Can We Schedule Penn State @ Yankee Stadium??
- Thread starter Dooley
- Start date
- Status
Dooley
Done with U-con athletics
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2012
- Messages
- 9,958
- Reaction Score
- 32,816
I answered you in the other thread disputing the same thing and I'm far too lazy to respond to this by typing up something else: Now the # of BC fans at the game is up to 15K?? That's truly hilarious. Unless BC fans were sitting on each other's laps (and piling up 3 or 4 high...
Dooley
Done with U-con athletics
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2012
- Messages
- 9,958
- Reaction Score
- 32,816
I will never understand why we get the same flock of BC fans sniffing around here just to quash and derail any thread about UCONN doing something good or potentially doing something good. The second UCONN is invited into a P5 conference (and I mean the VERY SECOND!), I will not give a about conference realignment or any other local school that isn't in the same conference that we would be in (unless we play against them). The constant attempts to derail UCONN and the obsession with UCONN should tell you all you need to know about a bunch of things.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2014
- Messages
- 1,154
- Reaction Score
- 258
Back on track here,... the answer to the thread question posed by the OP is " yes ", imo. If Penn State officials can be persuaded that a scheduled game with Uconn will be in their self interests for them at Yankees Stadium, over other out of conference options available to them, then they will schedule a game with Uconn there. All thats required is a creative and convincing marketing strategy that appeals to these Power Conference schools as to whats in it for them.
Last edited:
.-.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2014
- Messages
- 1,154
- Reaction Score
- 258
I have no idea what this reply has to do with my comment.
Dooley
Done with U-con athletics
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2012
- Messages
- 9,958
- Reaction Score
- 32,816
I agree with you. I think if UCONN bit the bullet and was designated "home team" but still shared the gate, then that's a start. Essentially free money for PSU (or whoever) and they can still schedule 7 home games at full gate. Let's say UCONN agrees to split the gate 50/50. 50% of 49,000 x $40 average ticket price is roughly $1M. Then you factor in TV and media rights on the game along with concessions and merchandising and each team could take home millions. Penn State (or whoever) essentially gets free money to play in a "road game" in NYC when they will definitely have 60-70% home field advantage in the stands and, not to mention, a winnable game for bowl season determination. But you're right, it would come down to how much sharing UCONN is willing to do. Personally, I think sharing everything 50/50 is fair and UCONN would still stand to make more money playing in this type of game then if they played in front of 20K at the Rent (some of which will pay a discounted promo price, I'm sure) against a non-P5 school.
I have no idea if PSU is contracted to play any similar games or if they have room on their schedule to do this. I also have no idea how much money a school could stand to make by playing a "road" game by normal means. I just think that both schools (if not PSU, then insert another B1G school) would benefit from such a game. Rutgers is already in-conference so they wouldn't want to share gate money by moving a game to Yankee (not to mention, the cut in capacity from High Points to Yankee). Syracuse would be another local school that would probably want to do this (not against UCONN, but against a B1G school or another P5). They've already played USCw, PSU and ND at MetLife. I have no idea how the gate and money were split at these afore-mentioned games, if at all. But I think they would be able to offer such a game and guarantee a sellout. Then there are other P5 schools that do not get much NYC exposure that may be interested. USCw played Cuse at MetLife in hopes of creating a little east coast magic so maybe other schools that we don't think about might want to do that too. Can you imagine someone like Oregon coming across the country to play? Even if they don't play against UCONN, I would want to go to that game!
UCONN does have a hurdle in that any "home game" must be played at the Rent until 2017 or UCONN needs the blessing of state legislators and the General Assembly to move a home game away from the Rent. Personally, I think the state would be beyond stupid if it blocked UCONN from playing in such a game with an opportunity to create quite a buzz.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
#1. No one, and I mean NO ONE, is agreeing to play UCONN at a neutral site in football, and agree to designating the game as a home game for UCONN for revenue sharing purposes.
