Big Sky

[OKC_Poke]

Re: Big Sky

Not that anyone here cares now that USD is not joining the Big Sky, but what is the Big Sky going to do now. They want at the very least have 12 teams for football. Only having 11 schools, should the Montana schools leave, is not enough to have divisions.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Big Sky

Sioux Falls game???? Only if the City or some other organization steps up and financially guarantees each university enough money to off set potential lost revenue from hosting the game. Still wouldn't be in favor though as at least for right now you would be leaving out students and business owners in each town who would count on the game being hosted by one school.

We're a long way from some of the FBS schools who play at a neutral site for a variety of reasons.

I don't understand why everyone assumes revenue will be lost with a SF game? Say there's 12,000 seats at Howard Wood, a limited supply. Demand will be high for this ticket. IMO fans will buy season tickets to make sure they have a seat.

If it goes home/home we are going to lose revenue every other year when the game is in Vermillion, and you miss out on the opportunity to get the whole city of Sioux Falls talking about the game.

Several FCS schools have had neutral site games this year with good to great success.

[SUPERBUNNY]

Re: Big Sky

I don't understand why everyone assumes revenue will be lost with a SF game? Say there's 12,000 seats at Howard Wood, a limited supply. Demand will be high for this ticket. IMO fans will buy season tickets to make sure they have a seat.

If it goes home/home we are going to lose revenue every other year when the game is in Vermillion, and you miss out on the opportunity to get the whole city of Sioux Falls talking about the game.

Several FCS schools have had neutral site games this year with good to great success.

His post addresses that. It would be great for Sioux Falls but it would hurt both Brookings and Vermillion a lot to not host the game. Tax revenue from food, booze, and hotels would be lost not to mention the revenue to all the businesses themselves.

You are right that ticket revenue would be the same to both schools.

More than anything this provides the impetus to get going on that 22,000 seat stadium in Brookings.

SUPERBUNNY

[2002jack]

Re: Big Sky

His post addresses that. It would be great for Sioux Falls but it would hurt both Brookings and Vermillion a lot to not host the game. Tax revenue from food, booze, and hotels would be lost not to mention the revenue to all the businesses themselves.

You are right that ticket revenue would be the same to both schools.

More than anything this provides the impetus to get going on that 22,000 seat stadium in Brookings.

SUPERBUNNY

Sponsors pay for home games, you would lose that revenue, or those sponsor would need to be recongnized in S.F. somehow. I bet it could all be worked out, but I prefer the games stay on campus.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Big Sky

His post addresses that. It would be great for Sioux Falls but it would hurt both Brookings and Vermillion a lot to not host the game. Tax revenue from food, booze, and hotels would be lost not to mention the revenue to all the businesses themselves.

You are right that ticket revenue would be the same to both schools.

More than anything this provides the impetus to get going on that 22,000 seat stadium in Brookings.

SUPERBUNNY

I agree that it would hurt Brookings and Vermillion for that one fall day.

IMO, a Sioux Falls USD game would be an investment for the Brookings and Vermillion communities. It will cost some money in the short term, but pay dividends for decades to come.

I do know this: The first school that figures out how to corner the Sioux Falls market will hold a significant advantage in the DI era.

[BTownJack]

Re: Big Sky

I don't know what the policies in the MVFC state currently with respect to scheduling. Given that they will be a conference foe, it isn't fair or practical to assume that USD would be expected to sacrifice the possibility of home field advantage is such a potentially crucial game just because they didn't have the foresight to go DI when SDSU did.

So, I imagine it will come down to a coin flip or some other random method of determining where the game is played or if its played at all the first year (2012). I have no idea if they will keep and 8 game balanced home and away conference schedule or if they'll go true round robin with 9 games necessitating an unbalanced home and away schedule.

Fact of the matter is, now that it's a conference game I suspect it's entirely out of SDSU or USD's control. Maybe I'm wrong.

I wouldn't say it is entirely out of SDSU's control. While it is ultimately the MVFC's decision we can give them our input. I would think if we request the first USD-SDSU game to be in Brookings it will be granted simply because we've been in the conference longer.

Similar to our request to have the MVFC schedule on the road each year on pheasant opener weekend. They granted it the last two years but if I remember right we are home next year on that weekend.

So take that for what it's worth.

[CatchEmAll]

Re: Big Sky

Estimated attendance for a HOME game versus USD in the first few years....16,000. Of that maybe 10,000 paying customers (the rest assumed students). Say there are 3,000 season ticket holders, that leaves 7,000 paying customers times $15 per tickets that's $105,000 in gate revenue.

