Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Saw it one egriz...is it true or just a rumor? 2014 in Missoula and 2015 in Norfolk? Pretty sweet if you tell me. And hey, it's actually gonna be hard OOC game for Montana . I'll definitely try to make the trip out there four years from now...of course, a bunch of things can also change in that time.

Would be an interesting H&H. Just make sure the home is first in Norfolk, or there is a steep buyout...

It's supposed to start at Montana...I've heard the Griz are notorious for buyin' some of these return games out, but any actual examples?

First game is in Montana. The ODU noobs are getting broken in.

Ya'll are a bunch of fuckers.

andy7171 wrote:First game is in Montana. The ODU noobs are getting broken in.

What's next an ODU/Furman series.. starting at Furman???

∞∞∞ wrote:It's supposed to start at Montana...I've heard the Griz are notorious for buyin' some of these return games out, but any actual examples?

Haha. Funny.

The Griz bought out one game as far as I know. We paid 50K to get out of an arrangement with SDSU when our athletic department was 1 million in the hole. For all those who think the arrangement was taken lightly, you can see how long even the supporters had to suffer before we could afford to schedule some tougher OOC opponents.

ChickenMan wrote:

andy7171 wrote:First game is in Montana. The ODU noobs are getting broken in.

What's next an ODU/Furman series.. starting at Furman???

Then they coudl go play SDSU, I think they have an open home game in the future.

SeattleGriz wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote:It's supposed to start at Montana...I've heard the Griz are notorious for buyin' some of these return games out, but any actual examples?

Haha. Funny.

The Griz bought out one game as far as I know. We paid 50K to get out of an arrangement with SDSU when our athletic department was 1 million in the hole. For all those who think the arrangement was taken lightly, you can see how long even the supporters had to suffer before we could afford to schedule some tougher OOC opponents.

We bought out Cal Poly in that same time frame for the same reason. Who gives a fuck what a bunch of dipshit fans think though. Any AD from most other FCS schools is gonna take a game with us because it is like getting a seat at the king's table and you better fucking appreciate the opportunity to dine with us.

We give programs a chance to play with the best and come see the best stadium so they will all jump at the chance to be here if we choose them. Cal Poly fans and administration didn't have a problem taking a deal when it was offered to them after the first one. They have their heads on straight and ain't a bunch of crybabies because their every little whim couldn't be met.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

SeattleGriz wrote:
Haha. Funny.

The Griz bought out one game as far as I know. We paid 50K to get out of an arrangement with SDSU when our athletic department was 1 million in the hole. For all those who think the arrangement was taken lightly, you can see how long even the supporters had to suffer before we could afford to schedule some tougher OOC opponents.

We bought out Cal Poly in that same time frame for the same reason. Who gives a fuck what a bunch of dipshit fans think though. Any AD from most other FCS schools is gonna take a game with us because it is like getting a seat at the king's table and you better fucking appreciate the opportunity to dine with us.

We give programs a chance to play with the best and come see the best stadium so they will all jump at the chance to be here if we choose them. Cal Poly fans and administration didn't have a problem taking a deal when it was offered to them after the first one. They have their heads on straight and ain't a bunch of crybabies because their every little whim couldn't be met.

I'd love to see a UD-UM H&H, but it will probably never happen. While both teams would gladly be willing to host the other, there is no reason for either team to travel 2000+ miles to play.

It economics, not personal.

BlueHen86 wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: We bought out Cal Poly in that same time frame for the same reason. Who gives a **** what a bunch of dipshit fans think though. Any AD from most other FCS schools is gonna take a game with us because it is like getting a seat at the king's table and you better **** appreciate the opportunity to dine with us.

We give programs a chance to play with the best and come see the best stadium so they will all jump at the chance to be here if we choose them. Cal Poly fans and administration didn't have a problem taking a deal when it was offered to them after the first one. They have their heads on straight and ain't a bunch of crybabies because their every little whim couldn't be met.

I'd love to see a UD-UM H&H, but it will probably never happen. While both teams would gladly be willing to host the other, there is no reason for either team to travel 2000+ miles to play.

