Boston Globe goes after UMass football

[nelsonmuntz]

Uh, no. Your mind is on conference TV money whereas ticket sales of $10-15m, donations and licensing of $25m are just as important. There is light years difference between the two.

Were you at the Memphis game at the Rent? Have you gone to many basketball games this year? Ticket revenue is going to fall dramatically in this league. What is going to happen to licensing after a few years of playing in Siberia?

UConn needs to do something, anything, to increase its TV revenue. The entire business model is under enormous pressure in this new conference.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Newswriters do not understand business and finance to begin with, and for most sportswriters it might as well be Sanskrit. The decision to upgrade in recent years has been based on the premise that since being FCS is such a money loser, FBS will be an improvement no matter what league a school joins. I tend to think that is still true, although I don't know.

I do believe that between the money losing and the potential lawsuits from concussions, many FCS and lower colleges are going to simply drop football. Costs too much and creates too much liability.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Let me be clear I'm NOT advocating CM as a candidate for OC but ...

With UMass Football's viability continuing to be in the cross hairs ya have to wonder what CM is thinking.

Just a passing delusional thought...<<

For UMess' small fan group, they may be delusional yet more than a few would probably also pay some school to take Molnar away.

 

[upstater]

Were you at the Memphis game at the Rent? Have you gone to many basketball games this year? Ticket revenue is going to fall dramatically in this league. What is going to happen to licensing after a few years of playing in Siberia?

UConn needs to do something, anything, to increase its TV revenue. The entire business model is under enormous pressure in this new conference.

Licensing was mostly based on tier 3 games which are typically worse than playing current AACs.

 

[huskypantz]

Were you at the Memphis game at the Rent? Have you gone to many basketball games this year? Ticket revenue is going to fall dramatically in this league. What is going to happen to licensing after a few years of playing in Siberia?

UConn needs to do something, anything, to increase its TV revenue. The entire business model is under enormous pressure in this new conference.

The Michigan, Maryland or USF games were all well attended. The somewhat sad truth is that many uconn fb fans don't care who the opponent is, and on the football side they don't know the difference between UCF and USF (one's in south florida.....right?). That actually works in our favor. CT fans want a winner. If the fb team wins, they'll go to the games. Suck it up for a few years and we'll see what happens in the conf realignment picture down the road. You don't need to cry chicken little in every thread.

 

[Palatine]

The unfortunate reality is that UConn's athletic financials will look a lot like UMass' pretty soon.

Based on what?

 

[Waquoit]

The somewhat sad truth is that many uconn fb fans don't care who the opponent is,

How is this sad truth? That's a positive.

 

[freescooter]

I actually thought the Globe piece was pretty balanced. It is correct that you can't make a sensible decision based on 2 years. UMass really needs to rethink the Gillette strategy though. Makes sense to play a game or 2 there maybe, but they really need to focus on developing a fan base from Worcester west. I know there are a lot of UMass alumni in Eastern Mass, but they aren't football fans since there never really has been 1A UMass football to support. they need to be focusing on the folks who have always supported UMass and on developing a new fan base among the student body. Playing games 100 miles from campus doesn't do that. they really need to play most home games in Amherst. An expanded McGurk Stadium to about 20,000 would probably work pretty well and is consistent with the MAC. 15,000 in a 20,000 seat stadium is a solid crowd. the same 15,000 in a 70,000 seat stadium looks and feels like nobody. Play BC at Foxborough, play some other game at Foxborough, then play the MAC home schedule in Amherst. Maybe you get lucky and some year you get BC or UConn to agree to play a game in Amherst and you have lots of folks on campus.

 

[huskypantz]

How is this sad truth? That's a positive.

It's sad if fans don't know the difference between playing Temple and playing WVU.

 

[HuskyHawk]

not sure I would call worcester a craphole, but I would agree the people of boston may not want to drive outside of 495. they certainly aren't driving to foxboro.

Drove by Gillette last Saturday, saw the lights were on. Wife asked what was going on. I had to look as we drove by and saw UMass on the jumbotron. No heavy traffic as with other events. Even a Rev's game is noticeable if you drive by the stadium area.

There are lots of UMass Amherst alumns in metro Boston, but none of them ever had an FBS football team when they were at UMass. So it isn't something they are used to. If they build it in Amherst, they will have a solid, small contingent of fans, but since few Alumni stay in western Mass, it will always be limited. But that will instill in the future alumni more appreciatiation for football. If I were them (and my taxes support them), I'd play on campus, and at Gillette against BC and UConn (or any real major home game like we had with Michigan, if they ever land one).

