- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Winn-Dixie Showdown...
Posted on 1/28/09 at 10:00 am to DoubleDeuce
Posted on 1/28/09 at 10:00 am to DoubleDeuce
quote:
I think what you are saying is they only wanted to host a regional if LSU didn't get one. That is completely ridiculous, I would need some proof of that.
Nuts4LSU will give you all the proof you want.
Yeah like Tulane would say, we do not want a regional if LSU wants one. That would be throwing money away.
2
Posted on 1/28/09 at 10:07 am to LSUTANGERINE
And I went to a lot of those Showdowns in the late 80's and early 90's. Was LSU always part of the tournament? For some reason I don't remember them the first couple of years. I was a young kid living in the New Orleans area and used to go, but don't really remember the teams.
I also remember watching some major league exhibition games in the dome.
I also remember watching some major league exhibition games in the dome.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 10:44 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
LSU opted out becuse they wanted more money.
Nope. We weren't going to do it under any circumstances after Tulane tried to frick us over with the regional.
quote:
If it is okay for LSU to want more money, then when the shoe is on the other foot (i.e., Tulane trying to host a regional with LSU in it to make money)
Tulane's tactic was specifically aimed at hurting LSU, both financially and competitively, in the NCAA tournament. Very different from trying to bring a little more fairness to a regular season "tournament" in which a huge inequity exists between the contributions and the returns for the teams involved. And besides, see above; you and "virtually all here" are wrong. We didn't want more money. We wanted to quit subsidizing the bastards who tried to frick us over. We were going to get our money with or without them, but we decided to quit carrying their parasitic asses along for the ride.
quote:
Get over it.
Tell a lie, and I'll point it out. Tell it again, I'll point it out again. If it's critical of LSU and worth your lying about it, it's worth my correcting you on it.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 10:46 am to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Nuts4LSU
<G>
Posted on 1/28/09 at 10:47 am to DoubleDeuce
quote:
I think what you are saying is they only wanted to host a regional if LSU didn't get one.
Yep. Obviously they would have loved to host one either way, but they could only guarantee the money that they were offering to the NCAA on the condition that LSU not get a regional. Thus, their bid (which included said guarantee) was contingent on LSU not getting a regional.
quote:
That is completely ridiculous, I would need some proof of that.
Look it up yourself. It happened either the year before or two years before the showdown ended, and it was the reason why it ended.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 10:47 am to Nuts4LSU
quote:
We didn't want more money. We wanted to quit subsidizing the bastards who tried to frick us over. We were going to get our money with or without them, but we decided to quit carrying their parasitic asses along for the ride
Which is why I hate that we went into a 10 year deal to play them in football.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 10:53 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
like Tulane would say, we do not want a regional if LSU wants one. That would be throwing money away.
More stupidity. You obviously don't know how the regional bid system worked (and still does, to some extent). Schools bid for regionals, and their bids must include a guaranteed amount that they will pay to the NCAA, regardless of actual revenues they generate from the regional. Obviously, the higher your guarantee, the better your chances of getting a regional, which is why big money producing programs like LSU, Texas, etc. would always get regionals, even if they weren't a top seed in their own regional. Schools would have to estimate how much they could make off the regional before deciding how much they could guarantee. Tulane's estimate of what it could bring in was greatly affected by whether LSU would be in their regional or hosting its own. Without LSU, they couldn't bid as much and would have a lesser chance of getting the regional. Thus, they submitted a high bid, but with the condition that LSU not get a regional (meaning we would almost certainly be sent to theirs).
Posted on 1/28/09 at 10:57 am to Nuts4LSU
That would have been 2001. And it wasn't a regional, it was a super regional. And LSU did host a regional that year along with Tulane.
For the first time in Tulane history, they hosted a NCAA Regional, with Southern, Oklahoma State, and Ole Miss participating. And LSU hosted at the Box (with a much weaker field Va-Commenwealth & Minnesota). Then because of the seeding LSU had to travel to Zephyr Field for the Super Regional.
And since Tulane beat us 4 out of 5 that year I wouldn't bring this up again. Don't worry I already debated a Wave fan of this and it is true.
For the first time in Tulane history, they hosted a NCAA Regional, with Southern, Oklahoma State, and Ole Miss participating. And LSU hosted at the Box (with a much weaker field Va-Commenwealth & Minnesota). Then because of the seeding LSU had to travel to Zephyr Field for the Super Regional.
And since Tulane beat us 4 out of 5 that year I wouldn't bring this up again. Don't worry I already debated a Wave fan of this and it is true.
This post was edited on 1/28/09 at 10:59 am
Posted on 1/28/09 at 11:24 am to DoubleDeuce
quote:
That would have been 2001. And it wasn't a regional, it was a super regional. And LSU did host a regional that year along with Tulane.
It was a regional. And yes, the ploy didn't work, and LSU did in fact host a regional in spite of Tulane's shenanigans. Super regionals were awarded on different criteria than regionals.