It economics, not personal.

I always thought the home team paid the road team's travel? Maybe I am wrong.

packerbacker wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote:
I'd love to see a UD-UM H&H, but it will probably never happen. While both teams would gladly be willing to host the other, there is no reason for either team to travel 2000+ miles to play.

It economics, not personal.

I always thought the home team paid the road team's travel? Maybe I am wrong.

I'm not sure, but either way, UD would make more money hosting West Chester than they would travelling to UM. I suspect that the opposite is also true for UM - a home game agaist Dixie St is more lucrative than an away game at Delaware.

BlueHen86 wrote:

packerbacker wrote:
I always thought the home team paid the road team's travel? Maybe I am wrong.

I'm not sure, but either way, UD would make more money hosting West Chester than they would travelling to UM. I suspect that the opposite is also true for UM - a home game agaist Dixie St is more lucrative than an away game at Delaware.

I also cannot say one way or the other on how much more money would be made scheduling a slack division II team verses a name FCS team. But I would assume one want to do it for added playoff aspirations, no?

BlueHen86 wrote:

packerbacker wrote:
I always thought the home team paid the road team's travel? Maybe I am wrong.

I'm not sure, but either way, UD would make more money hosting West Chester than they would travelling to UM. I suspect that the opposite is also true for UM - a home game agaist Dixie St is more lucrative than an away game at Delaware.

No doubt about it Hen. As much as I would love that they need to sprinkle a few of those games in to keep the intrigue going once in a while. You nailed the AD's reasoning though. I have been saying that there is likely a H&H coming with ODU because of the crossing of paths with that institution as far as exchanging presidents and so forth so this wouldn't surprise me at all but I would really love to see the H&H's with Delaware.

packerbacker wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote:
I'm not sure, but either way, UD would make more money hosting West Chester than they would travelling to UM. I suspect that the opposite is also true for UM - a home game agaist Dixie St is more lucrative than an away game at Delaware.

I also cannot say one way or the other on how much more money would be made scheduling a slack division II team verses a name FCS team. But I would assume one want to do it for added playoff aspirations, no?

As far as Montana goes we scheduled one game with a D2 and came up with 10 FCS wins to get the #1 seed this year so I don't know if that game hurt us all that much. Most teams schedule ONE D2 as they pay them very little to come in and they normally schedule a relatively close D2 to keep the travel costs down. UM cleared close to $800,000 on the Western States game earlier this season with a packed stadium so it is as BH86 said already all about the Benji's. The AD's have several more considerations to give some weight to than just the singular perspective of the fans.

The big time games like Delaware would be will also cost more to see as a fan and that is something else that needs to be thrown into the product mix as far as how much your fans are gonna bitch about the ticket prices.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

packerbacker wrote:
I also cannot say one way or the other on how much more money would be made scheduling a slack division II team verses a name FCS team. But I would assume one want to do it for added playoff aspirations, no?

As far as Montana goes we scheduled one game with a D2 and came up with 10 FCS wins to get the #1 seed this year so I don't know if that game hurt us all that much. Most teams schedule ONE D2 as they pay them very little to come in and they normally schedule a relatively close D2 to keep the travel costs down. UM cleared close to $800,000 on the Western States game earlier this season with a packed stadium so it is as BH86 said already all about the Benji's. The AD's have several more considerations to give some weight to than just the singular perspective of the fans.

The big time games like Delaware would be will also cost more to see as a fan and that is something else that needs to be thrown into the product mix as far as how much your fans are gonna bitch about the ticket prices.

Wouldn't most fans WANT to see premium matchups, so the increased ticket prices wouldn't be a big deal?

packerbacker wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: As far as Montana goes we scheduled one game with a D2 and came up with 10 FCS wins to get the #1 seed this year so I don't know if that game hurt us all that much. Most teams schedule ONE D2 as they pay them very little to come in and they normally schedule a relatively close D2 to keep the travel costs down. UM cleared close to $800,000 on the Western States game earlier this season with a packed stadium so it is as BH86 said already all about the Benji's. The AD's have several more considerations to give some weight to than just the singular perspective of the fans.