 

[Husky25]

I actually thought the Globe piece was pretty balanced. It is correct that you can't make a sensible decision based on 2 years. UMass really needs to rethink the Gillette strategy though. Makes sense to play a game or 2 there maybe, but they really need to focus on developing a fan base from Worcester west. I know there are a lot of UMass alumni in Eastern Mass, but they aren't football fans since there never really has been 1A UMass football to support. they need to be focusing on the folks who have always supported UMass and on developing a new fan base among the student body. Playing games 100 miles from campus doesn't do that. they really need to play most home games in Amherst. An expanded McGurk Stadium to about 20,000 would probably work pretty well and is consistent with the MAC. 15,000 in a 20,000 seat stadium is a solid crowd. the same 15,000 in a 70,000 seat stadium looks and feels like nobody. Play BC at Foxborough, play some other game at Foxborough, then play the MAC home schedule in Amherst. Maybe you get lucky and some year you get BC or UConn to agree to play a game in Amherst and you have lots of folks on campus.

I believe NCAA rules require a home stadium of no less than 30k seating capacity. UConn had a waiver to play in Memorial for 2 years as Rentschler was under construction.

 

[Husky25]

Drove by Gillette last Saturday, saw the lights were on. Wife asked what was going on. I had to look as we drove by and saw UMass on the jumbotron. No heavy traffic as with other events. Even a Rev's game is noticeable if you drive by the stadium area.

There are lots of UMass Amherst alumns in metro Boston, but none of them ever had an FBS football team when they were at UMass. So it isn't something they are used to. If they build it in Amherst, they will have a solid, small contingent of fans, but since few Alumni stay in western Mass, it will always be limited. But that will instill in the future alumni more appreciatiation for football. If I were them (and my taxes support them), I'd play on campus, and at Gillette against BC and UConn (or any real major home game like we had with Michigan, if they ever land one).

It's not like Foxborough is right outside Boston Proper. It is still 40 minutes away and not very easy to access without a vehicle. If a stadium were to be built in western MA, it would be just as easy to get there from inside 495 as it would foxborough. Also it would be easier to run specials and gain corporate sponsorship from the Greater Springfield Metro Region.

 

[freescooter]

FWIW I don't totally agree with Nelson's view but I do think that anyone who doesn't think basketball will take a hit long term in the American is either intentionally ignoring reality or hasn't a clue. UConn could still compete at a decent level, but forget about really deep runs.

As far as attendance goes, I think a few things have happened. First and foremost on the football side the team was awful. A cold December day, with a game against an equally awful Memphis team was lucky to draw what it did. On the other hand we also set a record for Michigan, and drew well for Maryland and a solid crowd for South Florida, considering that was 2 awful teams too. On the basketball side, the NCAA has created a monster with its tournament. For power teams, with the exception of a handful of "big games" against top opponents, the regular season is little more than an exhibition season where power programs ring up there requisite 20 wins to get tickets to the real season which begins in March and lasts about 3 weeks. Nobody cares about UConn-Houston since it is just one of those ticket-punch games that counts toward the 20. Its worse for UConn in a sense that nobody knows or cares about most of the teams in the AAC, but even Duke doesn't sell out most games any more. Rutgers had under 500 at a game. BC which used to draw reasonably well, had around 1500 for one game and 1200 for another. 3500 (in an 8300 seat arena) for a conference game against Maryland. Add that virtually every game is televised somewhere, in HD, with lots less hassles, cheap beer and nachos, the fact that for a decade or more, the UConn athletic department pretty much treated the fans as an ATM and nothing more, and basketball regular season attendance is never going to return to the 1990-2000 levels. with a good team, football could return to the Edsall era level, in part because its only 6-7 games. One final note, is that UConn has pretty much tried to build a UConn fanbase. Good concept but as the seasons have more and more started to overlap (the Dream Team's first game was Nov 24 and first home game was Nov 30, the 1999 National Champ's first game was Nov 15. this season started November 8) the demands on fans become impossible unless you commit your whole life to attending UConn athletic events.

 

[BHusky]

I believe NCAA rules require a home stadium of no less than 30k seating capacity. UConn had a waiver to play in Memorial for 2 years as Rentschler was under construction.