Tulane put the condition of LSU not hosting one on its guarantee in order to avoid the risk of losing money. If they bid a high guarantee and not enough fans showed up to generate the revenue to cover it, they would lose money. If they bid too low, they risked not being awarded a regional. So they solved this dilemma by bidding high, but only if they could be fairly certain of getting LSU and its fans there. So they conditioned their offer on LSU not getting a regional of its own.
As for the specific year, I don't remember that. I do know that it was very shortly before the end of the showdown and was the primary reason why LSU stopped doing the showdown. LSU probably cited the financial inequity of the showdown as the reason, but after 15-20 years of that same inequity, it was pretty coincidental that we only decided to stop doing it right after Tulane pulled their stunt with the regional bid, and Skip did mention the regional bid incident at the time we pulled out of the showdown.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 11:25 am to DoubleDeuce
quote:
Tulane beat us 4 out of 5 that year
That wasn't a factor in any of it. It was about money. Tulane wanted a regional and couldn't guarantee as much without LSU as they could with it, so they guaranteed a lot but only on the condition that we didn't get one.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 11:37 am to los angeles tiger
quote:
Which is why I hate that we went into a 10 year deal to play them in football
Yes. I've often thought that was the dumbest thing Skip ever did as AD. That may be a bit harsh, as there were other factors involved at the time that in hindsight should not have been as big as they might have seemed at the time.
Tulane had just barely avoided having to disband its program. Having saved the program for the time being, but still needing much more revenue, Tulane tried two approaches. First, they rallied the alumni base to contribute money. That was partially successful, but not nearly enough to keep the program going. Second, their president came to the forefront of the movement to attack the BCS on anti-trust grounds, either through the courts or through Congress, to get more money for the non-BCS conferences. That, in hindsight, probably wouldn't have worked, but it had enough traction early on among other non-BCS schools (obviously) and in Congress (troubling) that it was somewhat of a threat. It would not surprise me if LSU were pressured by other BCS schools and conferences to make some kind of deal with Tulane just to shut the bastard up. It worked, too. Almost as soon as that contract was signed, we hardly heard any more from him on the anti-trust front. I wouldn't be surprised if this was part of the deal, too.
Given the pressure to make some kind of deal, Skip probably made about as good as deal as he could have, but I still think it was a mistake not to just stand firm and take the risk of anti-trust problems. Of course, since other schools weren't being asked to donate money to their historic rival to keep its program alive, it was easy for them to suggest that we make a deal.
Had we stood firm and not made a deal, I think Tulane would have been dead in the water. The BCS tweaked its system to afford better access to non-BCS schools, which undercut the anti-trust movement, but the increased access has benefitted only the MWC and WAC so far, not CUSA. So, Tulane would have lost a lot of their support for anti-trust action without receiving any real financial benefit. They would have been dead in short order.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 11:46 am to LSUTANGERINE
"The out of state teams brought tons of fans"
No, they didn't. LSU always had at least 3 times the number of fans. Hell, even close teams like Miss. St. brought only about 50 or 75 fans. I know this because I actually attended the games every year. Toolame brought about 40 to each game; UNO about 25. UNO games were NEVER well attended even at their own field, even in their best years.
At least make an attempt to get your facts right before attacking LSU. You are an ignorant, uninformed fool.
No, they didn't. LSU always had at least 3 times the number of fans. Hell, even close teams like Miss. St. brought only about 50 or 75 fans. I know this because I actually attended the games every year. Toolame brought about 40 to each game; UNO about 25. UNO games were NEVER well attended even at their own field, even in their best years.
At least make an attempt to get your facts right before attacking LSU. You are an ignorant, uninformed fool.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 12:25 pm to mta504
quote:
No, they didn't. LSU always had at least 3 times the number of fans. Hell, even close teams like Miss. St. brought only about 50 or 75 fans. I know this because I actually attended the games every year. Toolame brought about 40 to each game; UNO about 25. UNO games were NEVER well attended even at their own field, even in their best years. At least make an attempt to get your facts right before attacking LSU. You are an ignorant, uninformed fool.
So, I see you were a ticket taker at the games and actually asked each person at each gate who they were fans of? I went to the games as well. I am not saying LSU did not have the most fans--never have. I am saying that others brought large numbers as well, just not as large as LSU's. At least make an attempt to get your facts straight before responding next time.
The name calling is grade school playground shananigans at best, which is only part of your downfall. Now, move on.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 12:49 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Schools bid for regionals, and their bids must include a guaranteed amount that they will pay to the NCAA, regardless of actual revenues they generate from the regional. Obviously, the higher your guarantee, the better your chances of getting a regional, which is why big money producing programs like LSU, Texas, etc. would always get regionals, even if they weren't a top seed in their own regional. Schools would have to estimate how much they could make off the regional before deciding how much they could guarantee. Tulane's estimate of what it could bring in was greatly affected by whether LSU would be in their regional or hosting its own. Without LSU, they couldn't bid as much and would have a lesser chance of getting the regional. Thus, they submitted a high bid, but with the condition that LSU not get a regional (meaning we would almost certainly be sent to theirs).
