Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
Author Message
GE and MTS Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 3,656
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 83
I Root For: Liberty/Penn St
Location: FBS!!!
Post: #21
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-30-2018 05:47 PM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  
(08-30-2018 08:21 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  I'm feeling pretty good about the $1.3 million we're getting from Liberty

[Image: giphy.gif]

Liberty paid $1.3 million for Old Dominion?

Did they think they were getting Ole Miss?

Basically Liberty is getting a boatload of money to be Auburn's sacrifice before their Iron Bowl game. Liberty took that money and gave it to ODU to help with them rearrange their existing schedule to be Liberty's opening FBS game.
08-30-2018 08:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #22
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-30-2018 05:59 PM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  
(08-30-2018 11:26 AM)ken d Wrote:  Why is Eastern Michigan paying somebody to play them? They don't get enough revenue for their home games as it is.

Are you suggesting that Eastern Michigan only play nonconference games on the road? No one does that.

Not sure where you are getting that. I'm saying why not just play FBS home and home?
08-30-2018 09:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #23
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-30-2018 03:41 PM)YNot Wrote:  The FCS buy games are the worst part of college football IMO. There are too few touch points among FBS schools as it is.

Keep the FCS buy games, but as exhibition games that don't count towards the win-loss records, stats, bowl eligibility or red-shirt eligibility.

If you did that, there would be no "buy" because far fewer fans would come out to see an exhibition game. There's just not much value there.
08-31-2018 08:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #24
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-30-2018 04:28 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(08-29-2018 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  College football’s version of the gig economy gets rolling Thursday, as teams across the country begin the annual ritual of playing one-time, non-conference games in exchange for huge payouts.

This season, well over $175 million will change hands just for teams getting on the field for these so-called “guarantee” games, according to an analysis of more than 275 contracts for matchups involving teams in the NCAA’s top-level Bowl Subdivision.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...131488002/

That article is baloney. A lot of those aren't "buy" games.

For example, Cincy @ UCLA is part of a 2 game contract. UCLA gives Cincy $400,000 this year for the visit to LA, and next year Cincy will (presumably) give UCLA $400,000 for the visit to Cincinnati.

This is very common in CFB contracts so that teams don't have wild revenue fluctuations from year-to-year.

I agree that some of these games, like the UCLA/Cincy series, are misclassified, they aren't actual buy games.

But that doesn't make the article 'baloney'. There is a lot of useful, accurate information on true buy games in it.
08-31-2018 08:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #25
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-31-2018 08:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-30-2018 03:41 PM)YNot Wrote:  The FCS buy games are the worst part of college football IMO. There are too few touch points among FBS schools as it is.

Keep the FCS buy games, but as exhibition games that don't count towards the win-loss records, stats, bowl eligibility or red-shirt eligibility.

If you did that, there would be no "buy" because far fewer fans would come out to see an exhibition game. There's just not much value there.

I would much rather just not allow FCS games at all. Let the money for buy games go to G5 schools instead.
08-31-2018 09:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #26
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-31-2018 09:04 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(08-31-2018 08:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-30-2018 03:41 PM)YNot Wrote:  The FCS buy games are the worst part of college football IMO. There are too few touch points among FBS schools as it is.

Keep the FCS buy games, but as exhibition games that don't count towards the win-loss records, stats, bowl eligibility or red-shirt eligibility.

If you did that, there would be no "buy" because far fewer fans would come out to see an exhibition game. There's just not much value there.

I would much rather just not allow FCS games at all. Let the money for buy games go to G5 schools instead.

Even though USF is G5, I'd really rather see the money go to FCS than G5. It's the G5 schools that claim they are in the same division and should be treated on an equal footing with the Big Boys, so they should have to earn their way.

FCS are much smaller programs trying to get by on a lower level, they don't make any claims against the P5 with regards to bowls and TV and playoff access, so they deserve more of that kind of gratuitous support.
08-31-2018 09:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 9,478
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 766
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #27
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-31-2018 08:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-30-2018 04:28 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(08-29-2018 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  College football’s version of the gig economy gets rolling Thursday, as teams across the country begin the annual ritual of playing one-time, non-conference games in exchange for huge payouts.

