UConn athletic department deficit reached $42 million in 2019 with a decline in ticket sales and league revenue

[Exit 4]

Yes. Read @JohnFSilver 's response to my first post in this thread.

Dropping to FCS does not materially costs while having a drastic effect on revenue.

I dont think Putterman's reporting on UConn athletics budgeting has an "objectivity" problem, but rather an effort problem. Its far easier to look at the negative budget issues of the past several years and just go with the easy conclusion. I don't think he has an ax to grind here tilting him in a particular direction. The issue, in part, is that he has no particularly affinity for UConn sports, particularly UConn football, so it makes flip FCS comments even easier to pen. I would say I guy like Mike DiMauro has a very conscience objectivity problem with respect to UConn. Putterman is just someone that takes these matters on the surface and digs no deeper.

 

[uconnbill]

Putterman is just looking for click bait and nothing else. This is a way to get The Boneyard to talk about this again while he gets clicks on his article.

Moving is a positive as it will lower travel cost overall. Football just needs to win some. I think basketball will take care of itself by playing rivals from the past like Georgetown, St. Johns and other schools.

 

[Husky25]

I dont think Putterman's reporting on UConn athletics budgeting has an "objective" problem, but rather an effort problem. Its far easier to look at the negative budget issues of the past several years and just go with the easy conclusion. I don't think he has an ax to grind here tilting him in a particular direction. The issue, in part, is that he has no particularly affinity for UConn sports, particularly UConn football, so it makes flip FCS comments even easier to pen. I would say I guy like Mike DiMauro has a very conscience objectivity problem with respect to UConn. Putterman is just someone that takes these matters on the surface and digs no deeper.

I thought about including an "effort" angle in my initial post, but it's tough to get down on reporters in traditional print media, given recent news on current industry conditions and how thin the human capital is already seemingly stretched. Is it laziness or the pressure to produce eye-drawing content?

Another factor, which I cannot address intelligently, is in the editing. How different is the finished product from the submitted draft? How does the headline alter the intended message?

 

[Palatine]

What a joke.

This is cost accounting and projecting at its worst.

 

[Pudge]

The clear thing - Putterman has a Northwestern/B1G mindset. Though from Connecticut, he’s not tried to qualify his reckless words at times with the grand picture of a sport undergoing dramatic structural change. In 10 years, the financing of all things P5 are going to show a significant caste system. In fact, the PAC 12 etc also may lag. Great consequences of the realignment leads to a oligarchy of about 5-8 super teams. Like English Premier League.

UConn has to find its way. But so does about 40 others as the $ demands continue to skew the sport.

 

[CL82]

The original calculation that you may have seen was annualized, but someone here pointed out it didn't accurately account for time value of money so I changed it to compared between now and the end of the AAC deal in terms of total money in today's dollars. So while they are not receiving $2 million a year, the net effect is $2 million less spent on planes that more positively affect UConn's balance sheet and/or could be used elsewhere.

Reasonable.

FWIW, I like your approach on this in that you willingly adopt suggestion that make sense to you. You were quick to include the cost of the production capital outlay when I mentioned it as well.

I consider your figures/analysis to be a tool for visualizing the savings/cost of the move. I find it useful.

 

[ZooCougar]

So what would be the cost to the school in terms of # of applications and prestige if we were to drop down to FCS or drop football and de emphasize other programs in the AD.

Of course we want something closer to profitability, but I have to think the school is making some of this money back somewhere else.

 

[UCFBfan]

So why do we play our games in Hartford if they not only charge us rent, but keep all concession profits and parking fees? I get why we have to play at the Rent. But why aren't we forcing Hartford's hand? They need us at the XL more than we need the XL. If the winning starts and the Big East play attracts more fans, as expected, fans will travel to Gampel. If we are in the red by so much, one area we should be looking to cut or increase money should be at the XL. Force Hartford, mainly the state's, hand. They want to be able to keep the XL open and active and without UConn, that's a hard sell. So if they want us, pony up and help us out.

 

[uconnric]

So why do we play our games in Hartford if they not only charge us rent, but keep all concession profits and parking fees? I get why we have to play at the Rent. But why aren't we forcing Hartford's hand? They need us at the XL more than we need the XL. If the winning starts and the Big East play attracts more fans, as expected, fans will travel to Gampel. If we are in the red by so much, one area we should be looking to cut or increase money should be at the XL. Force Hartford, mainly the state's, hand. They want to be able to keep the XL open and active and without UConn, that's a hard sell. So if they want us, pony up and help us out.

