(08-02-2013 06:28 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 03:02 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 02:59 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  It seems strange that Rice and UH can each supposedly make more money turning their game over to a middleman than running it themselves. I mean, isn't the reason you have a football stadium so that you can host games -- and keep the profits for yourself?

It seems sort of like a restaurateur holding his grand opening at someone else's restaurant. There may be logical reasons why Reliant is able to make a much bigger profit on the game (enough to pay lump sums to the competing teams AND keep a big bundle for itself) than either Rice or UH could, but it seems a bit counter-intuitive.

It makes sense for a sold out game. The extra 30-40k seats you can fill in Reliant can go towards the Reliant fees etc. Either that or Reliant expects to fill 70k and hence hands out a handsome payment to Rice/UH.

I cannot see how Reliant expects to make money (and Rice/UH making money) by selling 25-30k seats. HRS really isn't that expensive to operate, yes, it does seem counter-intuitive. Hoping Afflicted can share the dollar figures that we are slated to receive from Reliant...

Dollar figures? It must be a significantly higher amount than either school could make by hosting the game or neither would sell out to Reliant. People will pay ridiculous money to park, buy tickets and eat at Reliant because its so much nicer than HRS and Robertson. It's an NFL stadium that people like to visit. It's a great venue. Fans go for the game, but also for the experience of watching that game in a nice stadium.

1. Based on the business decisions made by Rice Athletics in the last few years, I would not assume any such thing. For all we know, RG's second cousin-in-law works at Reliant and hence brokered the deal.

I hope the payout is good, but I wouldn't assume it to be so.

2. No. People will not choose to go to the game because it is at Reliant. The stadium does not make the decision. I am yet to meet someone who decided to skip a Rice game because "HRS is an old crappy stadium". Usually the comment I hear is "Rice is going to lose anyways, why bother"

There was a study conducted recently (cannot find the link) that showed that the content of TV shows vastly outweighed the resolution. While HD was a bonus, it did not make up for the lack of quality programming; conversely people were willing to endure poor picture quality to watch a good show.

Another example is Apogee stadium. Despite the new stadium, attendance hasn't really gone up that dramatically. Their nice new shiny stadium didn't result in masses clamoring to see Sun Belt football.

Everything else is of minor importance to attendance compared to whether the team is winning against decent opponents. All the special
marketing efforts and new stadiums, etc. might make a short bump in attendance but only winnings insures that the fans will stay around in the long term.

Rice was selling off games to Reliant as far back as 2004, which was long before Greenspan got here. It was interesting to see Reliant ofr the first time in 2004, but after that I preferred to go to HRS where I am not having to pay extra for parking and there are on campus events.

The Cougars had been playing in the Astrodome until about 20 years ago before they decided they needed to move to Robertson to attract alums back to campus. Playing on campus ties alumni more to the school than going to an off-campus stadium. Universities have football to market the rest of the university. Also, Baylor is building an on campus stadium instead of continuing to play several miles south of Baylor.

I agree that HD can not make a television show without a decent plot and characters worth watching. Also, Blue Ray is not enough to get me interested in bad movies with a bunch of explosions and violence instead of a decent plot.

(08-02-2013 11:20 AM)Antarius Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 06:28 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 03:02 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 02:59 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  It seems strange that Rice and UH can each supposedly make more money turning their game over to a middleman than running it themselves. I mean, isn't the reason you have a football stadium so that you can host games -- and keep the profits for yourself?

It seems sort of like a restaurateur holding his grand opening at someone else's restaurant. There may be logical reasons why Reliant is able to make a much bigger profit on the game (enough to pay lump sums to the competing teams AND keep a big bundle for itself) than either Rice or UH could, but it seems a bit counter-intuitive.

It makes sense for a sold out game. The extra 30-40k seats you can fill in Reliant can go towards the Reliant fees etc. Either that or Reliant expects to fill 70k and hence hands out a handsome payment to Rice/UH.

I cannot see how Reliant expects to make money (and Rice/UH making money) by selling 25-30k seats. HRS really isn't that expensive to operate, yes, it does seem counter-intuitive. Hoping Afflicted can share the dollar figures that we are slated to receive from Reliant...

Dollar figures? It must be a significantly higher amount than either school could make by hosting the game or neither would sell out to Reliant. People will pay ridiculous money to park, buy tickets and eat at Reliant because its so much nicer than HRS and Robertson. It's an NFL stadium that people like to visit. It's a great venue. Fans go for the game, but also for the experience of watching that game in a nice stadium.

1. Based on the business decisions made by Rice Athletics in the last few years, I would not assume any such thing. For all we know, RG's second cousin-in-law works at Reliant and hence brokered the deal.

I hope the payout is good, but I wouldn't assume it to be so.