The big time games like Delaware would be will also cost more to see as a fan and that is something else that needs to be thrown into the product mix as far as how much your fans are gonna bitch about the ticket prices.

Wouldn't most fans WANT to see premium matchups, so the increased ticket prices wouldn't be a big deal?

You would think wouldn't ya? But now throw more than one of those premium games in a year to a ticket package that already has at least one $50 ticket and every other year two of those when MSU is in town. Now add a third @ $50. Then you have 3 or 4 other games @ $30-40 each. Not everybody wants to see the ticket prices going ballistic since we already have the highest season ticket prices in the division.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

packerbacker wrote:
Wouldn't most fans WANT to see premium matchups, so the increased ticket prices wouldn't be a big deal?

You would think wouldn't ya? But now throw more than one of those premium games in a year to a ticket package that already has at least one $50 ticket and every other year two of those when MSU is in town. Now add a third @ $50. Then you have 3 or 4 other games @ $30-40 each. Not everybody wants to see the ticket prices going ballistic since we already have the highest season ticket prices in the division.

I guess I can see your point. But that isn't the norm for all of the FCS. I can understand a school to get as much money for the product they put on the field and when someone important comes through town to charge a couple bucks extra. But aren't most school's ticket prices in the 10-20 dollar a game range?

So for the schools that are not named Montana, which I think is the highest by a long shot right, a regular season consists of what, 6 or 7 home games?

120 for 6 plus a bonus 30 or whatever for homecoming or the rivalry game. 150 bucks doesn't seem all that bad for a ticket to each and every home game. And then if ASU, Delaware, Montana, McNeese St (sp), _____________________ comes to town on a home and home I would think the season tickets would still be in the 180 dollar range? No?

packerbacker wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: You would think wouldn't ya? But now throw more than one of those premium games in a year to a ticket package that already has at least one $50 ticket and every other year two of those when MSU is in town. Now add a third @ $50. Then you have 3 or 4 other games @ $30-40 each. Not everybody wants to see the ticket prices going ballistic since we already have the highest season ticket prices in the division.

I guess I can see your point. But that isn't the norm for all of the FCS. I can understand a school to get as much money for the product they put on the field and when someone important comes through town to charge a couple bucks extra. But aren't most school's ticket prices in the 10-20 dollar a game range?

So for the schools that are not named Montana, which I think is the highest by a long shot right, a regular season consists of what, 6 or 7 home games?

120 for 6 plus a bonus 30 or whatever for homecoming or the rivalry game. 150 bucks doesn't seem all that bad for a ticket to each and every home game. And then if ASU, Delaware, Montana, McNeese St (sp), _____________________ comes to town on a home and home I would think the season tickets would still be in the 180 dollar range? No?

They probably would but many of the FCS not mentioned above would fall into the group that don't bring in 20-30K for the home games. They bring in under 12K normally and a lot struggle to even touch 10K. So at 10K and $30/ticket you aren't dealing with an overwhelming amount of money to pay for the big draw to come in there and still make much money. On the opposite end you have a full stadium on the lesser price and reduced expenses which nets out about the same whether you bring in Delaware at the higher price or Western States at the lower price. It's a tough mix to get it right I think.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

packerbacker wrote:
I guess I can see your point. But that isn't the norm for all of the FCS. I can understand a school to get as much money for the product they put on the field and when someone important comes through town to charge a couple bucks extra. But aren't most school's ticket prices in the 10-20 dollar a game range?

So for the schools that are not named Montana, which I think is the highest by a long shot right, a regular season consists of what, 6 or 7 home games?

120 for 6 plus a bonus 30 or whatever for homecoming or the rivalry game. 150 bucks doesn't seem all that bad for a ticket to each and every home game. And then if ASU, Delaware, Montana, McNeese St (sp), _____________________ comes to town on a home and home I would think the season tickets would still be in the 180 dollar range? No?

