My guess is that as part of the negotiations to get the unfavorable contract terms out of the deal, Barta had to (or agreed to) have the deal expire after that home game in 2012.
Today's Lesson
- Thread starter Stewo
- Start date
My guess is that as part of the negotiations to get the unfavorable contract terms out of the deal, Barta had to (or agreed to) have the deal expire after that home game in 2012.
If the only sticking point was what each school loses or gains from a financial standpoint, then it's fairly obvious that Barta caved pretty easily despite clearly having the upper hand.
I've got no way to prove this, but I can't imagine that writing the ISU AD a check for 300K every year is part of the Iowa AD's guidelines.
ISU pays all non-conf foes ~$300,000 to come play. When Army bought out the ISU home game a few years ago, they paid $300,000 to the replacement school.
So... why whine about the agreement when the money gained and lost is basically the same as a home/home?
Iowa's contract with ISU is like trying to ride a see-saw with a fat person on the other end and the fulcrum is dead center and very steep. It's lop-sided and a horrible deal for Iowa. Like other people said, Kudos to Pollard on that one.
Do you think Iowa is going to trade us for SDSU?
Thanks for the ringing endorsement.
Because it isn't the same as a home/home where each team keeps 100% of the gate, concessions, parking, etc..
Right now, this series (from a financial standpoint only) clearly favors Iowa State. ISU gets at least 600K for playing in Iowa City, but only has to pay Iowa 300K when the game is in Ames.
No... I was saying that when we play a school like NDSU (I was actually thinking of SDSU from last year) or Iowa plays a school like Maine there isn't a financial benefit. A home and home with us brings a financial benefit.
Not right now, it doesn't; it costs Iowa 300K a year to play this game. In 2014 it'll start benefitting Iowa, but not until then.
Iowa has money to blow. They made 8 million dollars last year.
Really I wouldn't mind this game going away for a lot of reasons, but I know I'm in the clear minority on that view point.
Just nit-picking, but wouldn't it be $300,00 every other year?
Averaging out to $150,000/year net loss. Maybe not as bad when you look at it that way.
I'm lazy... I think you said this earlier in the thread, but it is less than clear.
So you are saying that Iowa pays ISU when we come to IA city and Iowa pays ISU when IA comes to Ames too? How in the hell did that manage to happen?
ISU made 616K and some change for playing in Iowa City; in 2007, Iowa received something like 330K and some change for playing in Ames.
That's a 284K net loss.
Yeah but you said Iowa's Athletic Department made $8,000,000 last year and it's not big deal Ferenz is making $3,000,000 a year, so not so sure why your unhappy about this? It seems like chump change, for you guys.
Last edited:
That's because ISU deserves to have more because Iowa made more money and it is unfair to ISU not to have the same opportunities.
It isn't a big deal, it's just odd that ISU comes out on the positive end of this series from a financial standpoint.
I've all ready given credit to Pollard (or whoever it was at ISU) for getting the contract written in a way that favors Iowa State. ISU is going to reap the benefit of getting a last payday from Iowa in 2012 (the last year of the current contract), and will also benefit from keeping all of the gate receipts in 2013.
Wow that's a border line political statement.:wink:
Can't believe I'm thinking that way about athletics.:shocked:
How does ISU "deserve" anything? Jack Trice holds 15K less than Kinnick, and the payout is based on attendance.