They got rid of this rule many years ago and made it much more liberal. Instead of 30k capacity a team must average 15k fans in paid OR actual attendance in 1 of the 2 most recent seasons. It doesn't get more subjective than that.

UMass took the Gillette deal because it got them closer to Boston where they thought more alumni/fans/media/population were. Makes sense, it is just that Boston is not much of a college football town and if people want to see games they could go to a BC game right in Boston. MA has no money to fund sports projects for UMass which would be a football complex and re-doing their current on campus stadium. The stadium they have has space to be renovated and in a good spot for this to happen pretty painlessly, so you would think that woyuld have been their first priority if they had the cash accessible.

 

[freescooter]

I believe NCAA rules require a home stadium of no less than 30k seating capacity. UConn had a waiver to play in Memorial for 2 years as Rentschler was under construction.

I don't think that rule applies anymore. I think it was replaced by an attendance requirement. A lot of the MAC and a fair number of Sunbelt stadiums are smaller than 30,000, some by quite a lot. Bowling Green I know is about 26000, and Ohio is in that range too.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

I don't think that rule applies anymore. I think it was replaced by an attendance requirement. A lot of the MAC and a fair number of Sunbelt stadiums are smaller than 30,000, some by quite a lot. Bowling Green I know is about 26000, and Ohio is in that range too.

I thought they were expanding the seating capacity. Doesn't seem to be the case.

http://maroonmusket.com/2012/10/no-expanded-seating-for-mcguirk-alumni-stadium/

 

[huskypantz]

UConn could still compete at a decent level, but forget about really deep runs.

Why no deep runs? George Mason, Gonzaga, Butler, VCU, Memphis etc? No doubt there will be an impact, but winning and strong scheduling can minimize the impact.

 

[Marty Jackson]

FWIW I don't totally agree with Nelson's view but I do think that anyone who doesn't think basketball will take a hit long term in the American is either intentionally ignoring reality or hasn't a clue. UConn could still compete at a decent level, but forget about really deep runs.

As far as attendance goes, I think a few things have happened. First and foremost on the football side the team was awful. A cold December day, with a game against an equally awful Memphis team was lucky to draw what it did. On the other hand we also set a record for Michigan, and drew well for Maryland and a solid crowd for South Florida, considering that was 2 awful teams too. On the basketball side, the NCAA has created a monster with its tournament. For power teams, with the exception of a handful of "big games" against top opponents, the regular season is little more than an exhibition season where power programs ring up there requisite 20 wins to get tickets to the real season which begins in March and lasts about 3 weeks. Nobody cares about UConn-Houston since it is just one of those ticket-punch games that counts toward the 20. Its worse for UConn in a sense that nobody knows or cares about most of the teams in the AAC, but even Duke doesn't sell out most games any more. Rutgers had under 500 at a game. BC which used to draw reasonably well, had around 1500 for one game and 1200 for another. 3500 (in an 8300 seat arena) for a conference game against Maryland. Add that virtually every game is televised somewhere, in HD, with lots less hassles, cheap beer and nachos, the fact that for a decade or more, the UConn athletic department pretty much treated the fans as an ATM and nothing more, and basketball regular season attendance is never going to return to the 1990-2000 levels. with a good team, football could return to the Edsall era level, in part because its only 6-7 games. One final note, is that UConn has pretty much tried to build a UConn fanbase. Good concept but as the seasons have more and more started to overlap (the Dream Team's first game was Nov 24 and first home game was Nov 30, the 1999 National Champ's first game was Nov 15. this season started November 8) the demands on fans become impossible unless you commit your whole life to attending UConn athletic events.

I'm confused... Are you a Uconn fan?

 

[Drew]

Not to change the subject but why do so many people seem to be supporting the idea of UMASS playing their home games on their campus which apparently is in the middle of nowhere (i'm not from around here I really don't know anything about UMASS, so if its not in the middle of nowhere just ignore this) but the same people seemed to be opposed when I asked about the stadium being on campus for UConn when we were transitioning to D1 10 years ago?

For the record I absolutely think UMASS should move their games back to their campus. Dumb to alienate the students like that when you're trying to grow the program. UConn and UMASS are in different spots now because we started our transition 10 years ago but if they were smart they'd put their games on campus.

