Interesting revelation in Jackie's article on 247 this week

[stateskills]

Now, the head coach could also suggest moving games to Thursday night or like when we moved a home game against Florida to Orlando, Fla., to get money to help our program. But that latter part was my first year at Mississippi State and those situations don't occur anymore.

For years moving the Florida home game to Orlando for money has been high on the list of ****** decisions made by LT that causes the fans, alumni, etc. to hate the man. Turns out after all these years that it was Jackie's idea. Interesting.

http://mississippistate.2...ooks-at-scheduling-44962

 

[stateskills]

Now, the head coach could also suggest moving games to Thursday night or like when we moved a home game against Florida to Orlando, Fla., to get money to help our program. But that latter part was my first year at Mississippi State and those situations don't occur anymore.

For years moving the Florida home game to Orlando for money has been high on the list of ****** decisions made by LT that causes the fans, alumni, etc. to hate the man. Turns out after all these years that it was Jackie's idea. Interesting.

http://mississippistate.2...ooks-at-scheduling-44962

 

[BudgetDawg]

They are going to play WVU and VA Tech in Baltimore and rake in a couple million while doing so. I realize Baltimore is right in their backyard and is a heck of a lot closer to them than Orlando is to MSU. However, I wouldn't be opposed to moving a game or two here or there to a place like LP Field in Nashville, the Georgia Dome, Reliant Stadium in Houston or the Superdome.

Let's say we moved a home game with Tennessee to LP Field, maybe play SC or UGA in the Georgia Dome or play Texas A&M at Reliant Stadium. We have a good bit of alumni in all of those areas and none of them are too far away that we couldn't bring a decent crowd, with the exception of maybe Houston. I wouldn't want to see us make a regular habit of doing this, but a couple games here or there wouldn't be too bad, especially Nashville, I'd love to see that happen.

 

[mcdawg22]

So I don't know how that would affect the bottom line. Plus it hurts the economy of Starkville which is a negative in my book.

 

[thatsbaseball]

dressing like asshats always draws a crowd

 

[SchruteDog]

The SEC of today and prior to expansion are two totally different animals. Back then we had 6 conference games and neither UM or MSU played meaningful conference games on campus. Ole Miss kind of broke through in 1990 when they made a run, and MSU turned a corner on that Thursday night in 92 with the chants of "Shane...Shane....Shane". But, without expansion, an 8 game conference schedule and moving the games back to the campuses neither school would even have a chance today. Unlike LTs way of thinking, we need at MINIMUM 7 home games per year. Hell, we have some SEC teams regularly playing 8 at home and here we are placing ourselves at a disadvantage with these stupid schedules with 6 road games.

 

[Hump4Hoops]

These kids today and their non-leather helmets...

 

[dawgs.sixpack]

no.<div>
</div><div>maryland play in baltimore is like bama playing in bham. or uga playing in atl. or tenn playing in nashville. if we traveled to play in atl, nashville, houston, or even nola, we are not the dominant fanbase in any of those areas. it would be stupid to give up a big home game to play 5+ hours from campus, especially if we'd be giving a&m or tenn or uga or lsu a home field advantage.</div>

 

[Hump4Hoops]

We have no big market areas where we would dominate other teams. The closest comparison would be us playing a home game in Jackson, and 17 that.

 

[Hump4Hoops]

We have no big market areas where we would dominate other teams. The closest comparison would be us playing a home game in Jackson, and 17 that.

 

[GloryDawg]

When you got TX offering 1 million plus for a one game home stand and you got Miss State who can only offer 400k chances are you are going to lose either game so which game do you take? To get around the money situation Miss State has to play in Birmingham. State has to have a home and home contract. That's the facts of life for Miss State unless you want to donate a few million to fix the dilemma. </p>

 

[futaba.79]

State moved most SEC games to campus in '82.

