Random thoughts at the Bye

[Marbles90]

We spent almost $10M on annual travel as an athletic department during the AAC days. Football travel was roughly half of that. Assuming travel costs are up, you’d need probably over $10M from the football-only conference to make it a smart financial move. I don’t think you find that anywhere.

You have to show the delta to what we are spending today to what we would spend to go to the PAC. We are already traveling to places like Houston, Laramie and Colorado Springs. Going to places like Boise, Fresno, San Diego is probably going to cost more, but how much more? And since we are getting so little from our football media deal, assuming we get a bump going to the PAC, I would say it will probably wash. And even if it costs more, having a chance - even it it is an outside chance to get to the playoffs is worth it for football only.

I generally agree though I would seriously consider a football only membership from the AAC or the PAC 12. Not the MAC.

I agree, too. This only applies to the AAC or PAC. Even dominating in the MAC (or Conf USA) there is still pretty much no chance to get to the playoffs. I think the same is true for the Sun Belt or MW.

 

[CTBasketball]

Rentschler Field cost $90M so the state was willing to pay. It's a moot point now and at the time it seemed like a good decision financially and logistically.

UConn Football does have some regional games at Syracuse, DE, Buffalo, BC but it also has to travel to Rice and FAU. The AAC is not a bad conference with Army, Navy, Temple, USF, ECU, Memphis for competition and location. I don't think travel is a big issue for football only. The AAC wouldn't let us keep football there 6 years ago so I don't think it would work now. I'm surprised if there haven't been discussions between the AAC and UConn. But it may become necessary to join a conference very soon.


I hate when people compare UConn's situation to Miami and UCLA. just stop. Those are major cities. And the folks at Pittsburgh regret tearing down Pitt Stadium

View attachment 112195

The state was willing to pay because they wanted to posture themselves to have the Patriots move here. The state will be unwilling to pay hundreds of millions to build an on-campus stadium so that the die hard 10% of the fanbase can have their way. Especially in the ever changing landscape of college athletics.

It’s a financial non-starter unless there’s significant private money, which, is unlikely. The Rent is what we have and it’s more than fine, better than most stadiums.

 

[Ewekon]

My thoughts to your thoughts:

1. Yes, but he will have to have the right opportunity. And keeping him for Year 2, 3, etc. will be difficult.
2. No. Should not take any MAC or Pac-X offer, financially it’s a bad move when you consider cost of travel vs. income from contract.
3. No. Even if you built a 50k on-campus stadium the towns of Storrs and Coventry would find ways to gatekeep/eliminate tailgating and all the fun. Would be very BC-like.
4. Yes.
5. Agree.

Imho … MAC football is a step back from what we can bring as a soon - to - be high visibility independent. We can schedule 5 total MAC/AAC games each year if we want. Would like BCU, Syracuse and Navy home & home locked in.

 

[CTBasketball]

Where did you come up with those travel numbers? If we had 6 travel games that would approximate $800,000 per trip. 100 hotel rooms @ $200 per is only $20,000. Meals might be another $20,000. Charter flight perhaps $150,000. That’s a long way from $800,000.

I was quoting an article from Daily Campus awhile back, but I went back and checked financial reports. You are mainly correct with football travel. Don’t trust the media, especially college media lol.

$1.2-1.8M for football travel in FY19 which included 5 away games (at Memphis, at ECU, at Tulsa, at Indiana, and at UCF). Assuming some additional costs with that so maybe no more than $2M annually. With 6 games to the West Coast that number would increase. So maybe it would pay off to get a football only contract, would have to see the contract details. I can re-run numbers for other fiscal years in my free time.

I doubt AAC or MAC would pay off. PAC-X potentially could…unsure.

 

[Kolumbo]

The state was willing to pay because they wanted to posture themselves to have the Patriots move here. The state will be unwilling to pay hundreds of millions to build an on-campus stadium so that the die hard 10% of the fanbase can have their way. Especially in the ever changing landscape of college athletics.

It’s a financial non-starter unless there’s significant private money, which, is unlikely. The Rent is what we have and it’s more than fine, better than most stadiums.

The state paid $90M after the patsies already decided to go with Gillette. Rentschler is fine and it is what we have, but that's about it. It will never be much more than a shell stadium. It's not worth making it a great college football stadium because it is located in an isolated industrial complex and rarely used.

 

[Jetskies]

Rentschler Field cost $90M so the state was willing to pay. It's a moot point now and at the time it seemed like a good decision financially and logistically.

UConn Football does have some regional games at Syracuse, DE, Buffalo, BC but it also has to travel to Rice and FAU. The AAC is not a bad conference with Army, Navy, Temple, USF, ECU, Memphis for competition and location. I don't think travel is a big issue for football only. The AAC wouldn't let us keep football there 6 years ago so I don't think it would work now. I'm surprised if there haven't been discussions between the AAC and UConn. But it may become necessary to join a conference very soon.


I hate when people compare UConn's situation to Miami and UCLA. just stop. Those are major cities. And the folks at Pittsburgh regret tearing down Pitt Stadium

View attachment 112195

yeah... the Rent doesn't belong in the same sentence as 2 NFL stadiums (acrisure / hard rock) & one of the most prestigious venues in all of college football (rose bowl)

those are exceptional cases of off-campus stadiums working out, that unfortunately do not form a basis for us trying to pull it off.