Mike Bohn next KU AD?

[absinthe]

I believe it is a slight loss in "home" years but a huge financial gain in "away" years. Plus it is supposed to make the state government and the Denver area alums happy while getting in-state prospects more interested in the game.

and net-net over the ten year contract it is a significant gain.

 

[absinthe]

A. That is standard language in most OOC contracts. Conference changes often necessitate revisiting prior scheduling. Therefore, it better be in there.
B. The economics change quite a bit when the game is as sparsely attended as last week. Does anyone have final ticket sale numbers?
C. Who cares? I'd rather drive to Ft. Fun that go to that ****hole again. I hate playing the game at that stadium with all my being.

Final sale/giveaway what have you number was just under 61K, in years when we get 6 home games (which we always should even if we have to play a chump) that 7th game at invesco which basically pays us as much as a game at Folsom is a huge windfall even when it is as poorly attended as it was this year. I know you hate the game but look at the simple economics, so long as we don't trade a real home game for the invesco game this thing should continue to be played.

 

[Buffarino]

You read a lot of OOC contracts, do you?

I know that OOC games get moved and canceled due to conference changes all the time. And clauses in the contract are always mentioned as allowing the teams out. I will be very unhappy if CU is unable to modify the series with only 3 OOC games going forward.

I know that the game at Invesco makes the AD a lot of money purely because it adds a seventh game to the season ticket package. That's going to be hard to give up. I'm with you, though, the experience at Invesco sucks eggs. I can't stand that place. I used to tolerate it, now, not so much.

I would love to see the real numbers on what it makes vs a home and home (or vs. an Invesco/Folsom rotation), but I doubt the AD is going to share those numbers anytime soon. Poor attendance certainly hurts the money argument, though.

 

[Buffarino]

I have seen my last game at the Invesco Diaphragm. I just do not like the stadium, atmosphere or location.

If the game has a mid-day kickoff again, I will think twice about attending next year. This year was so ****ing hot that it just sucked the life out of you.

 

[Buffarino]

Final sale/giveaway what have you number was just under 61K

Only part that matters is how many tickets CU sold, IIRC. I believe that is what dictates CU's payout.

My point is that if you are going to keep the game, an Invesco/Folsom rotation should have been do-able since it was part of the old contract. I know CSU will always play their home games in Invesco due to economics, but there is no reason Folsom can't factor in every other year or every 3rd year.

 

[sackman]

Only part that matters is how many tickets CU sold, IIRC. I believe that is what dictates CU's payout.

My point is that if you are going to keep the game, an Invesco/Folsom rotation should have been do-able since it was part of the old contract. I know CSU will always play their home games in Invesco due to economics, but there is no reason Folsom can't factor in every other year or every 3rd year.

There is a reason, though. The reason is that you can schedule 6 home games every year without accounting for playing CSU. You get a 7th game every year if you play at Invesco. Last year, we played the lammies at home and got 6 games. The year before, Invesco plus 6 games. This year, Invesco plus 6 games.

If we could somehow work it out so that we got seven home games a year without the need to play at Invesco ever again, I'd be all over it. I don't think that is an available option, though.

 

[Buffarino]

If we could somehow work it out so that we got seven home games a year without the need to play at Invesco ever again, I'd be all over it. I don't think that is an available option, though.

Bohn should have been all over that, IMO. CSU needs this game WAAAY more than CU does. Bohn should have used that to his advantage when negotiating the deal. Instead, CSU got exactly what they wanted. 10 straight at Pat's Diaphragm.

 

[sackman]

Bohn should have been all over that, IMO. CSU needs this game WAAAY more than CU does. Bohn should have used that to his advantage when negotiating the deal. Instead, CSU got exactly what they wanted. 10 straight at Pat's Diaphragm.

You really think Bohn could have swung that deal, after the year we just had? What benefit to CSU is it to have a game every year played in Boulder? Maybe if we offered them a guarantee of some kind.

 

[Buffarino]

You really think Bohn could have swung that deal, after the year we just had? What benefit to CSU is it to have a game every year played in Boulder? Maybe if we offered them a guarantee of some kind.

I think Bohn should have gotten 2-3 out of the 10 at Folsom, at a minimum. After all, that was in the previous contract. He could offer up the same number as CSU's choice (Ft. Fun or Invesco), knowing full well they will choose Invesco. It was already established precedent. Use the fact that fans hate the game in Denver as a negotiating chip.

CSU wanted every single game in Denver and that's exactly what they got. Bohn got nothing for giving up the games that were in Folsom.

I guess what I'm getting at is that there are some things more important than money. Playing a game the fans despise every year isn't going to build a lot of goodwill, even though it makes money.

 

[sackman]

I guess what I'm getting at is that there are some things more important than money. Playing a game the fans despise every year isn't going to build a lot of goodwill, even though it makes money.

I'm right there with you. I am beginning to despise the game in Denver. Invesco sucks. Maybe, just maybe, we'll make enough money from the new Pac 12 deal so that we don't have to worry about the revenue from the RMS, and can just end the series.

 

[absinthe]

Only part that matters is how many tickets CU sold, IIRC. I believe that is what dictates CU's payout.

CU takes home team share regardless of if they are the home team which is what makes the 7th game at invesco make sense and why we should always find a way to do 6 at Folsom + the invesco game.

 

[absinthe]

I'm right there with you. I am beginning to despise the game in Denver. Invesco sucks. Maybe, just maybe, we'll make enough money from the new Pac 12 deal so that we don't have to worry about the revenue from the RMS, and can just end the series.

I get the dislike for the game but isn't a Buff game at invesco, plus six at home still better than just 6 at home?

 

[SINKRATZ]

I get the 6 at home plus Invesco as an "away" game argument, but wasn't it just a couple years ago that Nebraska played 8 home games and didn't go on the road until mid-October? There's no reason 6 home games should be the max - it should be a minimum.

 

[absinthe]

I get the 6 at home plus Invesco as an "away" game argument, but wasn't it just a couple years ago that Nebraska played 8 home games and didn't go on the road until mid-October? There's no reason 6 home games should be the max - it should be a minimum.

Ok if we could do 7 at Folsom then I am anti-Invesco.

 

[Buffarino]

CU takes home team share regardless of if they are the home team which is what makes the 7th game at invesco make sense and why we should always find a way to do 6 at Folsom + the invesco game.

I believe CU gets 55% of the tickets and gets that ticket revenue, less the costs of holding the event. CSU does the same with their 45%.

I'd rather look for a 7th at Invesco vs. Poor Sisters of the Blind than go to that hellhole every year.

 

[Buffarino]

I get the 6 at home plus Invesco as an "away" game argument, but wasn't it just a couple years ago that Nebraska played 8 home games and didn't go on the road until mid-October? There's no reason 6 home games should be the max - it should be a minimum.

:yeahthat:

 

[sackman]

Ok if we could do 7 at Folsom then I am anti-Invesco.

This is where I am, too. Seven at Folsom beats 6 at Folsom + 1 at Invesco. But 6 Folsom + 1 Invesco beats 6 Folsom.

 

[BlackNGold]

The Invesco game was NOT a huge financial payout. The TV payout was enough to cover a twelve pack of beer and CU did not have blockbuster ticket sales...