If that happaned, it sounds like good business to me as opposed to trying to "screw LSU". Tulane wanted the biggest bang for its buck. Not that LSU would ever take that approach.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 2:51 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
If that happaned, it sounds like good business to me as opposed to trying to "screw LSU".
Asking the NCAA to deny our regional bid so that they could make money off of our fans that they wouldn't have a prayer of making off their own is indeed trying to screw LSU.
quote:
Not that LSU would ever take that approach
Nope. And it never has. No bid LSU has ever made for a baseball regional has EVER been conditioned on Tulane not getting one. We don't need their fans to make money on a regional. They need ours. What pissed Skip off was that he had done so much for so long to carry their asses in the Winn Dixie Showdown, and this was how they repaid him. Typical Tulane.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 2:56 pm to Nuts4LSU
From this:
"Then, one year, Tulane made a bid to host a regional at Zephyr Field that was contingent on LSU not getting one. Their assumption was that, if LSU didn't get one, we'd be sent to theirs and they could rake in lots of dough from LSU fans. That pissed Skip off, even though we ultimately did get a regional that year, and he stopped doing the showdown".
to this?
That is quite a jump.
I think you mean, telling the NCAA that they only wanted to host if LSU did not host.
Sounds like a sound business decison as opposed to trying to "screw LSU"
"Then, one year, Tulane made a bid to host a regional at Zephyr Field that was contingent on LSU not getting one. Their assumption was that, if LSU didn't get one, we'd be sent to theirs and they could rake in lots of dough from LSU fans. That pissed Skip off, even though we ultimately did get a regional that year, and he stopped doing the showdown".
to this?
quote:
Asking the NCAA to deny our regional bid so that they could make money off of our fans that they wouldn't have a prayer of making off their own is indeed trying to screw LSU.
That is quite a jump.
I think you mean, telling the NCAA that they only wanted to host if LSU did not host.
Sounds like a sound business decison as opposed to trying to "screw LSU"
This post was edited on 1/28/09 at 3:00 pm
Posted on 1/28/09 at 2:57 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Nope. And it never has. No bid LSU has ever made for a baseball regional has EVER been conditioned on Tulane not getting one. We don't need their fans to make money on a regional. They need ours. What pissed Skip off was that he had done so much for so long to carry their asses in the Winn Dixie Showdown, and this was how they repaid him. Typical Tulane.
I was talking about taking an approach to sports and scheduleing that is driven by money and greed.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 3:01 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
I was talking about taking an approach to sports and scheduleing that is driven by money and greed.
Yet you are a fan of a school where the tuition is over $35,000 a year and room and board is another $10,000 plus a year.
Posted on 1/28/09 at 3:12 pm to los angeles tiger
quote:
Yet you are a fan of a school where the tuition is over $35,000 a year and room and board is another $10,000 plus a year.
I am not a fan of Tulane. If you are referring to USC, I don't deny that schools, including USC are driven by money and take that approach. For someone to imply that LSU does not do that is incorrect. To call another school out for it, is the pot calling the kettle black. Kind of like "Tulane sucks for trying to make a buck at the expense of LSU", all while LSU makes bucks at the expsnse of other schools as well.
I mean is LSU really trying to screw Oregon St. or other teams they only play one home game against? No. They are making bucks.
If Tulane tried to play like the big boys as said, then good for them (even though they failed).
This post was edited on 1/28/09 at 3:36 pm
Posted on 1/28/09 at 3:31 pm to los angeles tiger
quote:
Yet you are a fan of a school where the tuition is over $35,000 a year and room and board is another $10,000 plus a year.
Woah! I don't think he said he was a fan of Tulane. He was just defending their politics of trying to secure a regional bid. I don't think anyone who doesn't have P&G glasses on wouldn't blame Tulane for bringing up a great economic issue to the NCAA for wanting a regional.
I would assume that Tulane probably stated that "if" LSU didn't get a regional and traveled to New Orleans then they could guarantee more money, but without LSU they couldn't guarantee the same. It's just rational to do that. We all know that Tulane by itself won't draw the same bucks that LSU will, but to say that they were somehow trying to undermine LSU's attempt to host a regional by wanting them at theirs is only good politics on the behalf of Tulane's Athletic Director. Not trying to screw LSU.
Most regional eligible teams in the nation that have a 3,000+ seating capacity put a bid in to host a regional. LSU competes against other regionals as well and I am sure they use politics to secure a bid. I'm sure we only hear half of the story.
I would like to know when was the last time LSU had to leave Alex Box for a regional? It's been a great run, but to believe that there aren't other schools worthy of hosting a regional or LSU is above traveling to a regional is absolutely ridiculous.
This post was edited on 1/28/09 at 3:33 pm
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News