Author Topic: ksu ladycats  (Read 188822 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52980
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #325 on: February 10, 2014, 03:11:12 PM »
K-State's women's basketball program total expenses, including game travel/game hosting etc. etc.   

Could have covered the entire budget of OU's National Champion Women's Softball team, and WVU's 2 time Big 12 Champion Women's Soccer team with approx: $300K left over, based on 2013 EADA filings; that includes all game day and travel expenses.  Based on my at-a-glance calculations.

Such a bullshit post, there are like three people reading this thread, your numbers magic tricks aren't going to work, I read equity in athletics reports too & I know exactly why you didn't compare basketball program with other basketball programs.

What would you like to compare, the fact that OU women's basketball makes almost 7x's the amount of revenue than K-State WBB (for example).

All women's sports operates at a loss, that's news to no one.   

Why spend all that money to finish at the bottom? 

When you start paying a WBB's coach $600K a year and you build her facilities that are exactly equal to the men's team in every way, you have to expect more than swirling around at the bottom of the conference and getting blown off the floor.   

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44810
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #326 on: February 10, 2014, 04:26:56 PM »
K-State's women's basketball program total expenses, including game travel/game hosting etc. etc.   

Could have covered the entire budget of OU's National Champion Women's Softball team, and WVU's 2 time Big 12 Champion Women's Soccer team with approx: $300K left over, based on 2013 EADA filings; that includes all game day and travel expenses.  Based on my at-a-glance calculations.

Such a bullshit post, there are like three people reading this thread, your numbers magic tricks aren't going to work, I read equity in athletics reports too & I know exactly why you didn't compare basketball program with other basketball programs.

What would you like to compare, the fact that OU women's basketball makes almost 7x's the amount of revenue than K-State WBB (for example).

All women's sports operates at a loss, that's news to no one.   

Why spend all that money to finish at the bottom? 

When you start paying a WBB's coach $600K a year and you build her facilities that are exactly equal to the men's team in every way, you have to expect more than swirling around at the bottom of the conference and getting blown off the floor.

If you're going to keep being intellectually dishonest then we might as well stop the conversation. You were talking about expenditures not revenue. You used softball and soccer to compare to K-State's women's basketball expenditures because actually comparing them to their peers wouldn't prove your point. I call you out on that and then you jump to revenue but again not comparing us to a peer school. I'm sure you compare K-State football revenues to OU revenues all of the time.

Also the athletic department hasn't brought Deb anything, donors built the BTF and women had to get space for title nine requirements. Our women's basketball team doesn't have better facilities than anyone else in this conference. Your point about spending money to be at the bottom would be valid if our women's program was perennially there, we aren't, she doesn't get a lifetime exemption but she hasn't done nearly enough wrong to get fired.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52980
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #327 on: February 10, 2014, 04:44:32 PM »
K-State's women's basketball program total expenses, including game travel/game hosting etc. etc.   

Could have covered the entire budget of OU's National Champion Women's Softball team, and WVU's 2 time Big 12 Champion Women's Soccer team with approx: $300K left over, based on 2013 EADA filings; that includes all game day and travel expenses.  Based on my at-a-glance calculations.

Such a bullshit post, there are like three people reading this thread, your numbers magic tricks aren't going to work, I read equity in athletics reports too & I know exactly why you didn't compare basketball program with other basketball programs.

What would you like to compare, the fact that OU women's basketball makes almost 7x's the amount of revenue than K-State WBB (for example).

All women's sports operates at a loss, that's news to no one.   

Why spend all that money to finish at the bottom? 

When you start paying a WBB's coach $600K a year and you build her facilities that are exactly equal to the men's team in every way, you have to expect more than swirling around at the bottom of the conference and getting blown off the floor.

If you're going to keep being intellectually dishonest then we might as well stop the conversation. You were talking about expenditures not revenue. You used softball and soccer to compare to K-State's women's basketball expenditures because actually comparing them to their peers wouldn't prove your point. I call you out on that and then you jump to revenue but again not comparing us to a peer school. I'm sure you compare K-State football revenues to OU revenues all of the time.

Also the athletic department hasn't brought Deb anything, donors built the BTF and women had to get space for title nine requirements. Our women's basketball team doesn't have better facilities than anyone else in this conference. Your point about spending money to be at the bottom would be valid if our women's program was perennially there, we aren't, she doesn't get a lifetime exemption but she hasn't done nearly enough wrong to get fired.

Yes I was talking about expenditures, then you brought up revenue.  MIR wrote: Deb is fine, our wbb revenue and attendance is decent 

No, our revenues are not decent, they are horrible, per the KSU 2013 NCAA Financial Report, WBB produced just $348K in revenue, on $3.114 million in expenses (not quite the same format as the EADA). 

The collective of our WBB facilities are better than other programs on the major conference D1 level.   Other programs don't have their very own practice court, sure, some do, some don't.   The BTF puts K-State WBB in the mix for the best facilities collectively and exactly equal in every way to the men's program at K-State. 

I don't like Deb, never have, probably never will, and when she's losing by 40 and headed to another bottom of the conference finish and K-State is losing millions . . there's plenty there to question.


Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44810
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #328 on: February 10, 2014, 05:20:21 PM »
Again dax there is a reason that you aren't comparing our revenue and expenditures to our true peer schools, I know why that is so we can drop the charade.

Our practice facility isn't better than most of our peers, its newer. Just like the men we were way behind when the BTF was built, that facility, and it is a beautiful facility, caught us up. We did nothing that makes anyone else in our conference say, "damn K-State just rendered our facility obsolete, we have to start over." I don't know for sure but I'm fairly confident that I've seen more of these facilities than you or pretty much anyone else posting on this board.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52980
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #329 on: February 10, 2014, 11:16:20 PM »
Again dax there is a reason that you aren't comparing our revenue and expenditures to our true peer schools, I know why that is so we can drop the charade.

Our practice facility isn't better than most of our peers, its newer. Just like the men we were way behind when the BTF was built, that facility, and it is a beautiful facility, caught us up. We did nothing that makes anyone else in our conference say, "damn K-State just rendered our facility obsolete, we have to start over." I don't know for sure but I'm fairly confident that I've seen more of these facilities than you or pretty much anyone else posting on this board.

Our total AD operating revenue was nearly $70 million dollars (and that didn't include nearly $20 million in capital giving and revenue from the sale of investment vehicles).   You sound absolutely stupid, I have never said K-State has rendered any rivals facility obsolete.    I've been in K-State's facility, I've seen NC State's facility, I've seen Virginia Tech's facility, and I've been in East Carolina's brand new facility.   There's very little difference. 

You're just angry (as usual) that someone is calling out Deb for the lousy job she's doing running our WBB program. 
2013:
KU Total Expenses:  $3.391 million
K-State Total Expenses: $3.359 million
Oklahoma State Total Expenses: $2.25 million
Iowa State Total Expenses: $3.164 million
« Last Edit: February 10, 2014, 11:21:57 PM by sonofdaxjones »

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #330 on: February 11, 2014, 12:33:36 AM »
 :popcorn:

Offline wazucat

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 411
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #331 on: February 11, 2014, 03:53:42 PM »
Deb just needs to stop the KU loss trend, then most people will be content to wait 5 years for Shalee to take the reins, I hope MIR is right on his time frame, I see some real young talent and height on this years team that gives me hope the 5 year window will be OK.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44810
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #332 on: February 11, 2014, 05:01:31 PM »
:popcorn:

You can put the popcorn away. There is certainly a conversation to be had about Deb but dax isn't equipped to have it. The only thing he knows about the program is what he sees on box scores. He can't articulate why Deb isn't right for the program so he's doing what he does to dumb KU fans by pretending financial numbers mean something differently than what they say, as if I can't read.

The conversation is over because dax refuses to have a two sided conversation without being intellectually dishonest.

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53676
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #333 on: February 11, 2014, 05:11:59 PM »
This probably has the worst tapatalk image. Who the eff thought it was a good idea to post this?