 

[BehrDawg]

so we can increase our TV revenues. I like the upward trend we are making in fundraising. Perhaps 8 home games isn't so far out of the question in the near future.

 

[BudgetDawg]

let's say as far as our non-conference schedule, we can land a home-and-home with someone like Notre Dame, where our home game in the series is played in Nashville. Or maybe play someone like Boise State or even BYU in Nashville or New Orleans. Surely we could at least bring enough fans to counter what those teams might bring.

It may not be a true home-field advantage, but it would help us to generate revenues (I know....that's the Templeton-esque way of thinking, but it's what I do for a living..) and the games would be more of a bowl-like atmosphere rather than taking on the feel of a high school game (see LA Tech or MTSU). This would be a totally different scenario than LT lining us up to play MTSU, Louisiana Tech or Central Michigan on the road. There is no reason an SEC team should have to travel to places like Ruston, Murfreesboro or Mt. Pleasant, Michigan (thank goodness that one never happened). The fans won't travel worth a damn and it's hard for the team to get amped up to play in a half-filled Sun Belt or WAC stadium. Sacrificing a home game in Starkville to play a high-profile team in an NFL stadium just a couple hours up or down the road would not be a bad deal at all in my opinion.

 

[patdog]

I read it as saying Mullen could suggest it today, like "we" did 20 years ago. In any case, I'm all for taking a huge payday for a real neutral game if we get a good enough offer. But screw playing UGA in the GA Dome or something like that. I could see maybe something like play both sides of a home-and-home against Tennessee in Memphis (or maybe Memphis & Nashville)if we got a great offer for it, though.

 

[stateskills]

In the paragraph prior he talks about how scheduling has always been handled by the AD, then he discusses the Florida/Orlando situation.

I don't think we should sell conference home games now nor do I think we should have done it then. I just thought it was interesting that LT has been taking the criticism for that decision for years when it sounds like it was Jackie's idea to raise some money.

 

[SchruteDog]

Vanderbilt had an 8 game home schedule in 2007, the same year that we were the only team in the SEC with a 6 game home schedule. If we are going to continue playing nobodies, which I'm all for, then there's no reason why we can't throw in the occasional 8. We just need to expand our nobodies beyond CUSA. No excuse ever to play 2 CUSA road games, especially when one of them is not Tulane.

 

[patdog]

It allows us to have 7 home games every year. These games are generally part of a 2-for-1 deal. Look around, plenty of mid-to-lower level BCS schools are playing games at placed like LA-Monroe, Troy, UL-Lafayette, etc.

 

[GloryDawg]

Hell just last real they offered 3 million a year for a coach. The reason they suck in football is because they will not sacrifice academics to have a good team. </p>

 

[BehrDawg]

They have more money, but just like you said, it's for academics. They don't have more money than us for football.

I prudently deserve the right to be wrong, but I do not think I am.

 

[Dawgzilla]

And play the 1988 Auburn game at Auburn?

These decisions were made by LT. I find it hard to believe that Jackie came showed up in 1991, and one of his first decisions was to suggest we sell the 1991 Florida game just like we sold the 1989 one. In fact, I seem to recall him whining about that quite a bit in 1991, and insisting MSU never do that again.

 

[GloryDawg]

They do not have a AD. The chancellor controls everything. They might set a budget for Athletic but he controls that as well. If he needs a few million more next year to buy a game, all he has to do is allocate the funds. I sure there are some hoops he has to go through but their athletic are set up different then everyone else. I don't know all the details but it was years ago the eliminated the AD from their structure. </p>

 

[patdog]

2006, 2008, and 2009. Very poor planning by their AD (or whatever they call the guy that performs the AD function for them). I don't want to get to 8 home games that way.

 

[BudgetDawg]

I have no problem with us doing 2-for-1's with the CUSA opponents like Memphis, Tulane, UAB, Houston or USM. The travel time isn't too bad for our fans and I agree, there are a great deal of upper-tier FBS schools doing that sort of thing. Doing a 2-for-1 with SMU or Tulsa or a decent Mountain West opponent on the road wouldn't be bad either.

