Michigan AD confirms they will honor 2013 game....
- Thread starter gimber
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
edit: btw: I will preface everything I write from here on in in this subject matter with the following:
I believe the 2013 game contracted with Michigan should remain at Rentschler field.
The greatest asset that UConn has to draw from in the state when it comes to grow this football program from a fan and financial standpoint, is in Fairfield County, and it is virtually untapped. New York market presence is a pretty important and influential way to tap that keg. Scheduling games in Yankee Stadium, is going to catch the attention of Fairfield county, and it's easier for fans in the I-95 corridor in all the communities from Greenwich to Bridgeport to get to Yankee Stadium, than it is to get to Rentschler. Yes Syracuse is in New York, but last I checked, Syracuse is still 250 miles from manhattan. It's 159 miles from Putnam, CT to Yankee Stadium.
And once again, since no matter how many times I repeat it, people don't seem to get it - it does NOT have to come at compromising the quality of schedule at Rentschler, and if we go out and make it known, there are nationally prominent programs out there that are interested in playing in New York.
I believe the 2013 game contracted with Michigan should remain at Rentschler field.
The greatest asset that UConn has to draw from in the state when it comes to grow this football program from a fan and financial standpoint, is in Fairfield County, and it is virtually untapped. New York market presence is a pretty important and influential way to tap that keg. Scheduling games in Yankee Stadium, is going to catch the attention of Fairfield county, and it's easier for fans in the I-95 corridor in all the communities from Greenwich to Bridgeport to get to Yankee Stadium, than it is to get to Rentschler. Yes Syracuse is in New York, but last I checked, Syracuse is still 250 miles from manhattan. It's 159 miles from Putnam, CT to Yankee Stadium.
And once again, since no matter how many times I repeat it, people don't seem to get it - it does NOT have to come at compromising the quality of schedule at Rentschler, and if we go out and make it known, there are nationally prominent programs out there that are interested in playing in New York.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 5,805
- Reaction Score
- 15,836
We dont have a scheduling partnership with michigan, we just scheduled a home and home with them, as schools do all of the time. There's no down the road future long term agreement here. If we want to explore playing some neutral site games in NYC against various teams, that's one thing. But moving this home game in '13 would be a remarkably bad precedent. And I have no idea where you're getting this idea that we have some scheduling partnership on the table with them that's going to expire.
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,184
the yankee and mets stadium stuff is just false as far as FC goes. the game will draw attention becuase its in ny vs a certain team. but to the FC people it won't be any more of a highlight, they either follow uconn football or dont right now. if there wasn't a car on the road i could be at yanks in 50 minutes and mets in 45 minutes from norwalk. on a normal day with traffic, its 1 hour if really no traffic to several hours depending on what highways you take(95 merrit hutch throg neck etc) and what time of travel(rush hour or not/construction etc).
its ballpark a hour to the rent for me and there isn't traffic issues for the most part becuase of the several highway options. some go merrit to 91. some go 95 to 91 and some go 7up to 84. its all close to the same and it makes it easy for FC people to get to the rent. getting to nyc is not as easy and is not in any case easier for FC.
a saturday morning game at yanks would be maybe as easy for FC ppl as going to the rent, maybe. all other times would be high traffic and alot worse of a ride. ppl would take the train somewhat but thats just less of a uconn football tailgating atmosphere in the works. its either play a game at giants or don't play in nyc to me unless its a bowl game...a trip to giants stadium for a game is a neutral game if not a away game for uconn vs a michigan nd usc type. so if we did that i would have to think warde would be smart enough to have 6 home games with a acc coming to the rent for season tix purposes.
its ballpark a hour to the rent for me and there isn't traffic issues for the most part becuase of the several highway options. some go merrit to 91. some go 95 to 91 and some go 7up to 84. its all close to the same and it makes it easy for FC people to get to the rent. getting to nyc is not as easy and is not in any case easier for FC.
a saturday morning game at yanks would be maybe as easy for FC ppl as going to the rent, maybe. all other times would be high traffic and alot worse of a ride. ppl would take the train somewhat but thats just less of a uconn football tailgating atmosphere in the works. its either play a game at giants or don't play in nyc to me unless its a bowl game...a trip to giants stadium for a game is a neutral game if not a away game for uconn vs a michigan nd usc type. so if we did that i would have to think warde would be smart enough to have 6 home games with a acc coming to the rent for season tix purposes.