 

[freescooter]

Why no deep runs? George Mason, Gonzaga, Butler, VCU, Memphis etc? No doubt there will be an impact, but winning and strong scheduling can minimize the impact.

Oh sure, there are the occasional once in a lifetime things. Well in Butler's case twice in a lifetime. Memphis has been to the Final Four in 1973, 1985 and 2008, not exactly a permanent seat at the table. Got to the Elite 8 in the early 90s, then went 14 years before a return trip. If that's your model, that's fine but accept that it is a huge step back for a program that is where UConn was from 1989 on. Gonzaga has been there exactly zero times, VCU and George Mason 1 time each. If those are your models, again, that's fine, but at least admit that you have lowered your sites quite a lot.

 

[HartbeatHusky]

Not to change the subject but why do so many people seem to be supporting the idea of UMASS playing their home games on their campus which apparently is in the middle of nowhere (i'm not from around here I really don't know anything about UMASS, so if its not in the middle of nowhere just ignore this) but the same people seemed to be opposed when I asked about the stadium being on campus for UConn when we were transitioning to D1 10 years ago?

For the record I absolutely think UMASS should move their games back to their campus. Dumb to alienate the students like that when you're trying to grow the program. UConn and UMASS are in different spots now because we started our transition 10 years ago but if they were smart they'd put their games on campus.

Amherst is more developed than Storrs. I don't know that a major stadium would work on campus for UMass more than at UConn though, the major issue is distance from the population centers of the fanbase and road infrastructure. UConn has a state wide fanbase and Storrs is in the far eastern edge of the state so it made sense for UConn to build the stadium where it was accessible and close to major highways when demand for the product was unknown. UMass core football fanbase is concentrated around Amherst and Western MA in general so I think a stadium in Western MA has to be the priority, either on campus or near Springfield somewhere, maybe the Big E since HardRock didn't get approved?

 

[freescooter]

I'm confused... Are you a Uconn fan?

I'm not sure what my comments regarding factors that impact attendance have to do with being a UConn fan, but since you asked, yeah, I am.

 

[whaler11]

Not to change the subject but why do so many people seem to be supporting the idea of UMASS playing their home games on their campus which apparently is in the middle of nowhere (i'm not from around here I really don't know anything about UMASS, so if its not in the middle of nowhere just ignore this) but the same people seemed to be opposed when I asked about the stadium being on campus for UConn when we were transitioning to D1 10 years ago?

For the record I absolutely think UMASS should move their games back to their campus. Dumb to alienate the students like that when you're trying to grow the program. UConn and UMASS are in different spots now because we started our transition 10 years ago but if they were smart they'd put their games on campus.

Because their goal would be to draw 15-17k. If that was UConn's goal Storrs would make perfect sense too.

 

[Drew]

Amherst is more developed than Storrs. I don't know that a major stadium would work on campus for UMass more than at UConn though, the major issue is distance from the population centers of the fanbase and road infrastructure. UConn has a state wide fanbase and Storrs is in the far eastern edge of the state so it made sense for UConn to build the stadium where it was accessible and close to major highways when demand for the product was unknown. UMass core football fanbase is concentrated around Amherst and Western MA in general so I think a stadium in Western MA has to be the priority, either on campus or near Springfield somewhere, maybe the Big E since HardRock didn't get approved?

thanks! Was just wondering since it seemed a little hypocritical but it makes sense after the explanation. Would still like to eventually see a stadium in Storrs 25/30 years from now when I think Storrs will be a lot more developed but until then I will continue to show up to the rent and bring whoever I can with me.

 

[HuskyHawk]

It's not like Foxborough is right outside Boston Proper. It is still 40 minutes away and not very easy to access without a vehicle. If a stadium were to be built in western MA, it would be just as easy to get there from inside 495 as it would foxborough. Also it would be easier to run specials and gain corporate sponsorship from the Greater Springfield Metro Region.

Gillette from downtown Boston is only 25-30 minutes tops with minor Saturday traffic. Also, most of the people in metro Boston don't live in Boston proper, so it is closer for most of them, and for people in Providence. It takes me a little under 2 hours to get to Amherst from Franklin, so it isn't remotely similar for people in metro Boston. Foxboro is definitely well inside the boundary of the Boston metro area, and the stadium is served by rail as well. The difference in access is huge. Amherst is further from Boston than E Hartford is from anywhere in CT, by quite a bit.

Agree that UMass could become western Mass' team so sponsors and promotions would be better.