Tottenham Hotspur v Aston Villa (A) (16/02/20) (2pm)

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

We need to contain Grealish. Stop him, you stop Villa.

With no McGinn and with Leipzig a couple of days later, I'm happy for us to double up on Grealish, not play our usual game and do a hatchet job on them with a simple smash and grab like performance.

Because of the morons in charge of the PL, we need to prioritise fitness ahead of performance for the next 3 games. Clean sheets are more important than goals for the next week and a half for our football club.

A win and two draws really wouldn't be a bad outcome all things considered, our legs will be heavy come Saturday afternoon. I'm fine with a shithouse performance, needs and musts come into play.
 
I’m proud to present TFC’s very own 1882. He’s famous you know. And full of pashun.

cdpvyWp.gif


Top work mate.
My kind of guy......
 
It will vary wildly...depends on the situation. I paid $15 a seat for my tickets away at Tulane in New Orleans, to be 5 rows away from the court. I couldn't get inside Memphis' 18,000 seat arena, even at the very top level for that. The seats I sit in at home, about 20 rows back, sell for $150 for a single game.

If I had to hazard a guess on a ticket between 2 traditionally top 20 programs, I'd say you could probably get in the arena for $200 and anything near the court would be a $500 minimum.
Not cheap. How can the students afford them?
 
Well, it's (obviously) very complicated.

I think the players should be paid and have more freedom to transfer from school to school.

With respect to wages. Nick Saban (Alabama football coach) is making around $6 million/year, but it's paid for by the massive amount of money he brings into the school with all the trophies. No disrespect to your sister (or any educator) but nobody buys tickets to watch her/them teach. Broadcast companies aren't offering billions to schools hoping to broadcast history classes. The coaches make that much money because the market (currently) makes it financially feasible.

The revenue generated doesn't have anything to do with academics, so why should the athletic department that creates the revenue be forced to give it to the Science department just because they don't think it's "fair"? If someone donates $4 million to the History Department (and specifically states it is to support historical studies), the school wouldn't force them to share it with the English Department, or decline the donation.

What MemphisWill MemphisWill said earlier was spot on. Most big time university athletic departments are only lightly subsidized by student fees. Most pay for themselves. And keep in mind that college football and men's basketball are the only two sports that turn a profit for the school. The rest lose money. Further, due to Title IX laws, there must be gender equality in the scholarships/sports offered. So you can't field the only two sports that make money, you have to have an equal number of women's sports.

And she may not admit it, but the academics at schools almost always improve with athletics. When schools succeed in athletics and become national brands, they become more desirable, which leads to an increase in applications, which allows the school to be more selective about the quality of student, and also allows the school to increase tuition, room/board (demand/supply) and (for public schools) gives them greater political cache to get funding for improvements.

The University of Connecticut was an average (at best) public school. A safety-school (backup plan) 30 years ago. Then they won a few national championships in men's and women's basketball, within a decade the state legislature agreed to a massive $1 billion infrastructure improvement plan. New roads, new dorms, new classroom buildings, new student center, etc. The school is now one of the top 40 public schools in the country. The campus is now beautiful (it was dreadful), the infrastructure is state of the art. That doesn't happen without the success in athletics.

So it's a very, very complicated issue.
Understood. Very succinct explanation. I suppose coming from the UK where the Oxbridge boat race is our big sports event for universities, it's difficult to get my head around the idea of what a university is over there as opposed to here. Big cultural schism.
Not sure I'll ever be comfortable with it but at least I now understand.
 
There's a section of seating, probably 1500 odd, that is free to students on a first come first served basis.
Seems reasonable if it's a smallish stadium
I have a friend in Syracuse that extols the virtue of "The Dome?". That seats about 40,000 so one would hope that it's a bit more than 1500. Is that a "good" team?
 
Back
Top Bottom