College Football Week 3: The only real barbecue is whole Hog

[JosephC.Myers]

I wouldn't pay Boise a damn thing to come play me. If they want to be a big boy program, they can come on their own dime and be a big boy program.

What's the incentive when Bama won't return the favor by going to Boise? Isn't that what big boy programs do, play home and home?

Well, uhm, they could...I don't know...have a chance to beat the best team in the country?

Yes, they would, but it's not like Boise State is some FCS team here or even a Sun Belt-level FBS team. They're one of the few teams outside of the AQ conferences (except for the Big East) that would be worthy of a return game.

I might play them at home and neutral, but I wouldn't play on blue turf if I'm Alabama. The Tahd is above that mediocre publicity stuff.

This elitism is the stuff I hate. The "my school is above doing thus and such" crap. It wouldn't be a publicity stunt. It'd be playing the back end of a home and home against a good program.

 

[LongTimeListener]

I wouldn't pay Boise a damn thing to come play me. If they want to be a big boy program, they can come on their own dime and be a big boy program.

What's the incentive when Bama won't return the favor by going to Boise? Isn't that what big boy programs do, play home and home?

Well, uhm, they could...I don't know...have a chance to beat the best team in the country?

Boise has to balance the budget at the end of the season. They should run a loss for the honor of playing Alabama?

Typical SEC bullshirt THEY SHOULD PLAY US FOR FREE!!!!!!!! heck, your own players are making a mil combined for that game.

 

[Donny in his element]

I think Boise has paid its dues, earned the respect and name value to be able to play home and homes, just like Florida State did in its first 10 years of Bowden.

This stuff is just lip service by programs who are intimidated by the thought of losing to Boise on anything but their own terms.

 

[Armchair_QB]

I wouldn't pay Boise a damn thing to come play me. If they want to be a big boy program, they can come on their own dime and be a big boy program.

What's the incentive when Bama won't return the favor by going to Boise? Isn't that what big boy programs do, play home and home?

Well, uhm, they could...I don't know...have a chance to beat the best team in the country?

Boise has to balance the budget at the end of the season. They should run a loss for the honor of playing Alabama?

Typical SEC bullshirt THEY SHOULD PLAY US FOR FREE!!!!!!!! heck, your own players are making a mil combined for that game.

Why should Alabama travel halfway across the country to play non-conference game that they'll lose money on when they can sell 90,000 tickets and play at home? Alabama has to pay the bills too.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Alabama's athletic department made a $31 million profit in 2010-11, the most profitable program in the nation and $20 million MORE than Arkansas, the SEC's #2. I can't find Boise's number, but I do know SEC programs like South Carolina and Tennessee barely scratched out any profit at all. The two are not remotely similar in this discussion.

That said ... Alabama doesn't have to travel anywhere, obviously. But Alabama shouldn't hide behind some bullshirt ransom demand that Boise is making as if it isn't standard operating procedure throughout college football.

 

[Batman]

I wouldn't pay Boise a damn thing to come play me. If they want to be a big boy program, they can come on their own dime and be a big boy program.

Ummm ... you realize EVERYBODY gets paid when they play somewhere, right? If Alabama goes to Boise State, or Oklahoma, or Hawaii, or Michigan, or LSU or Arkansas, they get a guarantee.
It's one reason (besides arrogance) the big-boy schools don't go on the road to play the small schools often, or you see the 2-for-1 deals that are more about PR for the small schools than anything else. The small schools can make more money going to LSU or Alabama than they ever could by hosting them and paying an exorbitant guarantee.

 

[JosephC.Myers]

Alabama's athletic department made a $31 million profit in 2010-11, the most profitable program in the nation and $20 million MORE than Arkansas, the SEC's #2. I can't find Boise's number, but I do know SEC programs like South Carolina and Tennessee barely scratched out any profit at all. The two are not remotely similar in this discussion.

That said ... Alabama doesn't have to travel anywhere, obviously. But Alabama shouldn't hide behind some bullshirt ransom demand that Boise is making as if it isn't standard operating procedure throughout college football.

I agree with you. The whole "we shouldn't have to play road games because we're Alabama (or insert any other school name here)" excuse is just crap.

 

[Armchair_QB]

Alabama's athletic department made a $31 million profit in 2010-11, the most profitable program in the nation and $20 million MORE than Arkansas, the SEC's #2. I can't find Boise's number, but I do know SEC programs like South Carolina and Tennessee barely scratched out any profit at all. The two are not remotely similar in this discussion.

That said ... Alabama doesn't have to travel anywhere, obviously. But Alabama shouldn't hide behind some bullshirt ransom demand that Boise is making as if it isn't standard operating procedure throughout college football.

I agree with you. The whole "we shouldn't have to play road games because we're Alabama (or insert any other school name here)" excuse is just crap.

No it's not. And it didn't stop Florida State from going anywhere when they were in Boise's position.

And if Boise truly wanted to play Alabama they could have done so and played another paycheck game to make up the difference. Plus, it wasn't like Bama wasn't going to pay them.

But of course Boise never wanted to play two games like that in one season because they'd never win them both.

 

[JosephC.Myers]

Alabama's athletic department made a $31 million profit in 2010-11, the most profitable program in the nation and $20 million MORE than Arkansas, the SEC's #2. I can't find Boise's number, but I do know SEC programs like South Carolina and Tennessee barely scratched out any profit at all. The two are not remotely similar in this discussion.

That said ... Alabama doesn't have to travel anywhere, obviously. But Alabama shouldn't hide behind some bullshirt ransom demand that Boise is making as if it isn't standard operating procedure throughout college football.

I agree with you. The whole "we shouldn't have to play road games because we're Alabama (or insert any other school name here)" excuse is just crap.

No it's not. And it didn't stop Florida State from going anywhere when they were in Boise's position.

And if Boise truly wanted to play Alabama they could have done so and played another paycheck game to make up the difference. Plus, it wasn't like Bama wasn't going to pay them.

But of course Boise never wanted to play two games like that in one season because they'd never win them both.

I just get tired of the elitist stuff.

 

[young-gun11]

I guess I forgot the blue font. Newb mistake. My fault, y'all.

 

[Riptide]

I thought Texas and Penn State were 1-2 in profit.

 

[RubberSoul1979]

"Stanford Stadium looked full tonight. This must have been a lot of SC fans there, or maybe this was Stanford's designated "let's look like we care about football" weekend. Next home game they'll return to their usual 28K (and announce 40K)..."

Stanford played to 97 percent capacity in 2011. There were maybe 25 percent SC fans in the house, and the student section - where school isn't even in session yet - was packed before they flooded the field postgame.

If you want shirtty attendance, WTF is up with Miami? I know they have long struggled to put butts in the stands but come on.

Irony = Al Golden upgrades from the Temple Owls to "The U." One school got kicked out the Big East, the other is a legendary program with five national titles in a span of 20 years, yet they each play home games at a cavernous NFL stadium with acres of empty seats.