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

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

NorwalkHusky

NorwalkHusky

Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Messages
429
Reaction Score
815
Not trying to pin Basketball fans vs Football Fans, but just curious would we actually save money on not having to lease the Rent, Travel Costs, and other stuff?
 
Also just realized I have an old Bobby Fancy pants quote as my quote.... should probably change that.
 
In terms of costs of losing a football season UConn would not be as impacted as a Texas or Florida so it’s all relative. Not a crazy idea.
 
Maybe in a vacuum? I understand the question and it is something I looked at the other day. Men's and Women's basketball we know may run expenses higher than revenue at the moment, but in the Big East going forward I expect that to change in travel cost savings & increased attendance AND when you account for externalities like increase in applications and it serving as a marketing function it is comes out as a net positive.

Football these days is a big loser on paper for UConn and most G5 institutions and currently does not have those positive externalities for UConn, but when thinking about how much money UConn stands to lose if no football means no kids back on campus by the fall, plus no money from a TV deal if no games are played, plus how that would affect deals they have with Nike, IMG, etc. It is really hard to say.
 
If this seems like a good idea to anyone here even a little bit, then it is time to lobby your president and AD to drop the sport altogether. You can't half a** participation at The FBS Level. If your own fans won't miss the team no one else will either.
 
.-.
Our football program has been building towards this for years. 1k fans or no fans what's the difference. We may be the best equipped to handle it. While others lose millions we get a slap on the wrist. Look at Cincinnati already
 
Stay in Norwalk. You love football but not UConn football apparently.
 
Let's start with Scholarships - you have about 80 out there and you run the risk of paying them if a kid doesn't leave. Then you have a Title 9 issue with imbalance of scholarships - so that will affect the women's sports. Can't look at this in a vacuum - it is much bigger. Plus, with the UConn accounting hoo doo, the expenses get shifted to basketball where they won't be profitable. Big PR issue there.
 
The answer is likely no, revenue dries up completely and many of the expenses are still there.

We won't lose nearly as much as the P5 schools but not having any football would still be a financial net negative for UCONN.
 
Last edited:
.-.
I think you will see sports in outdoor arenas before indoor. The basketball season is actually in jeopardy now.
 
What will be intriguing will be if UConn keeps the games against teams like Fresno St, etc. Will they pay the costs to fly across country for a game with no pay day? I'm not sure....if we see a return to regional games, I'm not going to be shocked to see UConn play the big payday games and then see what they can get closer to home. COVID is going to kill a lot of college sports. To be honest, I think the AAC is going to struggle mightily to stick this out. The conference is so spread out that flying everywhere is more costly than the revenue.
 
This is precisely the reason I hate being a Uconn fan. Our fan base is really pathetic. I vacillate between getting angry about it and not caring. I guess I am getting too old for the fight.
 
Ldandy said:
If this seems like a good idea to anyone here even a little bit, then it is time to lobby your president and AD to drop the sport altogether. You can't half a** participation at The FBS Level. If your own fans won't miss the team no one else will either.
Expand ...
If they can be more competitive fans will come back in force.
 
buddy said:
I think you will see sports in outdoor arenas before indoor. The basketball season is actually in jeopardy now.
Expand ...

I get the idea that outdoors is safer than indoors, but what's a bigger risk, 110,000 people at the Big House or 10,000 at a Michigan MBB game?
 
metsfan2323 said:
The answer is likely no, revenue dries up completely and many of the expenses are still there.

We won't lose nearly as much as the P5 schools but not having any football would still be a financial net negative for UCONN.
Expand ...
Exactly. The Rent is a fixed obligation. You still have to pay the staff, unless the plan is to rebuild from scratch. The team would evaporate unless you kept them on scholarship, and it still might if there were other places to go. The schools who really get killed are the P5 who cash flow from TV revenues, and carry big staff overhead.
 
.-.
buddy said:
I think you will see sports in outdoor arenas before indoor. The basketball season is actually in jeopardy now.
Expand ...
Really that is not far fetched. Some models predict a return of the virus during “cold and flu” season which is late fall through roughly April. Attendance is already being threatened. A significant return will really endanger the indoor sports.
 
zls44 said:
I get the idea that outdoors is safer than indoors, but what's a bigger risk, 110,000 people at the Big House or 10,000 at a Michigan MBB game?
Expand ...
Statistically, the same. If you have a 4% (made up number) chance of contracting a disease, it doesn't matter if you are in a crowd of 100 or 1,000,000.. you have a 4% chance of contracting the disease.
 
zls44 said:
I get the idea that outdoors is safer than indoors, but what's a bigger risk, 110,000 people at the Big House or 10,000 at a Michigan MBB game?
Expand ...
im Guessing about the same. People in a confined space are more endangered that in open space but more are obviously a problem. Honestly though even if they do play I doubt 110000 show up at the Big House for a while. Or 10000 at a gym. If this thing is still around do you want to be sitting on top of a guy coughing his brains out? Or worse next to the guy who spikes a fever TOMORROW...
 
zls44 said:
I get the idea that outdoors is safer than indoors, but what's a bigger risk, 110,000 people at the Big House or 10,000 at a Michigan MBB game?
Expand ...
That's not good the right comparison. You won't see 110000 in the big house until 2021. The better comparison is 30,000 in the big house versus 3000. For a basketball game.

You won't see full stadiums this year.
 
UConn football should not have a problem with social distancing given 10,000 fans in a 40,000 stadium. Division. If the discussion of canceling college football starts picking up momentum, NCAA should work from the bottom up with a bottom-feeders league for Fall 2020 with UConn, URI Umass New Mexico East Carolina etc. so at least we have some football to watch.
 
I've been to the Big House. They jam you in there so tightly I reckon a virus would spread to all 110,000 before halftime. Like an invisible version of "The Wave".
 
.-.
Slick said:
If they can be more competitive fans will come back in force.
Expand ...

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Bobol said:
pull the plug.
Expand ...
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.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,271
Messages
4,560,889
Members
10,451
Latest member
WashingtonH


Top Bottom