It's a lot easier to go to a game in Hartford than Storrs, especially for New Haven and Fairfield County fans. Plus there are an extra 6,000 seats in Hartford. UConn also needs XL to be successful.

 

[UCFBfan]

It's a lot easier to go to a game in Hartford than Storrs, especially for New Haven and Fairfield County fans. Plus there are an extra 6,000 seats in Hartford. UConn also needs XL to be successful.

No offense to those outside the Hartford area but if we need to get creative, we need to force the state's hand and seriously show a push out of the XL. Only schedule pre conference games there. All BE games are on campus.

Question, how many XL games are sold out that the extra 6k seats are filled?

I just think it's a flipping joke that the state charges it's state U and keeps the majority of the profits while it watches it whither on a vine due to finances and expendetures. There's only so much the AD can do to cut the deficit. Cutting out paying rent or getting the state to lower it and/or giving the University a cut of concessions, etc would help.

Considering that without UConn the XL would be a ghost town, I don't see how a hard ball approach wouldn't be the way to go.

 

[jdb50]

The XL "rental" fee needs to be addressed with all concessions and parking going to city coffers in addition to giving restaurants and bars a boost. But with a $40 million deficit two years in a row what has the Athletic Dept done to face the facts. Any reduction in administration costs? Any reduction in sports that no one watches or goes to? They have to show some effort other than running up a tab and underfunding the football coaching staff to make it no where near it's peer competitors.

 

[BlueMAB]

Question, how many XL games are sold out that the extra 6k seats are filled?

Sunday didn't sell out, but 4k+ more fans went than would have been able to go had the game been in Storrs.

More fans in the seats is always a good thing.

 

[hardcorehusky]

Seven home games, a 40,000 seat stadium, and 125,000 alumni that live in the state of Connecticut equate to a net revenue of $3.3 million. That seems unreasonable.

Season tickets for UConn games in the chairbacks required a seat donation of over $750 per seat. That boosts revenue quickly

 

[JohnFSilver]

What a joke.

This is cost accounting and projecting at its worst.

No offense to those outside the Hartford area but if we need to get creative, we need to force the state's hand and seriously show a push out of the XL. Only schedule pre conference games there. All BE games are on campus.

Question, how many XL games are sold out that the extra 6k seats are filled?

I just think it's a flipping joke that the state charges it's state U and keeps the majority of the profits while it watches it whither on a vine due to finances and expendetures. There's only so much the AD can do to cut the deficit. Cutting out paying rent or getting the state to lower it and/or giving the University a cut of concessions, etc would help.

Considering that without UConn the XL would be a ghost town, I don't see how a hard ball approach wouldn't be the way to go.

It is accounting mechanisms that make it appear worse. If UConn athletic department went away, the $17 million that are spent on scholarships wouldn't actually save the school that money. Actually, that would be a decline in tuition revenue of $17 million, and would go as a reduction. Can they make that number up somewhere? I don't think that saves the school money to eliminate those scholarships.

Just basic managerial accounting a work. This can really be abused if you want it to (UConn is accounting it correctly though):

"Also of use to financial planners are imputed costs. These are costs that are not actually incurred, but are associated with internal transactions. When work in process is transferred from one department to another within an organization, a method of transfer pricing may be needed for budgetary reasons. Although there is no actual purchase or sale of goods and materials, the receiving department may be charged with imputed costs for the work it has received. When a company rents itself a building that it could have rented to an outside party, the rent may be considered an imputed cost. "

With that in mind, State entity is paying a state entity. Then, the state backfills UConn's deficits with state money. The circular logic can drive you crazy.

 

[hardcorehusky]

John - getting back on Putterman, I have always found it confusing that newspaper reporters who cover a beat wouldn't go out of their way to be fair but lean toward favoring the product. I don't see how you get more readers when you piss off those who should be reading the article. Opinion guys can do that but not the beat writer?

 

[JohnFSilver]

John - getting back on Putterman, I have always found it confusing that newspaper reporters who cover a beat wouldn't go out of their way to be fair but lean toward favoring the product. I don't see how you get more readers when you piss off those who should be reading the article. Opinion guys can do that but not the beat writer?

That's a good question. I think I can write a master's thesis on this if I wanted to examine the role of sports writer as an intermediary between fan and team. (Side note: I also don't find anything wrong with what Alex writes about UConn. It's fair. Some editorial choices we can quibble with, but it's honest work).