#2. If the revenue split is contracted at 50/50, there is no reason to designate the game as anything other than a neutral site game.
#3. The multiple year agreement with Notre Dame, was botched, because AD Hathaway, and that basketball centered universe around UCONN tried to get Notre Dame to agree to #1 and #2.
It's really unfortunate that we didn't have leadership in place at the time that could have made that deal work long term. Demanding that Notre Dame play at Rentschler home and home for 6 games? Foolish. But the past is the past.
The realistic thing that should matter has been stated already in this thread - and that is that UCONN leadership - specifically AD Manuel, should be pursuing any and all opponents that would be willing to schedule a football game for UCONN in the New York City metro area, and work to do so in a way that is in UCONN and the opponents best interests for a win/win situation. The Army game was a great start - there is no reason to think that repeating that should not happen sometime in the future, and that a winning UCONN team, would draw even better.
#2. If the revenue split is contracted at 50/50, there is no reason to designate the game as anything other than a neutral site game.
#3. The multiple year agreement with Notre Dame, was botched, because AD Hathaway, and that basketball centered universe around UCONN tried to get Notre Dame to agree to #1 and #2.
It's really unfortunate that we didn't have leadership in place at the time that could have made that deal work long term. Demanding that Notre Dame play at Rentschler home and home for 6 games? Foolish. But the past is the past.
The realistic thing that should matter has been stated already in this thread - and that is that UCONN leadership - specifically AD Manuel, should be pursuing any and all opponents that would be willing to schedule a football game for UCONN in the New York City metro area, and work to do so in a way that is in UCONN and the opponents best interests for a win/win situation. The Army game was a great start - there is no reason to think that repeating that should not happen sometime in the future, and that a winning UCONN team, would draw even better.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 7,181
- Reaction Score
- 8,747
The Yankee Stadium Foul Poles are +50 feet tall and only supported by their base. I don't know the specifics to Yankee Stadium besides their height; but, was once told by an engineer at another pro baseball stadium the typical foul pole is sunk 10 to 15 feet into the ground and is anchored by a multi-ton slab of concrete. Thank of your mailbox post; but on a grander scale. Thus, a foul pole, unless it was designed to be collapsible and/or sectional, is not going anywhere.
Dooley
Done with U-con athletics
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2012
- Messages
- 9,958
- Reaction Score
- 32,816
I just thought designating us as "home team" would be good for PSU/whoever as they could then keep 7 home dates for full gate. If the game is designated as neutral and some sort of revenue split is worked out, then that would be fine too. Whatever the logistics are, the idea would be to play the game at Yankee so the team we're playing against doesn't lose a home game from their schedule.
Completely agree about the ND series, by the way. I remember UCONN fans complaining about having to drive to Gillette or MetLife for a home game back when this deal was in negotiations. I surely hope that Hathaway didn't let the fans talk him out of that (he was such a buffoon that I wouldn't put it past him).
Warde and our state legislators/General Assembly really need to aggressively pursue scheduling neutral site games, even if it means losing a home game from the schedule. Our 2015 home slate is putrid and the years after that aren't going to get much better, especially is Mizzou buys out their back end of the deal like I fear they will. The schedule needs juice very badly.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 7,290
- Reaction Score
- 19,101
I would have understood that in an older stadium - but if they are going to have other events there, they should be sectional. You would think when you spend $1B they would have thought of that.
whaler11
Head Happy Hour Coach
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,353
- Reaction Score
- 68,192
What TV rights are you talking about? They are already sold - playing a game at Yankee Stadium doesn't let you sell them twice.
Penn State plays neutral site games in places like Dublin. They aren't going to play one a few hundred miles from campus and make half
of what they get for just playing a home game. On top of the value to the city and state of playing a game in Happy Valley.
UConnNick
from Vince Lombardi's home town
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2011
- Messages
- 5,073
- Reaction Score
- 14,066
That may have been a good friend of mine. BC undergrad, UCONN for grad school. He was going to the game.
- Status