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 2,044
- Reaction Score
- 1,870
i think people are overestimating what we'd gain from a game in NYC. Carl above said he'd go for a future 1 and 1 with one game being at Michigan and one at NYC with no trip to the Rent, but I'd rather see us play a home and home with a mid level BCS team like Georgia Tech, or Purdue. we're only going to have 4 OOC games a year from here on out, and assuming one will always be a 1AA patsy, you're really talking about 3 games to work with to try to get good teams at the Rent. if you assume one away game/year as part of a decent BCS home and home series and one payday game against a MAC team, there's not a ton of wiggle room left to have neutral site games.
with 4 OOC games per year i think we're probably looking at 1AA(I'd love to get rid of this to be honest, but i get why it's necessary) 2 BCS home and home schedules (one home/one away per year) and then a payday game against the MAC. that will give us 7 home games, which is what most BCS teams have.
with 4 OOC games per year i think we're probably looking at 1AA(I'd love to get rid of this to be honest, but i get why it's necessary) 2 BCS home and home schedules (one home/one away per year) and then a payday game against the MAC. that will give us 7 home games, which is what most BCS teams have.
.-.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2011
- Messages
- 1,886
- Reaction Score
- 3,442
-------------------------------------------------------
I said years ago that they should move the band right down on the field in front of the students. That would increase the intensity level in the stadium 10 fold, and open up an entire section of seats for more students or paying customers. After going to see it first hand in ND in09" it DEFINATELY has an impact with the band on top of the opponent. If you recall the quotes by RGIII, Butch Davis, and Dave Wan"Stache", they have all said on the record that The Rent is tough to play in bcuz it feels like the fans r right ontop of you! They should make that move!!
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,184
i agree with that. how many more seats would we be talking? 2k? not even? it still helps...
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2011
- Messages
- 1,886
- Reaction Score
- 3,442
----------------------------------
How is a florida guy an authority on CT traffic patterns? LOL..............
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
I disagree. Shocker.
I understand the commuter issues, traveling, in the area - probably a lot better than you can imagine. The concept that proximity is an issue, when it comes to UConn playing in the New York City - in a different state? that's false. Simply by scheduling games in Yankee Stadium, we're not going to generate a whole lot of new ticket buyers. I think that's what you're getting at it.
But by scheduling games in Yankee stadium, we most definitely will be generating new INTEREST in UConn football in the area.
There's a pseudo-scientific theory out there called the 100th monkey phenomena. It's not a true scientific thing and the way it's described in primates in popular culture is not what the original research showed. BUT....it's a phenomena that most indeed has legitimate reproducibility in when it comes to observing social phenomena in people, espeically around things like media driven social interaction (i.e. sports / entertainment).
Basically what it says, is that once a critical mass, or number of individuals have acquired a learned behavior in a group, that learned behavior begins to spread instantaneously and becomes a natural behavior for an entire population, such that members of that population that were never directly taught a behavior, begin to exhibit the behavior anyway.
By scheduling games in Yankee Stadium, the 100th monkey effect, however serious you take the concept, would come into play in Fairfield county when it comes to the general population interest in uconn football, and being a subject matter of interest.....in Fairfield County to the general population, is something that UConn Football needs to get. If playing outside CT is such a big deal for folks, there's another option to entice the ND's, Michigan's, and the like to CT - and that's the Yale Bowl - if Yale ever gets off their ass and upgrades that facility.
I understand this is heresy to a lot of UConn football fans. But it's the reality of the Northeast. Rentschler field is our home, but if you understand what we had to go through to get it, and why we played 1-AA football for 22 years rather than 1-A football, it probably shouldn't be a big deal for you to understand that playing games at larger venues in the Northeast is part of the deal that UConn will face in the future when it comes to scheduling.
And all of that, makes the fact that Michigan is coming to Rentschler, THAT much bigger for UConn. Michigan playing at UConn is a major, major thing. I'd hate to see it end at two games, and we have a lot of stuff to work with to work out a way to continue it.
Oh yeah, and BTW - I am completely in favor of Michigan playing at Rentschler in 2013, and do not want to see the game moved.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
I get it. Play the 2013 game at the Rent and then explore the possibility of scheduling a future series with UM that involves playing our home games in NYC. A couple of questions that nobody has answered:
1) Is Michigan going to play 6 games in Ann Arbor in return for a game in NYC? I mean not in a million years would they do that. I've seen no evidence, none, that UM would like to play in NYC.
2) How in the world does this not compromise the quality of schedule at the Rent?
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2011
- Messages
- 1,886
- Reaction Score
- 3,442
-------------------------------------------
At the very least they should do it for Big time teams that r willing to play here and add seats in the other endzone in front of the family section as well. W/ both ends you could get at least 5k more seats. Oh, and here's an idea for the Uconn AD: How about opening up those seats on the field to long term season tix holders first, then to all those who are connected at Uconn second which is prob what would happen. Might go over well in terms of establishing long time support. Fans may think twice about giving up their season tix for a year or two if they think they can get their hands on some field level seats for a big game!!!???
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,976
- Reaction Score
- 21,005
It would be far more important to the long term future of this program to have the economic benefit of more fans in greater NYC than it would be to have the "respect" of the college football world, whatever that means.
