Orlando Sentinel: Gators AD Scott Stricklin: Canceling football ‘would shake financial foundation of college athletics’

-
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
9,428
Likes
5,771
What those ratings show I think is that casual fans will watch what are perceived as “big games.” ND Michigan does a 4. Northwestern-Purdue does a 1. Big names draw. Marginal ones draw many fewer viewers.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
4,032
Likes
3,731
If you’re a fan of Northwestern, Iowa State, or Arizona, you will have no interest in watching Alabama against Florida State. The only people watching the 32 teams will be the fans of those 32 teams.

People will lose interest once their team is left behind.
I wouldn't bet on that happening.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,473
Likes
5,321
China hid this virus from the world for over six weeks (November 17 to December 31) a

Where did you get the Nov 17 date. That’s would mean they started seeing cases in October. meaning the virus made the jump in September. I’d like to see the document on this.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,473
Likes
5,321

In my opinion this is the right move. It’s responsible for ADs to look into. I think it’s a possibility for sure.This would be a big blow for UConn football amid financial issues.
Should this virus be seasonal, you can possibly start with fans, but by October it’s virus season starting.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
56,018
Likes
84,049

Ralph D. Russo @ralphDrussoAP 2h
Athletics for the most part doesn't fund the university much. So why would a college president, leading an institution whose mission is to educate young people and secondarily to keep them safe, have any motivation to allow the athletic department to rush the football team back?

Ralph D. Russo@ralphDrussoAP 2h
Ralph D. Russo (@ralphDrussoAP) | Twitter
The other thing is in pro sports, the players and leagues are in a partnership. If MLB wants to play in a bio-dome in Arizona, the players have to sign off and might because the stakes ($$) are really high for them too. But players aren't partners in college sports.

Ralph D. Russo @ralphDrussoAP 2h
Universities, athletic departments and sports programs play the role of caretakers to players. If an MLB or NBA player agrees to a return then gets sick, well that player had a say in the decision. If a college team comes back and players get sick, the school owns that failure.
 

Exit 4

This space for rent
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
7,821
Likes
11,826

Ralph D. Russo @ralphDrussoAP 2h
Athletics for the most part doesn't fund the university much. So why would a college president, leading an institution whose mission is to educate young people and secondarily to keep them safe, have any motivation to allow the athletic department to rush the football team back?

Ralph D. Russo@ralphDrussoAP 2h
Ralph D. Russo (@ralphDrussoAP) | Twitter
The other thing is in pro sports, the players and leagues are in a partnership. If MLB wants to play in a bio-dome in Arizona, the players have to sign off and might because the stakes ($$) are really high for them too. But players aren't partners in college sports.

Ralph D. Russo @ralphDrussoAP 2h
Universities, athletic departments and sports programs play the role of caretakers to players. If an MLB or NBA player agrees to a return then gets sick, well that player had a say in the decision. If a college team comes back and players get sick, the school owns that failure.
IDK - there is motivation for a student athlete to play and take the risk. Every athlete has a window of peak physical ability and opportunity. A lot of things need to be figured out, but I could see a scenario where fall college sports are restarted in October with shortened schedules and kids are given the opportunity to redshirt if they don't feel comfortable playing under these conditions. Basically an extra year of eligibility for all kids that dont want to play this fall. I think you'll see a ton of kids that return in these circumstances if the current trends continue which has shown this pandemic to not really impacting people under age 30 (there are of course exceptions, but those exceptions have been more akin to the flu scale).

But I don't think there is any return to college sports if we can't get this Abbott Lab machines on each campus for regular testing and we see some real progress on a vaccine and/or reliable treatment. College presidents will want an environment where there is some ability to monitor with precision unlike what we have at this moment.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
9,428
Likes
5,771
IDK - there is motivation for a student athlete to play and take the risk. Every athlete has a window of peak physical ability and opportunity. A lot of things need to be figured out, but I could see a scenario where fall college sports are restarted in October with shortened schedules and kids are given the opportunity to redshirt if they don't feel comfortable playing under these conditions. Basically an extra year of eligibility for all kids that dont want to play this fall. I think you'll see a ton of kids that return in these circumstances if the current trends continue which has shown this pandemic to not really impacting people under age 30 (there are of course exceptions, but those exceptions have been more akin to the flu scale).

