I love Football and this Board... That being said would we actually save money if they canceled the season?

Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
663
Likes
407
This is a tough call one way or the other. Revenue will be down if you play or don't play in any sport.....especially in the academic 20/21 time frame.

If they do play, universities may not be allowed to offer tickets on a "sellout" basis. For every seat occupied, one to the left/right would be empty and maybe one in front/rear for "distancing concepts". I don't see that disappearing any time soon. Even if teams could have "sellout" attendance........how many will purchase tickets.

If they don't play, all teams will loose out because a class will graduate next season, and scholarships and O&M of facilities will still have to be maintained. And regardless of TV/radio contracts.........revenue will be down as all businesses are hurting financially. How many advertisers will still be on board to fund broadcasts. Big bucks will not be there to show empty arenas/stadiums.

I feel bad for all........athletes, universities, fans, business enterprises, all support staff.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
70
Likes
53
P5 athletic directors have floated a shorted schedule ( league games only ) if necessary. UC could play a H/H this year with Maine-UMass-Army - @ND (1 game only). The Ivy league talked at one time of playing their 7 league games in the spring. ND said would not play if the students are not yet allowed back on campus.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
10,311
Likes
6,760
This could be like the post war years. Many schools stopped playing football for the duration or only fielded what would be considered club teams. After Wirld War II a number either didn’t re establish football or did so at a very much lower level. A number dropped the sport in he late 40s through the 50s. I could see a similar phenomenon over the next few years. Actually some fairly big names stopped playing at that point. Fordham and Georgetown were both national names in the pre war era for example.
 
Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Messages
410
Likes
368
Stay in Norwalk. You love football but not UConn football apparently.


Dude I freaking love the football team never missed a game while I was there. I of course would be lost if we didn't have a season in the fall. I'm just genuinely curious how bad this will affect UConn. Honestly if I was the Bama, Ohio St, Texas AD etc, I would be sharting bricks with the thought of not having a normal season. Those 100K Stadiums full make those guys rich. When the well dries up who knows. We on the other hand are kinda use to it. Do we just dip more into student fees. LOL maybe we won't notice?
 
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Messages
1,480
Likes
2,410
That's not really what is in question here. I agree a winning team could increase attendance, however my concern is that if the sport goes away for an entire season the fans will go away with it. With The NCAA mulling a one time transfer rule allowing movement without penalty, the prospect of returning a competitive team in 2021 would be bleak should opportunities to play elsewhere exist in 2020.