2. No. People will not choose to go to the game because it is at Reliant. The stadium does not make the decision. I am yet to meet someone who decided to skip a Rice game because "HRS is an old crappy stadium". Usually the comment I hear is "Rice is going to lose anyways, why bother"

There was a study conducted recently (cannot find the link) that showed that the content of TV shows vastly outweighed the resolution. While HD was a bonus, it did not make up for the lack of quality programming; conversely people were willing to endure poor picture quality to watch a good show.

Another example is Apogee stadium. Despite the new stadium, attendance hasn't really gone up that dramatically. Their nice new shiny stadium didn't result in masses clamoring to see Sun Belt football.

(08-02-2013 11:01 AM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 06:28 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  Dollar figures? It must be a significantly higher amount than either school could make by hosting the game or neither would sell out to Reliant. People will pay ridiculous money to park, buy tickets and eat at Reliant because its so much nicer than HRS and Robertson. It's an NFL stadium that people like to visit. It's a great venue. Fans go for the game, but also for the experience of watching that game in a nice stadium.

So, you don't have any clue what the payout is, but you are certain it is high enough to be worth it. That's about what I expected.

A few years ago, Rice and UH agreed to move one game each to Reliant. Rice did so (2004), then UH reneged (2005). Apparently UH thought the actual value wasn't good enough.

$500,000. I knew the amount was significant, but not by that much. So, until HRS is fully renovated, it makes no sense to host a big game. The stadium, as it is, simply can't squeeze enough money out of the fans who visit. Anyway, it really doesn't matter to me as long as the game continues. We can split hairs here all we want.

(08-02-2013 11:01 AM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 06:28 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  Dollar figures? It must be a significantly higher amount than either school could make by hosting the game or neither would sell out to Reliant. People will pay ridiculous money to park, buy tickets and eat at Reliant because its so much nicer than HRS and Robertson. It's an NFL stadium that people like to visit. It's a great venue. Fans go for the game, but also for the experience of watching that game in a nice stadium.

So, you don't have any clue what the payout is, but you are certain it is high enough to be worth it. That's about what I expected.

A few years ago, Rice and UH agreed to move one game each to Reliant. Rice did so (2004), then UH reneged (2005). Apparently UH thought the actual value wasn't good enough.

Depending on how firmly that agreement was made, Rice and UH were not operating from the same value proposition. If we take the $500k to each team mentioned for the Reliant game and pull a number out of thin air like, say, $800k to the host team for a home game, both teams made logical decisions. Rice makes more money from both games being at Reliant, but since UH has already gotten their $500k, as long as breaking their promise costs less than $300k, they're money ahead to host the second game.

(08-03-2013 12:30 PM)owl7886 Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 11:01 AM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 06:28 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  Dollar figures? It must be a significantly higher amount than either school could make by hosting the game or neither would sell out to Reliant. People will pay ridiculous money to park, buy tickets and eat at Reliant because its so much nicer than HRS and Robertson. It's an NFL stadium that people like to visit. It's a great venue. Fans go for the game, but also for the experience of watching that game in a nice stadium.

So, you don't have any clue what the payout is, but you are certain it is high enough to be worth it. That's about what I expected.

A few years ago, Rice and UH agreed to move one game each to Reliant. Rice did so (2004), then UH reneged (2005). Apparently UH thought the actual value wasn't good enough.

Depending on how firmly that agreement was made, Rice and UH were not operating from the same value proposition. If we take the $500k to each team mentioned for the Reliant game and pull a number out of thin air like, say, $800k to the host team for a home game, both teams made logical decisions. Rice makes more money from both games being at Reliant, but since UH has already gotten their $500k, as long as breaking their promise costs less than $300k, they're money ahead to host the second game.

Yet another reason to "hate" the coogs and keep the rivalry going. This time let's use our lawyers to ensure they don't renege on the deal or if they do we actually get something back in return.

"Rice is too Nice!"

The big boys have been playing us for waaay too long. When the SWC broke up, lawsuits were threatened but we just went away quietly with our tail'feathers' between our legs. Ditto when the gang of 5 imploded the WAC16. Now it is every school for itself, as even the virtuous? big 10 has latched onto academ-anemic schools such as Nebraska and is considering ND. Rice's reputation has not been enhanced by our athletic associations in the recent past.

Perhaps the best current course of action would be to align with the new Big East or even remain in CUSA for all sports save football; go indy for Football only. Unless and until we find a better home Rice athletics is a money pit, the sooner we figure that out and get someone who can fix it the better. And I am certainly not convinced that home is the bIG 12 with utexas gorging themselves to the detriment of all.

(08-03-2013 12:30 PM)owl7886 Wrote:  Depending on how firmly that agreement was made, Rice and UH were not operating from the same value proposition. If we take the $500k to each team mentioned for the Reliant game and pull a number out of thin air like, say, $800k to the host team for a home game, both teams made logical decisions. Rice makes more money from both games being at Reliant, but since UH has already gotten their $500k, as long as breaking their promise costs less than $300k, they're money ahead to host the second game.