But I don't think there is any return to college sports if we can't get this Abbott Lab machines on each campus for regular testing and we see some real progress on a vaccine and/or reliable treatment. College presidents will want an environment where there is some ability to monitor with precision unlike what we have at this moment.
It isn’t about the players decisions though. It is about the Universities’. If you are the president of Alabama and the football team comes back while students are out then the team has an outbreak, it is on you. Same scenario in the NFL and the league gets castigated but can pass off some blame to the players. It is one situation where there absolutely is a difference. In fact I could see a player or 3 saying “screw it. I am not playing now.” And if it is a middle class white kid, as it may well be, it will become a rallying point.
 

Exit 4

This space for rent
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
7,821
Likes
11,826
It isn’t about the players decisions though. It is about the Universities’. If you are the president of Alabama and the football team comes back while students are out then the team has an outbreak, it is on you. Same scenario in the NFL and the league gets castigated but can pass off some blame to the players. It is one situation where there absolutely is a difference. In fact I could see a player or 3 saying “screw it. I am not playing now.” And if it is a middle class white kid, as it may well be, it will become a rallying point.
It's not the player's decision? Wow - who knew? :rolleyes:

We'll see where we are medically. Obviously if we have no medical progress relative to where we are now then we aren't playing college ball this fall. We need a real medical breakthrough and then the question becomes in an environment where a medical breakthrough is being rolled out is how long do you wait until green light a return. I don't see us restarting college sports this fall if all we can offer is the current treatments (hydroxychloroquine and ventilators). There has to be a vaccine roll out in process. The rollout will probably in stages over many months with certain high risk types going first. For instance, to vaccinate 330 million Americans we would have to administer 2,750,000 vaccinations a day for four months to reach 100%. Not to mention manufacturing the stuff or the risk of giving 100% of the population a brand new vaccine almost simultaneously.

I do think there will be a super majority of kids that will want to play (in games w/o fans) even under the current medical environment because so far its pretty clear this is not having much of an impact on people under 30. Kids will have a hard time giving up this fall.
 
Last edited:

Redding Husky

Block “C” fan.
Joined
Mar 12, 2015
Messages
1,935
Likes
2,212
More people watch on TV than ever...and they are watching Alabama, Ohio State, LSU, Michigan, Clemson, et al...

National fans are watching marquis matchups...
As long as fans of NC State and Purdue think they have a shot at a national championship (no matter how small), they're involved. But if you go to 32 and those fans are locked out, they'll go fishing or just watch the NFL. They won't give a rat's ass about LSU vs. Stanford.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
4,032
Likes
3,731
If we get down to 32, I'm certainly not going to root for Penn State (the only Northeastern school to make the cut) or Texas (I live in Texas). To hell with them. I'll have zero skin in the game.
We are already down to 32. Hell, less than 32 who have a legitimate shot of winning. Yet, we still watch. Fans in states with no NFl team watch the NFL. Fans of schools with no shot of sniffing the playoffs watch now. That won't change on a large scale.

I believe you if you say you won't watch. You will not be in the majority on that one.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
5,286
Likes
2,098
As long as fans of NC State and Purdue think they have a shot at a national championship (no matter how small), they're involved. But if you go to 32 and those fans are locked out, they'll go fishing or just watch the NFL. They won't give a rat's ass about LSU vs. Stanford.
NC State fans and Purdue fans, the sane ones, don't think that they have any shot at the national championship.....just like Army, Wake, Duke, Rutgers, UConn, etc., etc.