But you and I have had this discussion before and we will just have to agree to disagree.
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,184
we could bank on the fact of umass upgrading a little more. its going to take them some time to get to mac level depth and recruit wise. so we can play them as our mac game, as our rival game, as a always home game, a warmup game for a couple years here. then we could pick the 2nd 3rd and 4th a little easier.
1-umass
2bcs team home
3bcs team away
4 go many ways, a neutral game like a nyc game. a warmup game and so on....
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
There's another option for the future too - and that's to expand Rentschler field to 50k, as it was originally designed to be.
And BTW: I am 100% in favor of keepign the 2013 Michigan game at Rentschler field.
And BTW: I am 100% in favor of keepign the 2013 Michigan game at Rentschler field.
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,184
what?
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,184
i understand your position carl. we agree on 2013.
i would love to see the rent expanded but it takes time to make sure we can fill it. what i would like to see is when the bball pf and the other fields are done are some media noise about it and some future plans draw up types getting spread to pump up the fans etc.
but wait a sec here. a sellout at the rent is 40k right?
-put the band on the field and fill those seats.
-put some temp bleachers up in the walk area.
are we talking 45k now?
thats why i don't like expanding to 50k. if you expand you do i once for good for the future. 50k is still below par in the cf world. it has to be 55,001 or bigger to get any respect from people. go big once and so what we wont fill it right away, we will in time and by that point everything else will make sense and work out. the last thing we want to do is add 10k and the 10 years later be looking around again. the state can lift the size requirments and stuff. there is $$ to be made by doing so.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,976
- Reaction Score
- 21,005
Stop kowtowing to the complainers. The future of UConn football requires we be in a real conference when all the shuffling is done, and our ability to work our way into a real conference would be greatly increased by materially increasing our market share.
Those who really care about the program need to stop worrying about whether they feel respected or will have a two hour drive to a "home" game and suck it up.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
I must have written something today or yesterday that started this, but I have no idea what it was - 6 games in Ann Arbor for 1 in NYC? Lines crossed somewhere. That's all I can say, if it was somethign I wrote. Other than that, I'm tired of this....somebody please tell me how scheduling in NYC is going to make the quality of schedule at Rentschler worse. I've talked a lot about how doing it, doesn't mean the schedule will necessarily get unattractive at Rentschler.
edit: BTW - I am completely in favor of keeping the 2013 Michigan game at Rentschler and do not want to see the game moved.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
4 conference road games
1 road game vs either ND or Pac12
That is 5 guaranteed road games every year. If they played one game annually in NYC, that leaves them 6 games every other year in Ann Arbor.
My apologies if I'm contemplating reality while convoluting some kind of pipe dream.
Do I really need to explain how playing a home game in NYC dilutes the quality of schedule at the Rent? Really?
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,976
- Reaction Score
- 21,005
Of course it dilutes the quality of the schedule at the Rent. But so will not making sure we stay "big time," and increasing our marketibility in NYC does that.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
Don't feel like I've been kowtowing, but maybe it looks like it? ;-)
Anyway, couldn't have said it better myself, and damn sure that I coudlnt' have said it shorter.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
Who said Michigan wants to play annually in NYC? I didn't.
Look playing a Michigan, ND, PSU, USC, etc......name brand in NYC, is not going to help the home schedule at Rentschler. I get that.
BUt there's no reason why we can't have a year or two spaced in of 6 home games at Rentschler (4 conference, 2 non) a game in NYC, and 5 road games (4 conference, and 1 out), with years of 7 home games at Rentschler and 5 on the road.
The fact that we've got Tennessee and Virginia as our only home and homes udner contract right now, leaves plenty of room to schedule decent home slates at Rentschler, in addition to playing in NYC.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,359
- Reaction Score
- 33,630
"This article I'm reading today, about UConn and Michigan, is the first time that I've seen Michigan take a public step in indicating interest in playing in New York"
Does that ring a bell?
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 22,815
- Reaction Score
- 9,456
You do know that Rentschler was designed to seat 50k? That the foudnation of the structure is in place to build above ground to put seating for another 10k in a third tier opposite the tower? That the concept of expanding in about 10 years was originally planned?
Expansion to 50k, cost and time wise is not a bank breaker at this point in time. If we can't have 50k seat sell out for a season that includes back to back weeks of games at home v. Maryland and Michigan......well, I believe we'd sell out at 50k.
The issue is getting the snowball going, and I've talked ad nauseuam about this in the past. Whether or not you want to think it was paper sell outs or actually gate sell outs, Rentschler was sold consecutively for I believe at least two full seasons around 2005-2006 - when we were playing our worst and filling our schedules with low profile teams.........the athletic department dropped the ball, instead of working like hell to retain season ticket buyers 6,7 years ago, and at the same time figure out who and where the new buyers can be found, they expected the basketball model to work and sat with their thumbs up their rears and planned golf vacations for the post season.