It goes back to journalism we were taught in school and there are some really good points to consider. There is always a hometown lean in local coverage. For example, when UConn loses, the story is Uconn loses. Not how the other team won. That's called a hometown lede. You have to understand who your readers are.

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle. American sports journalism is very different than it is in other parts of the world. There is a more professional and even antagonistic tone to it. Sport reporters are taught to cover sports like the white house. And the press conferences have become dances like the press briefing at the white house. I think it has all evolved into a ridiculous charade. The football coach lies and tries to obfuscate the "TOUGH" question. The journalist tries to pin down a gotcha moment. It's dumb.

UConn sports has been a lifeblood to the media in this state. Think about it. For decades the newspapers have sold off their coverage. In the meantime, there is certainly a business and editorial wall that is built up that sometimes comes in conflict.

Journalists didn't really see the direct financial benefit of the UConn-Media relationship (I won a national award for my work covering the team about 10 years ago and got $100 and a football from the FWAA. No bonus from paper), so they have no stake in whether the coverage helps sell subscriptions and ads. That is actually coming to an end, IMO. I think UConn's fall from grace as a hot commodity has caused newspapers to suffer. Less interest, less sales, no more travel, reduced staff affects the journalist's livelihood. Upstart websites (Bleacher, SB Nation) and even The Athletic tie content to revenue production, meaning the writer has to be tied to revenue generation now. That was not always the case and is a change from traditional media.

So, in an era of declining revenue in newspapers, where content is now tied to revenue, why would you continue to agitate your customers? Speaking now as a publisher and not only a journalist, it's a question we have to ask. I don't know the answer.

Tell the truth is foremost. That is why the readers buy the paper. Good news and bad news have to be reported. But, how about other editorial choices?

Why does the journalist have to prove total independence from the team as far as wanting a team to be successful? It's weird and counterintuitive. I think harping on the negative, under the guise of independence, has created content that rings as inauthentic and totally divorces the customer from the work. It's like the media wants to antagonize their customer in many respects just to antagonize.

Here's what we wanted to do at the @UConndaily (Sign up at uconndaily.com

*What does the reader fan want to read? -- This comes from my time at ESPN after I left the Horde. I look at our job as to get content and information to fans. That's the job. Get them stories they want to read that help them understand their favorite team better. We are writing for the fans. That's who reads us.

You have to create content that the fans want. Informing them of bad news is a big part of that. Fans are passionate about the team, shouldn't you also be passionate about covering the team? I think you have to be passionate about the team you cover. If you are passionate, you will go after James Bouknight for running from police and try and find out what happened. So, negative news and news that reflect badly on the team and school are certainly apart of delivering honest and robust coverage. Fans want bad news.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

 

[Exit 4]

That's a good question. I think I can write a master's thesis on this if I wanted to examine the role of sports writer as an intermediary between fan and team. (Side note: I also don't find anything wrong with what Alex writes about UConn. It's fair. Some editorial choices we can quibble with, but it's honest work).

It goes back to journalism we were taught in school and there are some really good points to consider. There is always a hometown lean in local coverage. For example, when UConn loses, the story is Uconn loses. Not how the other team won. That's called a hometown lede. You have to understand who your readers are.

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle. American sports journalism is very different than it is in other parts of the world. There is a more professional and even antagonistic tone to it. Sport reporters are taught to cover sports like the white house. And the press conferences have become dances like the press briefing at the white house. I think it has all evolved into a ridiculous charade. The football coach lies and tries to obfuscate the "TOUGH" question. The journalist tries to pin down a gotcha moment. It's dumb.

UConn sports has been a lifeblood to the media in this state. Think about it. For decades the newspapers have sold off their coverage. In the meantime, there is certainly a business and editorial wall that is built up that sometimes comes in conflict.

Journalists didn't really see the direct financial benefit of the UConn-Media relationship (I won a national award for my work covering the team about 10 years ago and got $100 and a football from the FWAA. No bonus from paper), so they have no stake in whether the coverage helps sell subscriptions and ads. That is actually coming to an end, IMO. I think UConn's fall from grace as a hot commodity has caused newspapers to suffer. Less interest, less sales, no more travel, reduced staff affects the journalist's livelihood. Upstart websites (Bleacher, SB Nation) and even The Athletic tie content to revenue production, meaning the writer has to be tied to revenue generation now. That was not always the case and is a change from traditional media.