Now, couldn't find Howard Wood seating, but lets assume it is 12,000. Take our our 3,000 season ticket holders. Assume USD has 1,000 season ticket holders. Still 8,000 seats left to sell. Now, USD gets gate revenue off of 4,000 and SDSU gets gate revenue off of 4,000. 4,000 x $15 = $60,000. Plus, we have to transport our team down, so take out another couple of grand for that. And I'm sure there's costs to using the field. So rough estimate our gate is $55,000 from the SF game.

Is that potential loss of $50,000 in revenue going to be gained by people being "exposed" to a game in Sioux Falls? No guarantees. I'm guessing of the 4,000 tickets SDSU would have to sell, 1,500 would be students, so no gain there. And a majority of the remaining 2,500 would be people that are heading to Brookings for games anyway.

Bottom line for me isn't the businesses losing out in Brookings (which is a big impact), it's what is SDSU's athletic department getting out of it financially. So, if someone is willing to pony up $100,000 or so to EACH school to take care of the game, in addition to some revenue sharing at the gate and transportation expenses, to me, it makes no sense to play a game versus USD in Sioux Falls.

Adding this after the fact:

Here's where my first comment on "we're not like FBS schools playing a neutral site game". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida...otball_Classic scroll down to "Site of game" and check out what the schools are estimated to pull in off this game.

[Rabbit74]

Re: Big Sky

I don't know what the policies in the MVFC state currently with respect to scheduling. Given that they will be a conference foe, it isn't fair or practical to assume that USD would be expected to sacrifice the possibility of home field advantage is such a potentially crucial game just because they didn't have the foresight to go DI when SDSU did.

So, I imagine it will come down to a coin flip or some other random method of determining where the game is played or if its played at all the first year (2012). I have no idea if they will keep and 8 game balanced home and away conference schedule or if they'll go true round robin with 9 games necessitating an unbalanced home and away schedule.

Fact of the matter is, now that it's a conference game I suspect it's entirely out of SDSU or USD's control. Maybe I'm wrong.

On both the SDSU and USD Arugus Leader live blogs it is indicated that the first game will be in Brookings. That must have been one of the conditions of approval

[Jack4Life]

Re: Big Sky

Bottom line for me isn't the businesses losing out in Brookings (which is a big impact), it's what is SDSU's athletic department getting out of it financially. So, if someone is willing to pony up $100,000 or so to EACH school to take care of the game, in addition to some revenue sharing at the gate and transportation expenses, to me, it makes no sense to play a game versus USD in Sioux Falls.

As I have posted before, I never wanted to play them in any sport again, ever, but have swallowed hard and can accept it. Now let's play our home games at Coughlin and they can do whatever the hell they want when it comes their turn to host. SDSU is located in Brookings, SD.

[TeaJackrabbit]

Re: Big Sky

Swung bu the UND message board....can't believe how many ppl there are just thrilled w/ the Big Sky move. Apparently they just wanted A conference to be in. Silly Flickertails.

[RabbitObsessed]

Re: Big Sky

Of that maybe 10,000 paying customers (the rest assumed students).

Back it up there, sir. We are paying customers too

[joeboo22]

Re: Big Sky

Back it up there, sir. We are paying customers too

yeah I agree on this, I'm guessing that if you moved the SDSU-USD to neutral site and didn't give students "free" tickets ,you'd have a lot of problems EVER getting an increase in student fees, for anything athletic.

It is a big misnomer that students get in "free". With every credit that a student pays for there are "fees" that are associated with it. Many of those fees are transfered to the athletic department. I don't know what the actual numbers are but generally it is a fairly large chunk of the student fees that go to athletics.

[Prairiehaas]

Re: Big Sky

Back it up there, sir. We are paying customers too

Or your parents are

[usdfbalum]

Re: Big Sky

On both the SDSU and USD Arugus Leader live blogs it is indicated that the first game will be in Brookings. That must have been one of the conditions of approval

Have no problem with the first game in Brookings by any means. Would be fun. I asked if it was a condition that SDSU asked for yesterday at the USD presser - was told no and that the MVFC would handle the decision.

I know it was said that SDSU has been in the MVFC longer so they should get the home game - well so has everyone else. 8 conference road games will be tough in 2012 (really must be the end of the world), but will look forward to 8 conference home games the next year I guess....

[goon]

Re: Big Sky

Believe it.

USD MVFC in 2012. USD has some capacity constraints currently, but what is your prediction on attendance for the first game if at CAS?

18K, if we could get enough temporary stands in place to hold that many, other wise 16K would be about right.