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53676
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #334 on: February 11, 2014, 05:12:33 PM »
91-25 KSU LADYCATS

 :bball:

Whats the women's bball hand sign?



good grief

at least you got a good laugh out of Dirty Sanchez

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52980
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #335 on: February 11, 2014, 08:54:53 PM »
:popcorn:

You can put the popcorn away. There is certainly a conversation to be had about Deb but dax isn't equipped to have it. The only thing he knows about the program is what he sees on box scores. He can't articulate why Deb isn't right for the program so he's doing what he does to dumb KU fans by pretending financial numbers mean something differently than what they say, as if I can't read.

The conversation is over because dax refuses to have a two sided conversation without being intellectually dishonest.

You keep bringing up the talking points, I provide the data, you then revert back to the same shtick.   Next thing you know you'll say ISU, OSU, and KU aren't "peers". 

The "right fit" is pure subjectivity, at some point objectivity has to kick in, and that starts with the results in the box score, and the standings, the trendline is down.




Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46346
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #336 on: February 12, 2014, 10:36:12 AM »
deb sucks in the ncaa tournament


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline puniraptor

  • Tastemaker
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21335
  • nostalgic reason
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #337 on: February 12, 2014, 10:37:35 AM »
i've always been kinda freaked out by her ruthless franking

Offline yoga-like_abana

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13189
  • Don't @ me boy, cause I ain't said crap
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #338 on: February 12, 2014, 11:27:03 AM »

91-25 KSU LADYCATS

 :bball:

Whats the women's bball hand sign?



good grief

at least you got a good laugh out of Dirty Sanchez
were you reading this thread from the beginning? Nerd alert


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 51305
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #339 on: February 12, 2014, 09:06:34 PM »
Isn't there a salary ceiling for a women's coach not named Pat or Geno?

Just like any biz, perform and your salary goes up.  Stop performing and it's not going to stay high, it will be reduced or eliminated.

Offline h8ku

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #340 on: February 12, 2014, 09:28:53 PM »
Too resourceful/ don't care quite enough to do this.
Anyone? :dunno:
:impatient:


[attachment deleted by admin]

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #341 on: February 13, 2014, 12:00:56 AM »
Lost again tonight, although they stayed very close to Texas. Not a bad effort considering the fact our Cats had no inside game at all. None at all.

Offline sunny_cat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 14367
  • eff off
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #342 on: February 13, 2014, 12:05:13 AM »
The fat girl on Texas was really good.

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #343 on: February 13, 2014, 12:12:40 AM »
The fat girl on Texas was really good.

Although she is big, she moves well, has good basketball sense, moves laterally quite well, knows how to block out...and shoots pretty well, also.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44810
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #344 on: February 13, 2014, 08:10:27 PM »
deb sucks in the ncaa tournament

horrible, only one sweet 16 :Yuck: unacceptable

Offline 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19129
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #345 on: February 14, 2014, 12:06:38 AM »
deb sucks in the ncaa tournament

horrible, only one sweet 16 :Yuck: unacceptable

IT'S A TRAP! :runaway:
:adios:

Offline sunny_cat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 14367
  • eff off
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #346 on: February 15, 2014, 01:42:32 PM »
The kstatehd.tv thing is being shown on FCS Pacific.

Offline sunny_cat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 14367
  • eff off
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #347 on: February 15, 2014, 03:11:05 PM »
Down 2 to the only winless team in the league, Tech, in Manhattan.  :'bye cruel world:

Offline bones129

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12132
  • RUN! Tell all the other curs the Law's coming!
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #348 on: February 15, 2014, 09:16:41 PM »
Down 2 to the only winless team in the league, Tech, in Manhattan.  :'bye cruel world:

We won, tho

Offline sunny_cat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 14367
  • eff off
    • View Profile
Re: ksu ladycats
« Reply #349 on: February 15, 2014, 09:17:25 PM »
Down 2 to the only winless team in the league, Tech, in Manhattan.  :'bye cruel world:

We won, tho

Oh, I stopped paying attention.