This season, well over $175 million will change hands just for teams getting on the field for these so-called “guarantee” games, according to an analysis of more than 275 contracts for matchups involving teams in the NCAA’s top-level Bowl Subdivision.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...131488002/

That article is baloney. A lot of those aren't "buy" games.

For example, Cincy @ UCLA is part of a 2 game contract. UCLA gives Cincy $400,000 this year for the visit to LA, and next year Cincy will (presumably) give UCLA $400,000 for the visit to Cincinnati.

This is very common in CFB contracts so that teams don't have wild revenue fluctuations from year-to-year.

I agree that some of these games, like the UCLA/Cincy series, are misclassified, they aren't actual buy games.

But that doesn't make the article 'baloney'. There is a lot of useful, accurate information on true buy games in it.

Ok, it's not total baloney.

But the $175 million figure is baloney.

There's only 75 or so games on that list. So the average payout would have to be $2.3 million to get $175 million. But the HIGHEST payout (according to the article) is $2 million for Colorado State@Florida.

Going through the list, at least 19 (that's 25%) are definitely not buy games:

Syracuse at Western Michigan
BYU at Arizona
UMass at Boston College
Navy at Hawai'i
Washington State at Wyoming
Boise at Troy
Marshall at Miami (OH)
UNC at Cal
Indiana at FIU
Louisiana Tech at South Alabama
Houston at Rice
SMU at North Texas
Middle Tennessee at Vanderbilt
6 neutral site games totalling $35.5 milllion
08-31-2018 10:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hammersmith Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 279
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 40
I Root For: NDSU
Location:
Post: #28
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-29-2018 10:57 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  There should be a ranking of most money paid to teams who won.
NDSU has made something like $2.2M in money games we've won. Not bad considering FCS teams get way less per game than FBS. Also why it's hard as hell to get P5 schools to schedule us.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
08-31-2018 07:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #29
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-31-2018 07:56 PM)Hammersmith Wrote:  
(08-29-2018 10:57 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  There should be a ranking of most money paid to teams who won.
NDSU has made something like $2.2M in money games we've won. Not bad considering FCS teams get way less per game than FBS. Also why it's hard as hell to get P5 schools to schedule us.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

That might be the record. NDSU has won 6 money games in 11 years. No one is giving them a shot this season or next; they'll play at Oregon in 2020.

There are FCS teams in addition to NDSU that have won at least two money games in this century, including UC Davis, their neighbor Sacramento State, Richmond, Northern Iowa, and Eastern Washington.

Southern Miss won money games at Alabama (2000) and Nebraska (2004). Does any other FBS team have two money game wins in this century? I doubt that money games before then paid enough to accumulate enough money for this purpose, and even those two might have paid less than a million each. (Note that I'm not counting road wins over P5 teams in home/home series, because those games are not money games. USM also has two of those in this century.)
08-31-2018 10:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Huskypride Offline
New Kid on the Block
*

Posts: 2,575
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 154
I Root For: Competitive FB
Location: Worcester
Post: #30
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
UConn will collect 1.2 mil from clemson when we go and play them in 2021..while I dont like the idea of us playing buy games. We have no choice the AAC money doesn't pay the bills
08-31-2018 11:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
debragga Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,751
Joined: Nov 2017
Reputation: 118
I Root For: ULM
Location: Texas
Post: #31
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-31-2018 10:56 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(08-31-2018 07:56 PM)Hammersmith Wrote:  
(08-29-2018 10:57 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  There should be a ranking of most money paid to teams who won.
NDSU has made something like $2.2M in money games we've won. Not bad considering FCS teams get way less per game than FBS. Also why it's hard as hell to get P5 schools to schedule us.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

That might be the record. NDSU has won 6 money games in 11 years. No one is giving them a shot this season or next; they'll play at Oregon in 2020.

There are FCS teams in addition to NDSU that have won at least two money games in this century, including UC Davis, their neighbor Sacramento State, Richmond, Northern Iowa, and Eastern Washington.

