That is where getting out information is important. Transparency. Tell us why we should accept a crappy 2017 home schedule. Are we working on a great future schedule? No further information only leads us to believe that there is no future payoff and that this is the best we can do. Even though we see almost everyone scheduling home games we would love to have.
---I admit that I don't know the answer to this but am trying to remember---Didn't we give revenue outside raised funds to athletics that were more than the transfer funds would have been? And by doing this we could say that the program was self sufficient and was not actually classed with all the state schools other than LSU? I do know that there was a lawmaker that raised the case to cut travel expenses to the schools that were using that money---does anybody know the answer to this?
If he said that, that's infuriating. Like you posted yesterday, the 2 for 1 arrangement is working for G5 schools (pretty sure that's how we got Boise St). As a ticket holder and donor, I demand to know why we are no longer employing this tactic? So you're telling me, if Ole Miss would come to the table for a 2 for 1 scheduling agreement, they would turn them down?
Guys, Farmer and Savoie have put their ingnorance about collegiate sports on display many times before, but this is a glaring indictment of their future planning.
Most of you will think I'm stupid, but I don't care.
I have no problem with an in-state FCS, 2 road P5's, and a home and home with a G5 provided that G5 is from the MWC, AAC or select CUSA schools.
This program is in dire need of self generated revenue and P5 wins.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)