They probably would but many of the FCS not mentioned above would fall into the group that don't bring in 20-30K for the home games. They bring in under 12K normally and a lot struggle to even touch 10K. So at 10K and $30/ticket you aren't dealing with an overwhelming amount of money to pay for the big draw to come in there and still make much money. On the opposite end you have a full stadium on the lesser price and reduced expenses which nets out about the same whether you bring in Delaware at the higher price or Western States at the lower price. It's a tough mix to get it right I think.

True.

packerbacker wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote:
I'm not sure, but either way, UD would make more money hosting West Chester than they would travelling to UM. I suspect that the opposite is also true for UM - a home game agaist Dixie St is more lucrative than an away game at Delaware.

I also cannot say one way or the other on how much more money would be made scheduling a slack division II team verses a name FCS team. But I would assume one want to do it for added playoff aspirations, no?

It comes down to whether or not you sell out your season ticket base or not. The ODU-Montana matchup is about football and possibly recruiting. It can't possibly be about money. If things hold in the future like they did this year, we will be sold out in May. So the only dollar differential for hosting Montana may be an extra $10 for that game. That would equate to about $145,000 based on the ~14,500 season tickets sold. Much of that cash would be spent on the trip to Montana (probably close to $100k).
If we did not sell out our games, and Montana drew a sellout, then the incremental increase would be greater, and money would be a reason for this matchup. But I just don't see that being the case for these two programs. Looks like a virtual wash to me. It's gotta be about football.

packerbacker wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote:
I'm not sure, but either way, UD would make more money hosting West Chester than they would travelling to UM. I suspect that the opposite is also true for UM - a home game agaist Dixie St is more lucrative than an away game at Delaware.

I also cannot say one way or the other on how much more money would be made scheduling a slack division II team verses a name FCS team. But I would assume one want to do it for added playoff aspirations, no?

How would it add to playoff aspirations? From a UD standpoint (or any other CAA school) I don't see how scheduling Montana increases their chances of making the playoffs.

It may be true that dropping D-II West Chester and replacing them with an FCS school might help, but the Hens can replace West Chester with an eastern school if that is what they wanted to do. I also can't think of a single season since UD moved up to I-AA/FCS where the West Chester game cost UD a playoff spot - if UD had finished 6-5 this season with a win at Montana instead of a win against West Chester they still don't make the playoffs.

CAA Flagship wrote:

packerbacker wrote:
I also cannot say one way or the other on how much more money would be made scheduling a slack division II team verses a name FCS team. But I would assume one want to do it for added playoff aspirations, no?

It comes down to whether or not you sell out your season ticket base or not. The ODU-Montana matchup is about football and possibly recruiting. It can't possibly be about money. If things hold in the future like they did this year, we will be sold out in May. So the only dollar differential for hosting Montana may be an extra $10 for that game. That would equate to about $145,000 based on the ~14,500 season tickets sold. Much of that cash would be spent on the trip to Montana (probably close to $100k).
If we did not sell out our games, and Montana drew a sellout, then the incremental increase would be greater, and money would be a reason for this matchup. But I just don't see that being the case for these two programs. Looks like a virtual wash to me. It's gotta be about football.

It is a wash, and that is a great thing. Hard to schedule a home and home with a team that is going to struggle financially with it in the first place. ODU seems to have the financial resources to "pay their way" in the two teams meeting.

Yes, Montana bought out Poly, SDSU and Hofstra but the school has no deficit now and are travelling TO App and McNeese. Going to ODU or even Newark would not be out of the question but those long road trips are where the $1 million dollar deficit came from in the first place.

putter wrote:Yes, Montana bought out Poly, SDSU and Hofstra but the school has no deficit now and are travelling TO App and McNeese. Going to ODU or even Newark would not be out of the question but those long road trips are where the $1 million dollar deficit came from in the first place.

KC wants no part of a tough OOC opponent.. he's got enough problems getting his butt whipped within the CAA. UD fans will be getting a belly full of NEC juggernauts if Mr Keeler has his way.