Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="TheCusian, post: 1149560, member: 2585"]
No. It's as simple as looking at the facts of the deal. [B]They traded a percentage chance at a win and the ire of the fan base for money and exposure. A lot of money. They said it was the best deal for this kind of game and that it helps with branding (i.e. at the time we needed the money and exposure). [/B]They can't disclose the numbers as it's an active deal. Not sure what else you want them to say. I love how people dog on Gross for talking points and sharing facts that only make SU look good. [B][I]That's his job.[/I]
[/B]
I don't work for the AD office and I don't think I'm claiming that they didn't do anything wrong. They clearly traded a % of a win in favor of money. I don't think that's a great deal and I'm glad they got out of it. I'm just saying that at the time, you take the money and the exposure. We needed both. With or without the paltry BE money.

I don't think it made them look bad - I think USC, Penn St, and ND looked at the deal as a team they knew they'd have an advantage over with a decent payout. [I]But they'd know that they have an advantage over us in talent where ever we play them. 
[/I]
---

If you bought goods from a seller and they said "I can cut you a good deal on this" - you don't go mouthing the deal in the press, or the deal goes away. And the chances at a future deal go away too. Business.

---

Finally, I think the real reason you're mad is losing a home game. That goes for bees too. I get that. I really do. But in a quest to prove your point you've had to vilify and suggest that people are lying - when the truth is sitting there, plain as day. Sometimes as spade is a spade. Money and Exposure.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?