will help the athletic program as a whole. That in turn benefits you the season ticket holder, if you are a A&M alum or real fan.
The best reason for the move is EXPOSURE AND MONEY. From that comes recruiting, better enrollment from HS, better visibility for the university as a whole (professors etc). UT/OU invite recruits to their game in Dallas and it is a positive. They can always make unofficial visits to campus. It would be a boost to recruiting.
Mac. I see why you are having a hard time. Let me make this clear so we don't have to hash out the economics. The 4M is coming from ticket sales. It is solid. Don't worry about TV revenue or anything else. That seems to be your stumbling block. The 4M has already been evaluated by both administrations. Anything above that will come from sponsors. Now that we are in the Big 12 and alums are more proud and the programs are more visible, it will attract the sponsors.
quote:
College Station and Lubbock aren't media mecas? What the heck? I think both schools have been on TV 38 times over the last 5 years from the article I read in the DMN. That averages out to 7.6 games a year. There are alot of schools who would kill for that media expsoure.
Like I said in the initial post. 4 years ago our game wasn't even televised. The year after it had to be moved to a ridiculous time. The move to Dallas will solidy our TV exposure.
quote:
This is the fatal flaw in the argument. Where are these legions of fans who aren't season ticket holders but are going to pay $100 per ticket in order for this game to make the $8 million per year that it is going to take for the teams to split $4 million? They aren't out there.
twk. Your game in the alamodome showed how many fans will support your team. Our soldout game at TCU (first sellout since 1984) was due to Tech, and the capacity crowd at last year's cotton bowl. There are literally legions of fans waiting to pick up the slack.
The game is in high demand. Kyle and Jones have sellouts yearly. It's a great game. Our game won't have the demand as UT/OU. It's important not to compare ourselves to them. However the demand is there, and the additional revenue is all we care about in addition to exposure. A win win situation.
There will be season ticket holders that protest. That is obvious. They are getting a game they love taken away from them. However it allows the programs to compete at a higher level which will trickle down and the season ticket holder will get a better product.
There will be some that don't renew their season tickets. They weren't real fans to begin with. The 6M every two years (or minimum 4M) will offset that, I assure you. Your season ticket will be replaced by a new season ticket holder and you give up your spot. I doubt many will want to do that, but if so let them bury themselves in their misery.
quote:
This is sad fact that we are at similar level with Tech far as program goes. 10 years ago this would been a joke.
Tech has been getting better due to the Big 12. That's good for all. Look at your hoops program, it is better. Everything is cyclical and your football team will get much better.
quote:
You just said we should stop trying to copy UT...
314. no I didn't. I said get over your complex about copying UT. They didn't invent the neutral site game. If it is a good business decsiion, then we'll do it, no matter if UT is already doing it.
There are always other ways for increasing revenue. This by far gets the most for the least amount of effort. Football is the money maker and this is effortless.
Agreed that you have less recruiting and exposure problems than Tech. However you have more recruiting and exposure problems than others like UT and OU. This will help level the playing field.
quote:
We've lost out on recruits because we haven't been winning. Yet we still out-recruit y'all.
You just negated your argument. Winning isn't the end all answer to better recruiting or else we would outrecruit you now. Kstate when they were top 10 would have had top 10 recruiting classes. Instead what both programs need is revenue and exposure. You just helped my view.
I'm not ridiculing Fran. There is no reason to believe he should be successful at A&M. He did well at bama against better competition.
I never said our programs were the same. I'm just saying both our programs need the additional revenue and exposure.
Finally, there will be people that get upset. I assure you they will get over it. If not it is their loss. They will be replaced in a heartbeat.
Tow the line and fall in place. You must support your program and this is a necessary deal.
[This message has been edited by TTmatador (edited 9/27/2006 5:15p).]