So, in an era of declining revenue in newspapers, where content is now tied to revenue, why would you continue to agitate your customers? Speaking now as a publisher and not only a journalist, it's a question we have to ask. I don't know the answer.

Tell the truth is foremost. That is why the readers buy the paper. Good news and bad news have to be reported. But, how about other editorial choices?

Why does the journalist have to prove total independence from the team as far as wanting a team to be successful? It's weird and counterintuitive. I think harping on the negative, under the guise of independence, has created content that rings as inauthentic and totally divorces the customer from the work. It's like the media wants to antagonize their customer in many respects just to antagonize.

Here's what we wanted to do at the @UConndaily (Sign up at uconndaily.com

*What does the reader fan want to read? -- This comes from my time at ESPN after I left the Horde. I look at our job as to get content and information to fans. That's the job. Get them stories they want to read that help them understand their favorite team better. We are writing for the fans. That's who reads us.

You have to create content that the fans want. Informing them of bad news is a big part of that. Fans are passionate about the team, shouldn't you also be passionate about covering the team? I think you have to be passionate about the team you cover. If you are passionate, you will go after James Bouknight for running from police and try and find out what happened. So, negative news and news that reflect badly on the team and school are certainly apart of delivering honest and robust coverage. Fans want bad news.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

Lots of excellent points here John...

 

[TheDoggPound]

What the State needs to do is stop IV-dripping $ into the XL and just rebuild or renovate. they're on the verge of investing almost $100m with nothing to show for it other than some updated concourses and jumbotron (along with unseen nuts/bolts expenses).. what benefit does it serve other than being politically expedient? Reboot the building and rework the lease, win-win for UConn.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

So why do we play our games in Hartford if they not only charge us rent, but keep all concession profits and parking fees? I get why we have to play at the Rent. But why aren't we forcing Hartford's hand? They need us at the XL more than we need the XL. If the winning starts and the Big East play attracts more fans, as expected, fans will travel to Gampel. If we are in the red by so much, one area we should be looking to cut or increase money should be at the XL. Force Hartford, mainly the state's, hand. They want to be able to keep the XL open and active and without UConn, that's a hard sell. So if they want us, pony up and help us out.

The state is UConn. UConn is the state.

The time to play tough with the state isn't when the taxpayers are subsidizing our awful football, and middling basketball programs.

 

[Husky25]

What the State needs to do is stop IV-dripping $ into the XL and just rebuild or renovate. they're on the verge of investing almost $100m with nothing to show for it other than some updated concourses and jumbotron (along with unseen nuts/bolts expenses).. what benefit does it serve other than being politically expedient? Reboot the building and rework the lease, win-win for UConn.

Lose-lose for CDRA.

Both a tear down/rebuild and major renovation would require a drastic reduction in seating in order to make way for premium boxes closer to the lower bowl. Location must come out of the clouds. Prices probably as well, but no one is spending $1,000s for that view and concessions no better than the old Coach's. There is not one person (or corporation) who can afford the "luxury" boxes who does not provide themselves or guests with a better viewing experience, either at home, Russian Lady, other otherwise.

A couple positives to a lower capacity are: 1) The arena will reflect it's urban environment. A 16,000 seat Northeast venue is not viable without a major league tenant and 2) presumable maintenance/overhead would be less in a smaller building.

On the flip side however, capital costs would be in the neighborhood of 5x the outlay mentioned above. Also, the venue loses virtually of it's attractiveness for a major tenant that has a 10,000 seat on-campus arena (Albeit, without alcohol sales).

A bigger issue for the state is the lease in East Hartford. I don't see how both parties do not benefit if they renegotiate the "All other non-UConn events at Rentschler Field MUST turn a profit" provision.

 

[UCFBfan]

The state is UConn. UConn is the state.

The time to play tough with the state isn't when the taxpayers are subsidizing our awful football, and middling basketball programs.

I was thinking more along the lines of the concession prices, etc. Yet how come the rent fees get put on our budget if the state is UConn, etc

 

[CL82]

That's a good question. I think I can write a master's thesis on this if I wanted to examine the role of sports writer as an intermediary between fan and team. (Side note: I also don't find anything wrong with what Alex writes about UConn. It's fair. Some editorial choices we can quibble with, but it's honest work).

It goes back to journalism we were taught in school and there are some really good points to consider. There is always a hometown lean in local coverage. For example, when UConn loses, the story is Uconn loses. Not how the other team won. That's called a hometown lede. You have to understand who your readers are.