If there's no 2020 season the schools will have two years of "freshmen" for the 2021 season so where will all these transferring players go if the "seniors or redshirt seniors" don't graduate and leave? Seems there might be a problem of another sort.............lots of good players with no scholarship available unless the NCAA allows rosters with more than 85 players.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
6,770
Likes
8,111
The biggest impact to a loss of the season would be the bottom line on the P5 schools. Without content, I'd imagine that they're not going to get their TV contract $$$. They certainly can't get their bowl/championship money. And what does Michigan gross on fan revenue per home game? $5-8 million? There is a lot of money at stake.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
10,311
Likes
6,760
If there's no 2020 season the schools will have two years of "freshmen" for the 2021 season so where will all these transferring players go if the "seniors or redshirt seniors" don't graduate and leave? Seems there might be a problem of another sort.............lots of good players with no scholarship available unless the NCAA allows rosters with more than 85 players.
Well if colleges don’t play most high schools won’t either. Recruiting will certainly change. You are taking a chance on a kid who was pretty good as a jr but hasn’t played since. Gonna be lots of mistakes made. Everybody will be Bob Diaco.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
7,321
Likes
5,146
Stay in Norwalk. You love football but not UConn football apparently.
I'm a Norwalk guy too, but definitely NOT in the same box as that Norwalk guy you are directing that comment to.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
5,045
Likes
3,827
The biggest impact to a loss of the season would be the bottom line on the P5 schools. Without content, I'd imagine that they're not going to get their TV contract $$$. They certainly can't get their bowl/championship money. And what does Michigan gross on fan revenue per home game? $5-8 million? There is a lot of money at stake.
Actually the biggest losers that many aren’t even talking about are the small college towns that these stadiums reside in. Think about where these towns are. Most are in small, rural areas that survive off football revenue. I read in one of the numerous articles about effects on CFB on schools that businesses in Tuscaloosa make close to $19.1 million a year on fans coming in for games. That’s for 6-7 weekends, that’s it. How are they making up that revenue? Now remove students also being off campus. These college college towns are going to be decimated.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
10,311
Likes
6,760
Some recent testing from the carrier Theodore Roosevelt raises more concerns. Reported in the Wall St Journal so clearly not a bastion of liberal elites. The Navy found like 60% of positives had no symptoms. Which might suggest that among young healthy people many can be carriers without knowing it. So sitting near the student section could be problematic since there might be many carriers in that cohort who have no idea they are dangerous. Same with players. Symptomless players could pass it to other more susceptible ones.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
6,770
Likes
8,111
Some recent testing from the carrier Theodore Roosevelt raises more concerns. Reported in the Wall St Journal so clearly not a bastion of liberal elites. The Navy found like 60% of positives had no symptoms. Which might suggest that among young healthy people many can be carriers without knowing it. So sitting near the student section could be problematic since there might be many carriers in that cohort who have no idea they are dangerous. Same with players. Symptomless players could pass it to other more susceptible ones.
I don’t we’re going to have fans in the stands. We should be happy if we have a season.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
855
Likes
361
How many advertisers will still be on board to fund broadcasts. Big bucks will not be there to show empty arenas/stadiums.

I think there will be big bucks to fund broadcasts, especially with empty stadiums. You will have bigger TV audiences and higher advertising rates.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
10,311
Likes
6,760
I do think the other question is who will even want to go to games. Some Recent research strongly suggests that you are most contagious about 2-4 days BEFORE you show symptoms. So you go to a game with 10 friends. everybody is fine. No coughs no fevers. Then Tuesday morning Joe wakes up with all the symptoms. Everyone you were with is now high risk for at least 2 weeks. Plus all the people you guys came in contact with. Maybe lesser that your group except for the ones in contact with Joe directly but still at high risk. You going to the Rent or Gampel in that scenario?
 
Joined
Sep 22, 2013
Messages
263
Likes
317
Most D 3 teams have to fund raise a certain percentage of their budgets. Think of Dan Hurley sending a note offering to walk your dog for a donation.

Not sure what D3 football program(s) you are referring to but each and every D3 program I am familiar with is fully funded by the college or university.

Please don’t be silly; no one is advocating UConn being D3. The issue facing UConn and Connecticut State decision makers is whether to continue support a financially draining FBS football team with little or no positive ROI when those same millions of $ could be used for additional financial assistance to worthy UConn students, or used to promote academic excellence of the University.

Importantly, there is absolutely no realistic plan by which UConn’s nomad Independent FBS football program becomes a self sustaining positive for the University while the UConn men’s and women’s basketball teams regain national prominence in the Big East.
 

hardcorehusky

Lost patience with the garden variety UConn fan
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,747
Likes
4,077
Not sure what D3 football program(s) you are referring to but each and every D3 program I am familiar with is fully funded by the college or university.

Please don’t be silly; no one is advocating UConn being D3. The issue facing UConn and Connecticut State decision makers is whether to continue support a financially draining FBS football team with little or no positive ROI when those same millions of $ could be used for additional financial assistance to worthy UConn students, or used to promote academic excellence of the University.

Importantly, there is absolutely no realistic plan by which UConn’s nomad Independent FBS football program becomes a self sustaining positive for the University while the UConn men’s and women’s basketball teams regain national prominence in the Big East.
There is a realistic plan that is in place. No way the University haphazardly withdraws from a league and enters a new one without a plan. The plan was being worked until Covid 19. Just because the University doesn't show us the future P & L doesn't mean they don't have a plan. Benedict was the CFO of Auburn's athletic department - he has a plan.
 