What the athletic department failed to do, was generate interest for new ticket buyers, when it was most crucial, which is something that constantly needs to be done in football. They went the basketball model and simply expected 40,000 tickets to be bought every year blindly........we've got the opportunity to recover from that strongly, with scheduling in coming years.
This year - is the very first year - I've seen on my ticket purchasing stuff - a slot to check if you are a new buyer or a returner......they're learning up there in storrs.....slowly.
anywya - I'm tangenting. To go beyond 50,000 seats at Rentschler, will be a major undertaking, to get to 50k wouldn't be, the construction could be done quite quickly - over hte course of a summer - and putting that third tier up there would make it a very, very difficult place for visiting teams.
The key to all of it, is winning games.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2011
- Messages
- 189
- Reaction Score
- 152
I know there've been comparisons to the size of other non-conference stadiums that Michigan plays in, but in case I missed it, why is Michigan playing Alabama in Arlington, TX this year? Alabama's stadium seats a little over 100K, and Cowboys Stadium 80K.
Carl,
Great entrepreneuial focus.
Manuel played football at Michigan. So, yeah, he should be wheeling and dealing on a series.
The only way Southern Cal schedules a return game vs Cuse is if it's played in NYC in a pro stadium
Ironically, the last time Southern Cal played in NYC area was circa (1990) vs Cuse in Kickoff Classic. Todd Marinovich vs Marlon Graves. Circa (1988) Southern Cal played at BC. O.J.'s son was a RB on that team
My all-time top 4 programs are:
1A. Notre Dame
1a. Southern Cal
3. Michigan
4. Ohio State
At this juncture of the program, it would be huge to have played, beaten and have a long series with any of these aristocracy programs and any of the service academies, which are the only national programs
College football is no longer a regional sport. So, how big and important is the media, financial and advertising capital of the world to college football today? Here's an excerpt from a recent article by New York Times, Pete Thamel on college football playoffs:
WHERE WILL THE GAMES BE PLAYED? The model receiving the most support has the semifinal games rotating among the four so-called B.C.S. bowls — Sugar, Orange, Fiesta and Rose — with the site of the national title game determined in a manner similar to that for the Super Bowl.
The option remains to have all three playoff games within the bowl system. A more lucrative option would be to have all three outside the bowl system, accepting bids for neutral-site games. Outsourcing lucrative games to the bowls has never made financial sense, but excluding the long-entrenched bowl system could be tricky politically.
Complete Article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/sports/ncaafootball/key-issues-in-deciding-college-footballs-new-postseason.html?_r=1&ref=sports
Also, in interview on Sirius today Thamel said SEC commish, Mike Slive is in favor of having Notre Dame keeping its indy slot with any new BCS workups because it prevents ND from joining and stabilzing the acc where the SEC has its focus on for the next round of expansion.
Wasted energy because no way Notre Dame joins the acc.
Great entrepreneuial focus.
Manuel played football at Michigan. So, yeah, he should be wheeling and dealing on a series.
The only way Southern Cal schedules a return game vs Cuse is if it's played in NYC in a pro stadium
Ironically, the last time Southern Cal played in NYC area was circa (1990) vs Cuse in Kickoff Classic. Todd Marinovich vs Marlon Graves. Circa (1988) Southern Cal played at BC. O.J.'s son was a RB on that team
My all-time top 4 programs are:
1A. Notre Dame
1a. Southern Cal
3. Michigan
4. Ohio State
At this juncture of the program, it would be huge to have played, beaten and have a long series with any of these aristocracy programs and any of the service academies, which are the only national programs
College football is no longer a regional sport. So, how big and important is the media, financial and advertising capital of the world to college football today? Here's an excerpt from a recent article by New York Times, Pete Thamel on college football playoffs:
WHERE WILL THE GAMES BE PLAYED? The model receiving the most support has the semifinal games rotating among the four so-called B.C.S. bowls — Sugar, Orange, Fiesta and Rose — with the site of the national title game determined in a manner similar to that for the Super Bowl.
The option remains to have all three playoff games within the bowl system. A more lucrative option would be to have all three outside the bowl system, accepting bids for neutral-site games. Outsourcing lucrative games to the bowls has never made financial sense, but excluding the long-entrenched bowl system could be tricky politically.
Complete Article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/sports/ncaafootball/key-issues-in-deciding-college-footballs-new-postseason.html?_r=1&ref=sports
Also, in interview on Sirius today Thamel said SEC commish, Mike Slive is in favor of having Notre Dame keeping its indy slot with any new BCS workups because it prevents ND from joining and stabilzing the acc where the SEC has its focus on for the next round of expansion.
Wasted energy because no way Notre Dame joins the acc.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,976
- Reaction Score
- 21,005
.-.
- Status