guys don't worry. we have a mall coming. couple lids, an auntie anns. we won't have money problems anymroe!!!
Williams & Blum Pod: ISU raises prices, bowl win, foul play in the CFP?
- Thread starter ChrisMWilliams
- Start date
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,748
- 33,771
- 113
Maybe because the House vs. NCAA settlement hasn't been officially approved yet. As I understand it, it has preliminary approval, but not final approval. They may not want to announce anything until it's official.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,748
- 33,771
- 113
Also, I think there are some that are still considering challenging the settlement on the grounds that it violates their existing state laws. Not sure how far they're willing to push it, but it's possible that the settlement is delayed for a bit
How does that math change if you are selling Ames lager and getting revenue from that as well?
That’s above my pay grade haha but I assume it wouldn’t move the needle that much.
Throw in that if it counts,, some will just consider what they give to NIL an offset to the CC increase and you don’t gain the 20%.
So you want to make college football more attractive to gambling? It's bad enough the Big 10/SEC/Network greed is ruining college football, now we want want to find ways to assist the gambling? No thanks.
Just curious if you kept Sukup with all alcohol options and sold Ames lager everywhere else in the stadium if that would work. Just well cans. Don't need to invest in the infrastructure for draft beer everywhere. Just a bunch of beer carts
Ha, no the email was clear, no money from CyTown is going to athletics or in any way to offset this $20M gap! Now pay up!
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,748
- 33,771
- 113
That horse jumped the fence long ago, my friend. Gambling is already absolutely entwined into college sports. That dam done broke years ago.
Same guy that removed from a high school game a few years ago? Save me the high horse stuff.
It’s no secret he doesn’t want to sell alcohol in the stadium but that’s not why it’s not happening. He cares about revenue more than anything else.
We're all focused on the revenue side of this given yesterday's news dump, but plenty of people have made that very argument.
I understand being focused on revenue but then why keep hammering away at a topic that 1) we don’t know will even generate positive revenue compared to our current situation and 2) if it does generate revenue, how much are we looking at?
The gambling genie isn't going back in the bottle, and it isn't ISU athletics' job to take a moral stand against something that is perfectly legal. I'd advise taking your beef with gambling up with the government.
Realistically, which school will open a sports book in their stadium first? I mean why not us? Get in bed with them because it’s not going away. (I’m only half kidding about opening one).
Struck me most when the Reds have a sports book with the whole Pete Rose thing(I know, slightly different circumstances).
It’s too big and too much $$$ and now they are literally in pro stadiums throughout the country. It all trickles down to
Should have clarified- it should have counted the whole time, and should retroactively account for something. This is what I get for trying to type and run an auger at the same time
Huh? You said people need to argue for alcohol on the basis of the fan experience, not the revenue. I said people have done that, it's just that the revenue argument is getting all the attention now in light of Pollard's email.
