We asked a Vanderbilt-educated, Washington D.C.-based economist to make sure of the painfully obvious - that LSU fans are, when mobilized towards a tactical seizure like West Virginia's in-stadium beer sales, a phalanx of alcoholism - using boring old math.
He didn't disappoint. Thanks to the numbers gathered by Mike Casazza of the Charleston Daily Mail, our economics whiz was able to tell us with cipherin' what we've known for years.
First, the numbers:
Second, his analysis:
So, LSU owned all in gross revenues from beer sales - 59% more than Marshall and 111% more than Norfolk. LSU alone made up 91% of week 1 and week 2's gross in beer sales.
The funny part about that is that if you look at gross concessions WITHOUT beer (hot dogs, popcorn, etc) and add it with gross revenues from beer sales, and look at the percentage beer sales made of total revenues, beer sales made up 44% of total revenues. versus 23% and 36% from week 1 and week 2. So LSU fans just wanted to drink beer.
Also, it looks like nobody gave a shit about Norfolk State, who placed in last in all categories except for frozen lemonade sales. And the fact that LSU had shitty frozen lemonade sales versus the other games made me LOL until I read that it was a night game, which would explain the poor sales.
There are certain variables to be considered: Namely, the specific amount of West Virginia fans at each of the three home games (the control group), the weather at kickoff, and the fact the Marshall game was cancelled early for weather, something we assume stymied sales.
What we're getting at is this: We're still not convinced, Tigers. You'll simply have to advance the heights of your apeshitness even higher.
Special thanks to learned good government employee and Excel warlock @asconniff