The only Sun Belt school that we should be playing on the road is South Alabama, as it's a relatively short trip for our fans and you can make a nice trip out of it as there are plenty of things to do in the area down there, unlike playing somewhere like Ruston, Monroe, Troy or Jonesboro. Even Murfreesboro is terrible, as Nashville is nearby. But in other case, there have to be other options out there like bringing in a MAC school (like we're doing with Bowling Green) to fill an open date on the schedule.

And there is an ever-growing number of FBS teams as well. UT-San Antonio, Texas State and UMass are all going to be FBS soon, as will UNC-Charlotte a few years down the road. There's no reason we shouldn't be able to get one of those types of teams to come play at our place without having to return the favor.

 

[patdog]

Good luck coming up with enough money to get most CUSA/MWC schools to agree to a 2-for-1. With the addition of the 12th game, the law of supply and demand has made it very expensive to get buy games or even 2-for-1s for that matter (remember when Central Michigan backed out of a 2-for-1 deal with us to take a single buy game at Georgia a few years ago?). You have to do what you have to do. It's not just us. Oklahoma St. has played several games at places like Troy and ULL. Hell, even Texas played a game at UTEP. I realize UTEP is CUSA, but they're near the bottom of CUSA and this is Texas we're talking about. There are plenty of other examples too. I do think the prices are going to come down because, as you mention, there are more schools moving up to I-A and also most of the BCS conferences are moving to 9-game conference schedules (I'm betting the SEC stays at 8 though).

 

[The Peeper]

it was a way to raise funds.

 

[Bdog9090]

because putting us on their schedule will guarantee at least a Top 15 ranking when they come to town.

 

[BudgetDawg]

And the prices will start to come down. As conferences expand and non-conference schedules among the BCS conferences move from 4 games to 3, the other schools are not going to be in a position to demand as much. To put it into perspective, that's 14 ACC schools that will now have to drop an opponent with them moving to 9 conference games.

We've dealt regularly with Memphis, UAB, Tulane and Houston, and now we have the home-and-home with USM. I'd like to think that we could also get someone like Rice, SMU or Tulsa to do at least a home-and-home with us. As I said before, I have no problem playing a Sun Belt school like South Alabama on the road every once in while, as it should be an enjoyable trip for the fans. Even MTSU isn't all that bad, with Nashville right up the road. I just don't think that an SEC school should have to resign itself to playing lower tier schools on the road on a regular basis.

As for Texas-UTEP, that wasn't a bad deal for UT even though UTEP is a bottom-feeder in CUSA. Texas was able to cater to their fanbase out in West Texas by playing out there. Penn State also played at Temple this year, but they also knew that they would have a ton of fans down in the Philly area that would be able to come out and watch them.

 

[patdog]

And the prices will start to come down. As conferences expand and non-conference schedules among the BCS conferences move from 4 games to 3, the other schools are not going to be in a position to demand as much. To put it into perspective, that's 14 ACC schools that will now have to drop an opponent with them moving to 9 conference games.

I believe I covered that in my post that you were replying to. Remember though, that even though the number of OOC games the other BCS schools need will go down from 4 to 3, the number of those games they can afford to play on the road will also go down from 1 to 0.5. When you have 4 OOC games, you can afford to go on the road once every year. When you only have 3, they have to all 3 be at home in years when you have 5 road conference games.

We've dealt regularly with Memphis, UAB, Tulane and Houston, and now we have the home-and-home with USM. I'd like to think that we could also get someone like Rice, SMU or Tulsa to do at least a home-and-home with us.

Of course we could do home-and-homes with pretty much any CUSA school. That does nothing to get us to 7 home games though. And even home-and-homes aren't a sure thing. We had a long-term home-and-home contract with Tulane and theycancelled it after just 2 games.