Blaudschun: UConn Switching BC Home Game to Fenway? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Blaudschun: UConn Switching BC Home Game to Fenway?

Will probably hurt our season ticket numbers as well. It was one of the few attractive home games on the schedule. Now there is even less incentive to buy season tickets vs buying them on the secondary market or game-by-game.
 
businesslawyer said:
You're demanding an official answer to a move that hasn't even been announced yet? Maybe being a litle self-entitled?
Expand ...

I don't think it's entitlement that UConn has already taken money from many of us based on a home schedule which is now quite possibly less attractive. I'm not saying I disagree with the move, but to imply that as season ticket holders, we have no right to care about the product many of us, including myself, have already spent money on, is a bit disingenuous.

BC is one of the few marquee matchups and it's now quite possibly gone.
 
Another reason BC fans can say they own us in football. May not be true but this just proves their point. So dumb. We are going to go play a home game in their back yard. Laughable. This isn't notre dame...
 
Dumbest decision since the civil conflict. Worse than the civil conflict
 
Do we have university concurrence on this? Or is this just some random guy on the internet with BC ties?
 
Maybe we can be the barn-burner traveling MLB stadium team. Move the Missouri home game to Busch Stadium in St Louis?:rolleyes:

I have no problem playing a game at Fenway against BC--but is should not be one of hour "home" games. Either play BC at Fenway for multiple game (with no actual home games). Or make it a contract with 1 BC home game, 1 UConn home game, and 1 Fenway game (or some multiple of that arrangement).Head bang
 
.-.
Irish Loop said:
I don't think it's entitlement that UConn has already taken money from many of us based on a home schedule which is now quite possibly less attractive. I'm not saying I disagree with the move, but to imply that as season ticket holders, we have no right to care about the product many of us, including myself, have already spent money on, is a bit disingenuous.

BC is one of the few marquee matchups and it's now quite possibly gone.
Expand ...

I'm not saying it's "entitlement" to want a refund on your tickets for that game if you ordered before the schedule change. That's perfectly fair. It think it's self-important entitlement to be demanding answers to your questions before it's even been officially confirmed that the move has been made. The game is 10 months off. How about waiting to see what the school says first?
 
Don't love it but as others say if it is the price for getting rid of Diaco I'm willing to go along
 
.-.
businesslawyer said:
Three posts on this having generated not one immediate like. A more self-reflective person might stop posting and ask themselves why almost no one is agreeing with them.
Expand ...

Because you're all settling for being a laughing stock I guess
 
Stinger92860 said:
I live in Wilton, but I am good with this. Shows we own NY and Boston. I'd prefer Yankee Stadium though. I can easily get to Fenway from my sister in laws apartment though.
Expand ...

Do we own Boston though? Think about it
 
.-.
UConnSportsGuy said:
Will probably hurt our season ticket numbers as well. It was one of the few attractive home games on the schedule. Now there is even less incentive to buy season tickets vs buying them on the secondary market or game-by-game.
Expand ...
I will probably never understand this mentality. I go to games to watch the team in home blues, not the away whites. I really don't care who they play. The name of the game is winning and in case people have been living under a rock for the last 5 out of the last 6 years, UConn has not been the most competitive program vs. even the most mediocre of opponents.
 
If this is not about money or prime time national TV, or a play to show we can match or outpace BC in their own (only) market, then it is a mistake.

If it leads to this being an annual neutral site game then, I'd just have done that.

But I think it's about the money. AD is probably looking to piece his revenue together a few 100k at a time.
 
If attendance and $$ help the off season moves, all be it ... let's get it done-the trade off with
FHCBD was well worth it..

If BC attendance numbers increase for this game, can only see this as being a positive toward potential inclusion next go-around in
ACC consideration.

MAYBE, just maybe, this can build into an annual game at Gillette and Yankee Stadium or another "neutral site".
 
.-.
SubbaBub said:
If this is not about money or prime time national TV, or a play to show we can match or outpace BC in their own (only) market, then it is a mistake.

If it leads to this being an annual neutral site game then, I'd just have done that.

But I think it's about the money. AD is probably looking to piece his revenue together a few 100k at a time.
Expand ...

Blauds was very clear it is about the money. No reason to believe part of his story and not all of it.

None of us know what expenditures Benedict gets to make by taking this deal. Which makes criticizing it sort of pointless. Was it this or stick with Diaco? This or hire someone we never heard of as OC?
 
Husky25 said:
I will probably never understand this mentality. I go to games to watch the team in home blues, not the away whites. I really don't care who they play. The name of the game is winning and in case people have been living under a rock for the last 5 out of the last 6 years, UConn has not been the most competitive program vs. even the most mediocre of opponents.
Expand ...
This is our biggest hurdle as a 'brand name' school.

We draw far fewer fans (in men's hoops as well as football) than schools we want to claim we are peers with.

if Kansas, Duke or Kentucky played North Florida or their regional versions of Boston U or Northeastern do you think they would have had similar attendance to what we saw?

I doubt that our best years in football had attendance any better than average years for Kansas and we've never had what Kentucky does for football attendance.

Of we are to become what we want to be we need fans who want to watch our teams, not our opponents. Until this happens we'll have nobody to blame but ourselves as our detractors will be able to claim our following wad merely a fad, based on fleeting success
 
Is Oklahoma a laughing stock for playing a game in Dallas every year against Tx?

Lets start something. Giving up a home game for a future marquee game is not the end of the world. Who knows what can become of this. Alternating games between Boston and NYC would be pretty cool and could get a look nationally especially if the teams are decent.

Just thinking out of the box, and not sure of all the facilities available in the area, but what about an annual game in the Springfield area during the Big E? Granted this has no chance if an adequate facility isn't close enough to be affiliated with the event.
 
So to recap, we gave up a 10 game series with Notre Dame because they wanted our home games played in NY and MA, but we are giving it to Boston College. Hang on, I have to puke in my waste basket.

I hate our current situation.
 
You guys are crazy. This generates so much more PR than at the Rent. It will probably be a night game too. Showcase game vs ACC, more $$ and a HUGE point to prove after that DISGRACE at The Heights this year. Embrace it people. Chance to start a Fenway/Yankee Stadium series (
cool idea IMO)
 
SubbaBub said:
But I think it's about the money. AD is probably looking to piece his revenue together a few 100k at a time.
Expand ...
From Blauds article:
What I don’t get is what UConn gets out of this. A guaranteed NESN spot?

How does this make us more money, unless they are anticipating a bad turnout at the rent?
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,197
Messages
4,556,478
Members
10,442
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom