Facility Investment Together Surcharge/Fee Coming This Year | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Facility Investment Together Surcharge/Fee Coming This Year

I have to laugh at some of the posters who think that a $5 charge on the football ticket will keep fans away. If the quality of the play on the field goes up the University would have no trouble increasing the ticket costs by much more than this. Many of the same fans complaining also desperately want to be in a better conference. Thank god AD Dave and Herbst understand the advance work that needs to be done for UCONN to have a chance in the future. We have to increase the profile of the school in every way possible because when an opening comes the competition will be fierce. To be a candidate for the Big Ten one of the area's needed for improvement is increasing participation in giving to the school. The quality of facilities is important as well. Most important is the quality of the football on the field. I have great respect for the moves that are being made in a very difficult financial environment for the state that is keeping UCONN moving forward in its long term athletic goals at a time when it would be very easy to give up and say it is impossible to do.
 
These are the same people who say it's all about football - so we attach a surcharge on football tickets to pay for soccer, softball and baseball. How does that advance the almighty football?
 
Chief00 said:
These are the same people who say it's all about football - so we attach a surcharge on football tickets to pay for soccer, softball and baseball. How does that advance the almighty football?
Expand ...
If you aren't improving you go downhill. It is a competitive environment that requires constant improvement. Not everyone in the state or in the state legislature would agree that it is all about football. Getting into a better conference is mostly about football but when you are being measured against similar programs other aspects of the university become important. The best way to keep support from the State where it needs to be is to stress the importance of keeping UCONN a great academic institution which provides educated employees to the employers of the state and the research that can be drawn on to create the jobs of the future in the state. In my opinion for what it is worth, looking to improve everywhere in a way that least exasperates the horrible state financial condition is the way to go. I don't want to pay $5 more a ticket to a game but I understand what the University is up against and in the big picture the $5 is not much of a sacrifice to make if it keeps us moving forward.
 
shizzle787 said:
Baseball needs to be saved, but m/w tennis and golf need to be canned. We can't afford them anymore and we have too many sports for even a P5 school (see UCLA with less male sports than us).
Expand ...

Why cut them? I'd love to see two more sports at UCONN - Lacrosse and water polo....
 
.-.
First, I'm ok with a fee. It makes sense and it is a great way to generate supplemental revenue. That said, CT has turned the fee into an art to raise revenues on just about anything the walks, talks or moves.

On sports, UConn ought to be leading the women sports movement nationally. The fact that they don't have an NCAA equestrian team and instead keep it at a club level is a real slap in the face to women's athletics. They revel in women's basketball but do the minimum to comply with Title IX. As long as it only costs a few balls and nets, fine for girls, fine. But, if it requires any meaningful investment they run the other way. NCAA equestrian has about 25 teams nationwide and is trying to get to 40 teams ( the schools that have stepped up are SEC, Big12, 3 Ivies , and some independents). UConn already has the facilities and is active st a club level.

They ought to step up.
 
"The fact that [UConn doesn't] have an NCAA equestrian team and instead keep it at a club level is a real slap in the face to women's athletics."

As my buddy likes to say, "You can't make this merde up."
 
TRUCONN76 said:
If you aren't improving you go downhill. It is a competitive environment that requires constant improvement. Not everyone in the state or in the state legislature would agree that it is all about football. Getting into a better conference is mostly about football but when you are being measured against similar programs other aspects of the university become important. The best way to keep support from the State where it needs to be is to stress the importance of keeping UCONN a great academic institution which provides educated employees to the employers of the state and the research that can be drawn on to create the jobs of the future in the state. In my opinion for what it is worth, looking to improve everywhere in a way that least exasperates the horrible state financial condition is the way to go. I don't want to pay $5 more a ticket to a game but I understand what the University is up against and in the big picture the $5 is not much of a sacrifice to make if it keeps us moving forward.
Expand ...

It's $5 per ticket per game - Do you buy season tickets? Have you sat through the last 6 years?
 
BlueDogs said:
First, I'm ok with a fee. It makes sense and it is a great way to generate supplemental revenue. That said, CT has turned the fee into an art to raise revenues on just about anything the walks, talks or moves.

On sports, UConn ought to be leading the women sports movement nationally. The fact that they don't have an NCAA equestrian team and instead keep it at a club level is a real slap in the face to women's athletics. They revel in women's basketball but do the minimum to comply with Title IX. As long as it only costs a few balls and nets, fine for girls, fine. But, if it requires any meaningful investment they run the other way. NCAA equestrian has about 25 teams nationwide and is trying to get to 40 teams ( the schools that have stepped up are SEC, Big12, 3 Ivies , and some independents). UConn already has the facilities and is active st a club level.

They ought to step up.
Expand ...
No, the athletic department is about to face a $40 million deficit in 2017/18. The last thing we should do is bring in more sports that are net losses financially. Remember, it's the students that have to pay the majority of that deficit. Education is more important than the equestrian team.
 
Chief00 said:
It's $5 per ticket per game - Do you buy season tickets? Have you sat through the last 6 years?
Expand ...
Chief I have and I have absolutely no problem with this. If this had been a long time ago the facilities wouldn't be in such bad shape..along with hathaway actually being forward thinking and doing his job!
 
.-.
TRUCONN76 said:
If you aren't improving you go downhill. It is a competitive environment that requires constant improvement. Not everyone in the state or in the state legislature would agree that it is all about football. Getting into a better conference is mostly about football but when you are being measured against similar programs other aspects of the university become important. The best way to keep support from the State where it needs to be is to stress the importance of keeping UCONN a great academic institution which provides educated employees to the employers of the state and the research that can be drawn on to create the jobs of the future in the state. In my opinion for what it is worth, looking to improve everywhere in a way that least exasperates the horrible state financial condition is the way to go. I don't want to pay $5 more a ticket to a game but I understand what the University is up against and in the big picture the $5 is not much of a sacrifice to make if it keeps us moving forward.
Expand ...

I have to agree with this and feel the administration and AD recognized and believe the following. They include:

A. The cost of buying out the last Coach which was recognized as crucial to save a sinking program had to be absorbed.
B. Feedback during the realignment process as to what other conferences are looking for and value moving forward.
C. Balancing out title IX concerns moving forward.
D. The expectation and confidence that the FB program will start winning games and playing a more exciting brand of football. If they didn't believe that football could be the rising tide they might as well pack up and go home.

There's plenty of room for dissenting opinions on this but it seems like shrinking a successful Athletic Dept would send a signal that we have given up on P5 as a goal. And let's face it, all these other programs aren't the reason we're in this position. It's football and regional rivals and ESPN. If we want to move forward we need to start winning and the fans will come.
 
Waquoit said:
"The fact that [UConn doesn't] have an NCAA equestrian team and instead keep it at a club level is a real slap in the face to women's athletics."

As my buddy likes to say, "You can't make this merde up."
Expand ...
I'm not making it up. It's a fact.
 
I guess I don't have a problem with the $30-35 fee per season ticket other than it doesn't appear to be tax deductible. That's a matter of principle for me - if your dollars are important to an organization - figure out how to do it under a 501c umbrella. I buy 8 tickets so that's $240 - $280 and even after the 80% benefit haircut that about a $200 deduction - not a lot but makes you feel better about it.
 
Chief00 said:
It's $5 per ticket per game - Do you buy season tickets? Have you sat through the last 6 years?
Expand ...
I have gone the last 40 years and sometimes it is tough to be a fan. I do believe we have some real leadership finally in the Athletic Department which hasn't been there in a long time. They are trying to make things happen. I believe they deserve my support.
 
TRUCONN76 said:
I have gone the last 40 years and sometimes it is tough to be a fan. I do believe we have some real leadership finally in the Athletic Department which hasn't been there in a long time. They are trying to make things happen. I believe they deserve my support.
Expand ...

Quite frankly, I agree the Athletic Dept finally has good leadership. Hathaway was not good at much and Warde was good with coaches and teams but a financial disaster.
 
.-.
Bootsthemonkey said:
If the football team is winning and putting an exciting product on the field nobody will care about the surcharge. If it continues to be like last year, the complaining will never cease.
Expand ...
Same with men's hoops and ice hockey.
 
Chief00 said:
These are the same people who say it's all about football - so we attach a surcharge on football tickets to pay for soccer, softball and baseball. How does that advance the almighty football?
Expand ...
Practical reasoning + basic math skills = higher/game football donation. Quite frankly, how do some people rationally ignore yuuuuge athletic department budgetary allocations + targeted fundraising heavily focused on getting 1-A/BCS up and running at the partial expense of Olympic sports/facilities and even UConn biggest bread winner, men's hoops? And, that ignores simple multiplication and the botched Hathaway abortion.
 
I think I'm more than pulling my weight in supporting UConn athletics by paying more than $500 for 2 football season tickets after the donation, not to mention what I'll pay for parking, rather than buying them for much cheaper on the secondary market.

Tacking another $60 on is pretty ballsy. At some point they're taking advantage.
 
.-.
$46M for 3 stadiums you don't need and will never come anywhere generating the revenue to make up for the cost, when already facing a $30M subsidy?

I have to be missing something.
 
the fewer the people that show up at an athletic event, means that those who do have to pay more.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
$46M for 3 stadiums you don't need and will never come anywhere generating the revenue to make up for the cost, when already facing a $30M subsidy?

I have to be missing something.
Expand ...
Perhaps an upgrade to substandard facilities improves our P5 profile?

That's all that I've got.
 
CL82 said:
Perhaps an upgrade to substandard facilities improves our P5 profile?

That's all that I've got.
Expand ...

Just seems odd. If you have $43M to spend, it is foolish to not go all in on improving football facilities and/or fixing up Gampel. (Assuming that this money couldn't be used towards The Rent).

I hate to be so callous towards soccer, baseball and softball, but if football doesn't improve, we all fail in the end.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Just seems odd. If you have $43M to spend, it is foolish to not go all in on improving football facilities and/or fixing up Gampel. (Assuming that this money couldn't be used towards The Rent).

I hate to be so callous towards soccer, baseball and softball, but if football doesn't improve, we all fail in the end.
Expand ...
I don't know, improving 3 sub par facilities instead of dumping more cash into existing better quality facilities? It doesn't seem like a unreasonable decision to me.

The real fly in the ointment is whether P5 membership is a reasonable possibility. I'm doubtful at this point.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Just seems odd. If you have $43M to spend, it is foolish to not go all in on improving football facilities and/or fixing up Gampel. (Assuming that this money couldn't be used towards The Rent).

I hate to be so callous towards soccer, baseball and softball, but if football doesn't improve, we all fail in the end.
Expand ...
Point noted, but those facilities have been need of significant upgrades for some time. Gampel ceiling is getting fixed and football facilities are in relatively great shape.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,289
Messages
4,561,604
Members
10,455
Latest member
UConnGabby


Top Bottom