You think that fans of an FCS program never turn on a FBS game?
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
9,428
Likes
5,771
For all the hoopla the National Championship game has been a wash ratingswise relative to the old BCS championship. Except for the first year the ratings are similar. And anecdotally there is not that much buzz. In fact it hasn’t done as well as some of the BCS games. It has ranged from a high of 18.6 in the first year to a low of 13.8 in 2019. Last season it rebounded a bit to 14.2 or so. The last 5 BCS games did 17.2, 15.3, 14.0 ( all SEC Ala-LSU) 15.1 and 14.8..Where there has been a significant fall off is in the New Years Day games. The 2 semi-finals draw about as well as top bowl games did but the no playoff games have dropped quite a bit. For comparison the ratings for the Super Bowl are in the 40s. Last five years for NCAA Basketball ranged from 9.2low to 16 high. the 2 lowest games have been Villanova finals, 9.2 and 10.6. So much for Villanova being a national draw FWIW. Bottom line I think is the CFB National Championship, while not exactly a bust, hasn’t really caught the public imagination, like it was sold to do. And I’m not sure it has helped the sport overall by making it the focus of the season. When you eliminate 80% of the teams by week 2 people lose interest Not gain.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
4,032
Likes
3,731
For all the hoopla the National Championship game has been a wash ratingswise relative to the old BCS championship. Except for the first year the ratings are similar. And anecdotally there is not that much buzz. In fact it hasn’t done as well as some of the BCS games. It has ranged from a high of 18.6 in the first year to a low of 13.8 in 2019. Last season it rebounded a bit to 14.2 or so. The last 5 BCS games did 17.2, 15.3, 14.0 ( all SEC Ala-LSU) 15.1 and 14.8..Where there has been a significant fall off is in the New Years Day games. The 2 semi-finals draw about as well as top bowl games did but the no playoff games have dropped quite a bit. For comparison the ratings for the Super Bowl are in the 40s. Last five years for NCAA Basketball ranged from 9.2low to 16 high. the 2 lowest games have been Villanova finals, 9.2 and 10.6. So much for Villanova being a national draw FWIW. Bottom line I think is the CFB National Championship, while not exactly a bust, hasn’t really caught the public imagination, like it was sold to do. And I’m not sure it has helped the sport overall by making it the focus of the season. When you eliminate 80% of the teams by week 2 people lose interest Not gain.
Good post, but your numbers show people haven't lost interest. The number of viewers is essentially the same.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
9,428
Likes
5,771
Good post, but your numbers show people haven't lost interest. The number of viewers is essentially the same.
That was the point. The hype was that this National Championship would be huge. It turns out that it isn’t. The people who watch college football are the people who watch college football. A few more actually watched under the BCS system most years but I think that’s just the overall decline in sports viewing. It didn’t bring new viewers. It didn’t bring new interest. If it ended tomorrow and was replaced by another system the game that was considered the “ best” would do comparable numbers.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
5,286
Likes
2,098
The NC game last year had 25.59 million watching....LSU-Clemson.

The Semi of Ohio State vs Clemson had 21.15 million...

Beat the pants off of BCS championship games.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
9,428
Likes
5,771
The NC game last year had 25.59 million watching....LSU-Clemson.

The Semi of Ohio State vs Clemson had 21.15 million...

Beat the pants off of BCS championship games.
Nope. BCS Games drew about the same. Last BCS game had 26.2 million. Highest NCFBC rating was the first year. 34.2. Highest BCs was Texas-USC which drew 36.63. Actually the BCS was a little better over it’s history but only marginally. The semi finals do a little better than the next 2 BCS games except when the 2nd BCS game was the Rose Bowl as traditionally played. Big 10-PAC 12. Those drew 24 some years. But the other bowl games typically do worse now.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
56,018
Likes
84,049

>>“First scenario is the season begins on time and isn’t altered much,” Fowler said. “Time is running out though, unless you feel four to six weeks is a lot of time. I'm told by the end of May, there has to be clarity. That’s about the deadline to get things going on time. Athletic directors have to plan for the what ifs. College football is way more complicated than any pro sports.

“Chancellors and presidents will make decisions for their schools, not the athletic directors.”

Without a vaccine and President Donald Trump extending social distancing nationwide into May, Fowler says the more likely scenarios include with a delayed start to the season this fall or one that begins in 2021. The latter has growing interest, he says.

“The people who are going to make these decisions will be guided by the epidemiologists and biotech people,” Fowler said. “Scenario 1 doesn’t feel super realistic. Scenario 2, the season starts late and maybe is shortened a bit. Reshuffling the Playoff sounds problematic. People are worried about the second wave. There’s a third scenario that’s gaining momentum — football in the spring — beginning at some pint in February.<<
 

Top