So the claim here is that Rice agreed to a contract that:

• allowed UH to collect half the cash from the '04 game
• and allowed UH to keep ALL the cash from the '05 game
  

which from Rice's standpoint is basically equivalent to (using your figures) giving $300K cash to UH.

I don't have much faith in Rice Athletics's negotiating, but even I find that difficult to believe... unless it was a quid pro quo for supporting our C-USA invite. One of my concerns about this becoming an OOC game is that UH can now negotiate from a position of strength.

Christ Almighty, folks. It's not a claim, it's just tossing out an idea. Please don't use any numbers I gave as actual, nor assume that I have any inside information as to what actually happened. I was simply giving an example of what could have happened in the world of business.

And for the record, the agreement I was assuming would have been with Reliant, which is the real flaw in the theory, because I'd bet good money they've got the best contract lawyers of any of the three parties.

(08-03-2013 04:13 PM)owl7886 Wrote:  Christ Almighty, folks. It's not a claim, it's just tossing out an idea. Please don't use any numbers I gave as actual, nor assume that I have any inside information as to what actually happened. I was simply giving an example of what could have happened in the world of business.

And for the record, the agreement I was assuming would have been with Reliant, which is the real flaw in the theory, because I'd bet good money they've got the best contract lawyers of any of the three parties.

The exact numbers don't really matter. Your idea was that UH kept half of the cash from '04 and all of the cash from '05 which, if true, was an epic fail on Rice's part, regardless of the exact numbers.

I think the more likely explanation is that UH, one way or another, made the move acceptable to Rice and the Coogs thought it was worth that to have the game on their campus.

No matter what happened behind the scenes, it's pretty lame from a Rice fan standpoint that we ended up with a neutral-and-away sequence.

(08-03-2013 03:39 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  One of my concerns about this becoming an OOC game is that UH can now negotiate from a position of strength.

I'm not going to buy into that until we see the AAC accomplish it on the field. Rice still offers any opponent the chance to play a game in front of recruits in a talent rich area. We should also be able to get opponents in reasonable contract terms, and the Coogs know this. When I see the Big 12 (TCU?) and SEC (Arkansas?) programs lining up to play UH in a home and home, then I will believe. But I think we should have an equal opportunity to land these two programs in a home and home.

Also, UH has to be careful about scheduling too strong out of conference in case they miss out on a bowl because they were 4-4 in the AAC and 1-3 out of conference. We have a few years, at least, when we can start to schedule harder out of conference and not risk bowl qualifying.

(08-04-2013 09:53 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  I'm not going to buy into that until we see the AAC accomplish it on the field. Rice still offers any opponent the chance to play a game in front of recruits in a talent rich area. We should also be able to get opponents in reasonable contract terms, and the Coogs know this. When I see the Big 12 (TCU?) and SEC (Arkansas?) programs lining up to play UH in a home and home, then I will believe. But I think we should have an equal opportunity to land these two programs in a home and home.

That's because Rice is willing to do 2-1, 3-1 and 1 and done games. We as of recently, refuse to do that plus Aresco also made it a requirement for AAC teams not to schedule 2-1s. It's either 1-1 or 2-2 or we pay a team to come to Houston for a bodybag game because we must have 7-8 home games a year. (see Southern , Texas State, Georgia State or any other low tier FBS or FCS program)


All of this being said however, we recently announced a 1-1 with Arizona starting next year and have lined up some Big 12 and SEC opponents which will also be announced in the near future.

(08-06-2013 08:52 AM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 09:53 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  I'm not going to buy into that until we see the AAC accomplish it on the field. Rice still offers any opponent the chance to play a game in front of recruits in a talent rich area. We should also be able to get opponents in reasonable contract terms, and the Coogs know this. When I see the Big 12 (TCU?) and SEC (Arkansas?) programs lining up to play UH in a home and home, then I will believe. But I think we should have an equal opportunity to land these two programs in a home and home.

That's because Rice is willing to do 2-1, 3-1 and 1 and done games. We as of recently, refuse to do that plus Aresco also made it a requirement for AAC teams not to schedule 2-1s. It's either 1-1 or 2-2 or we pay a team to come to Houston for a bodybag game because we must have 7-8 home games a year. (see Southern , Texas State, Georgia State or any other low tier FBS or FCS program)


All of this being said however, we recently announced a 1-1 with Arizona starting next year and have lined up some Big 12 and SEC opponents which will also be announced in the near future.

The Rice 2 for 1 is Texas, and we did a 1 and done at Texas A&M and at Notre Dame. I think we can argue the merits of those particular opponents (and the circumstances for A&M which was the loss of scheduled non-conference games with Louisiana Tech and UTSA that became conference games).

Rice has future home and home games with Wake Forest, Stanford, Army, and Northwestern.