Exit 4

This space for rent
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
8,765
Likes
13,214
Some recent testing from the carrier Theodore Roosevelt raises more concerns. Reported in the Wall St Journal so clearly not a bastion of liberal elites. The Navy found like 60% of positives had no symptoms. Which might suggest that among young healthy people many can be carriers without knowing it. So sitting near the student section could be problematic since there might be many carriers in that cohort who have no idea they are dangerous. Same with players. Symptomless players could pass it to other more susceptible ones.
I view this as very good news. It means the death rate percentages are dramatically overstated, albeit still scary - but much lower and closer (but still well above) the regular flu. There are several small studies that are finding similar conclusions including another one in California which is mentioned in the WSJ editorial this evening.

from the WSJ:
The county, where I live, is home to about two million people in the heart of Silicon Valley, including San Jose, the state’s third-largest city. It has the largest known number of cases in Northern California and saw some of the earliest cases of community spread in the U.S.

The researchers found that the percentage of infections was indeed vastly larger than the roughly 1,000 known positive cases in the county at the time of the study. The preliminary results—the research will now undergo peer review—show that between 2.5% and 4.2% of county residents are estimated to have antibodies against the virus. That translates into 48,000 to 81,000 infections, 50 to 85 times as high as the number of known cases.


Two ways out of this horrible pandemic, either we find a safe and robust vaccine is very short order (possible) and/or we find out that this is not as deadly for people under age 70 than originally thought. A high number of asymtomatic people could mean we get closer to herd immunity later this summer. I realize this does nothing for those that we have lost or those who remain at high risk, particularly the elderly....just saying its a path out of this mess.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
10,311
Likes
6,760
Not sure what D3 football program(s) you are referring to but each and every D3 program I am familiar with is fully funded by the college or university.

Please don’t be silly; no one is advocating UConn being D3. The issue facing UConn and Connecticut State decision makers is whether to continue support a financially draining FBS football team with little or no positive ROI when those same millions of $ could be used for additional financial assistance to worthy UConn students, or used to promote academic excellence of the University.

Importantly, there is absolutely no realistic plan by which UConn’s nomad Independent FBS football program becomes a self sustaining positive for the University while the UConn men’s and women’s basketball teams regain national prominence in the Big East.
That is a red herring. The money they “save” isn’t going to other worthy students. That is such a bs argument it isn’t even worth discussing. And D3 teams are funded by schools but it is essentially base funding. Often players buy their own gear or some of it anyway. They don’t get shoes for example. Or much in the way of special equipment. That comes from fundraising. I’ve had kids play d3 sports and every season they had to raise cash.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
354
Likes
576
What people do not seem to understand is successful sports programs provide the University and state with value that is not measured in dollars. I do not care if we “lose” money. Winning teams bring more value than the losses. That said we should make sure we are not spending out of control in the AD. But winning football teams for Uconn whether it’s independent, AAC or any other conference is a key to bringing more overall value and protecting and building on basketball and other sports success.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,633
Likes
1,120
I view this as very good news. It means the death rate percentages are dramatically overstated, albeit still scary - but much lower and closer (but still well above) the regular flu. There are several small studies that are finding similar conclusions including another one in California which is mentioned in the WSJ editorial this evening.

from the WSJ:
The county, where I live, is home to about two million people in the heart of Silicon Valley, including San Jose, the state’s third-largest city. It has the largest known number of cases in Northern California and saw some of the earliest cases of community spread in the U.S.

The researchers found that the percentage of infections was indeed vastly larger than the roughly 1,000 known positive cases in the county at the time of the study. The preliminary results—the research will now undergo peer review—show that between 2.5% and 4.2% of county residents are estimated to have antibodies against the virus. That translates into 48,000 to 81,000 infections, 50 to 85 times as high as the number of known cases.