Southern Miss won money games at Alabama (2000) and Nebraska (2004). Does any other FBS team have two money game wins in this century? I doubt that money games before then paid enough to accumulate enough money for this purpose, and even those two might have paid less than a million each. (Note that I'm not counting road wins over P5 teams in home/home series, because those games are not money games. USM also has two of those in this century.)

ULM does. Alabama in 2007, Arkansas in 2012, and almost Auburn in 2012 too
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2018 01:06 AM by debragga.)
09-01-2018 01:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #32
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(09-01-2018 01:04 AM)debragga Wrote:  
(08-31-2018 10:56 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(08-31-2018 07:56 PM)Hammersmith Wrote:  
(08-29-2018 10:57 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  There should be a ranking of most money paid to teams who won.
NDSU has made something like $2.2M in money games we've won. Not bad considering FCS teams get way less per game than FBS. Also why it's hard as hell to get P5 schools to schedule us.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

That might be the record. NDSU has won 6 money games in 11 years. No one is giving them a shot this season or next; they'll play at Oregon in 2020.

There are FCS teams in addition to NDSU that have won at least two money games in this century, including UC Davis, their neighbor Sacramento State, Richmond, Northern Iowa, and Eastern Washington.

Southern Miss won money games at Alabama (2000) and Nebraska (2004). Does any other FBS team have two money game wins in this century? I doubt that money games before then paid enough to accumulate enough money for this purpose, and even those two might have paid less than a million each. (Note that I'm not counting road wins over P5 teams in home/home series, because those games are not money games. USM also has two of those in this century.)

ULM does. Alabama in 2007, Arkansas in 2012, and almost Auburn in 2012 too

ULM was paid $1 million for the 2007 Alabama game (source) and $500,000 for the 2012 Arkansas game in Little Rock (source).
09-01-2018 01:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #33
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-30-2018 09:53 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(08-30-2018 05:59 PM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  
(08-30-2018 11:26 AM)ken d Wrote:  Why is Eastern Michigan paying somebody to play them? They don't get enough revenue for their home games as it is.

Are you suggesting that Eastern Michigan only play nonconference games on the road? No one does that.

Not sure where you are getting that. I'm saying why not just play FBS home and home?

Apparently a major flaw in this article is that they're conflating home-and-homes with buy games. EMU hosts Army this year, they played at Army last year. Apparently FBschedules.com's archives of scheduling news is gone with the redesign, but that looks like a multi-game contract, not a buy game.

(EMU's other nonconference games are Monmouth, @SDSU, @Purdue)
09-01-2018 08:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #34
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
(08-31-2018 08:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-30-2018 04:28 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(08-29-2018 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  College football’s version of the gig economy gets rolling Thursday, as teams across the country begin the annual ritual of playing one-time, non-conference games in exchange for huge payouts.

This season, well over $175 million will change hands just for teams getting on the field for these so-called “guarantee” games, according to an analysis of more than 275 contracts for matchups involving teams in the NCAA’s top-level Bowl Subdivision.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...131488002/

That article is baloney. A lot of those aren't "buy" games.

For example, Cincy @ UCLA is part of a 2 game contract. UCLA gives Cincy $400,000 this year for the visit to LA, and next year Cincy will (presumably) give UCLA $400,000 for the visit to Cincinnati.

This is very common in CFB contracts so that teams don't have wild revenue fluctuations from year-to-year.

I agree that some of these games, like the UCLA/Cincy series, are misclassified, they aren't actual buy games.

But that doesn't make the article 'baloney'. There is a lot of useful, accurate information on true buy games in it.

But the thumbnail, the headline and the BLUF is all garbage, because they're mixing apples and oranges. Army @ EMU (home and home) is not the same as EMU @ Purdue (which looks like true buy game), but the article treats them as the same.

FBSchedules.com nuking their news archive makes that site less useful. But I shouldn't really complain about the decline in quality of the free ice cream.
09-01-2018 08:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gulfcoastgal Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,299
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 400
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:
Post: #35
RE: College Football's $175 Million "Buy Game" Economy
Yep, expect that from blogs and such, but thought USAToday still held to journalistic principles...so much for truth and accuracy. Agree that there is some good info in there, just a shoddy job on how it was put together and presented.
09-01-2018 10:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.