Two ways out of this horrible pandemic, either we find a safe and robust vaccine is very short order (possible) and/or we find out that this is not as deadly for people under age 70 than originally thought. A high number of asymtomatic people could mean we get closer to herd immunity later this summer. I realize this does nothing for those that we have lost or those who remain at high risk, particularly the elderly....just saying its a path out of this mess.

I think treatment is really the way "out". Who knows when an actual vaccine will be available, and life can't just stop to wait for it. At the end of the day, people don't want to get sick, but if they do, they want to know they can be treated for it. People can get the flu, they can die from the flu, but they also know that they can be treated and get better, so they are confident in going about their daily lives. This is going to be the same thing. Once people realize this isn't Captain Trips, and once they know that they can get it and get better, then things will normalize. I believe that time is coming much more quickly than the doomsday crowd thought that it might.
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Messages
1,758
Likes
2,880
If there's no 2020 season the schools will have two years of "freshmen" for the 2021 season so where will all these transferring players go if the "seniors or redshirt seniors" don't graduate and leave? Seems there might be a problem of another sort.............lots of good players with no scholarship available unless the NCAA allows rosters with more than 85 players.

I misunderstood your hypothetical. I thought the idea was if UConn could save money by canceling the season, however I see now that you meant if the entirety of CFB was shut down.

Ultimately I think UConn loses money by not playing. The sunken costs of scholarships, personnel, and facilities don’t go away for football as well as the women’s sports that offset their numbers due to Title 9 should the season be cancelled. You save some on travel obviously, but there is no offset from ticket sales and TV revenue.

The loss would not be the same as say Alabama would experience, but it would still be a loss relative to the expected income of games being played. How much would likely depend on how good of a TV deal your AD had put together.
 

Exit 4

This space for rent
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
8,765
Likes
13,214
I think treatment is really the way "out". Who knows when an actual vaccine will be available, and life can't just stop to wait for it. At the end of the day, people don't want to get sick, but if they do, they want to know they can be treated for it. People can get the flu, they can die from the flu, but they also know that they can be treated and get better, so they are confident in going about their daily lives. This is going to be the same thing. Once people realize this isn't Captain Trips, and once they know that they can get it and get better, then things will normalize. I believe that time is coming much more quickly than the doomsday crowd thought that it might.
Do we have treatments for virus’? I guess so, but it seems most of the time it ends up being a vaccine. Regardless, sure a treatment would be great and welcome.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,633
Likes
1,120
Do we have treatments for virus’? I guess so, but it seems most of the time it ends up being a vaccine. Regardless, sure a treatment would be great and welcome.
Treatment, to me, means mitigating the symptoms when you get sick. Keeping you as comfortable as possible until your body wears the virus out. You don't contract this and fall face down, dead on the floor. Either nothing happens, or you get sick. If you get sick, the focus needs to be on keeping you well enough to not have to be hospitalized. When people feel confident in that, they are going to go about their lives again. We simply can't stay locked up for an indefinate amount of time. Life and commerce has to resume.
 

Exit 4

This space for rent
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
8,765
Likes
13,214
Treatment, to me, means mitigating the symptoms when you get sick. Keeping you as comfortable as possible until your body wears the virus out. You don't contract this and fall face down, dead on the floor. Either nothing happens, or you get sick. If you get sick, the focus needs to be on keeping you well enough to not have to be hospitalized. When people feel confident in that, they are going to go about their lives again. We simply can't stay locked up for an indefinate amount of time. Life and commerce has to resume.
AIDS is the only virus that comes to mind that we have a “treatment” for- all the others are defeated by our own antibodies or a vaccine. If we actually devise a clear treatment- it will probably be very much akin to a vaccine.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
160,093
Messages
3,822,230
Members
8,485
Latest member
Wbbnut

Top Bottom