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle. American sports journalism is very different than it is in other parts of the world. There is a more professional and even antagonistic tone to it. Sport reporters are taught to cover sports like the white house. And the press conferences have become dances like the press briefing at the white house. I think it has all evolved into a ridiculous charade. The football coach lies and tries to obfuscate the "TOUGH" question. The journalist tries to pin down a gotcha moment. It's dumb.

UConn sports has been a lifeblood to the media in this state. Think about it. For decades the newspapers have sold off their coverage. In the meantime, there is certainly a business and editorial wall that is built up that sometimes comes in conflict.

Journalists didn't really see the direct financial benefit of the UConn-Media relationship (I won a national award for my work covering the team about 10 years ago and got $100 and a football from the FWAA. No bonus from paper), so they have no stake in whether the coverage helps sell subscriptions and ads. That is actually coming to an end, IMO. I think UConn's fall from grace as a hot commodity has caused newspapers to suffer. Less interest, less sales, no more travel, reduced staff affects the journalist's livelihood. Upstart websites (Bleacher, SB Nation) and even The Athletic tie content to revenue production, meaning the writer has to be tied to revenue generation now. That was not always the case and is a change from traditional media.

So, in an era of declining revenue in newspapers, where content is now tied to revenue, why would you continue to agitate your customers? Speaking now as a publisher and not only a journalist, it's a question we have to ask. I don't know the answer.

Tell the truth is foremost. That is why the readers buy the paper. Good news and bad news have to be reported. But, how about other editorial choices?

Why does the journalist have to prove total independence from the team as far as wanting a team to be successful? It's weird and counterintuitive. I think harping on the negative, under the guise of independence, has created content that rings as inauthentic and totally divorces the customer from the work. It's like the media wants to antagonize their customer in many respects just to antagonize.

Here's what we wanted to do at the @UConndaily (Sign up at uconndaily.com

*What does the reader fan want to read? -- This comes from my time at ESPN after I left the Horde. I look at our job as to get content and information to fans. That's the job. Get them stories they want to read that help them understand their favorite team better. We are writing for the fans. That's who reads us.

You have to create content that the fans want. Informing them of bad news is a big part of that. Fans are passionate about the team, shouldn't you also be passionate about covering the team? I think you have to be passionate about the team you cover. If you are passionate, you will go after James Bouknight for running from police and try and find out what happened. So, negative news and news that reflect badly on the team and school are certainly apart of delivering honest and robust coverage. Fans want bad news.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

Great stuff John. It is intelligent and honest look at the business. Very interesting.

A couple of thoughts:

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle.

Hmmm, not always. Using that as a default conclusion allows parties to manipulate the coverage. Better, I think, to define the positions and list the facts that support and contradict them, rather than assume a the middle position will be right as a default.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

This. As you note, you can maintain your journalistic integrity and still write an article that is informed by your readers' worldview.

Again, thanks for taking the time to put together such a thoughtful post. I enjoyed it.

 

[CL82]

The state is UConn. UConn is the state.

The time to play tough with the state isn't when the taxpayers are subsidizing our awful football, and middling basketball programs.

On the other hand, the University subsidizes the state's awful basketball and middling football venues.

 

[hardcorehusky]

That's a good question. I think I can write a master's thesis on this if I wanted to examine the role of sports writer as an intermediary between fan and team. (Side note: I also don't find anything wrong with what Alex writes about UConn. It's fair. Some editorial choices we can quibble with, but it's honest work).

It goes back to journalism we were taught in school and there are some really good points to consider. There is always a hometown lean in local coverage. For example, when UConn loses, the story is Uconn loses. Not how the other team won. That's called a hometown lede. You have to understand who your readers are.

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle. American sports journalism is very different than it is in other parts of the world. There is a more professional and even antagonistic tone to it. Sport reporters are taught to cover sports like the white house. And the press conferences have become dances like the press briefing at the white house. I think it has all evolved into a ridiculous charade. The football coach lies and tries to obfuscate the "TOUGH" question. The journalist tries to pin down a gotcha moment. It's dumb.

UConn sports has been a lifeblood to the media in this state. Think about it. For decades the newspapers have sold off their coverage. In the meantime, there is certainly a business and editorial wall that is built up that sometimes comes in conflict.

Journalists didn't really see the direct financial benefit of the UConn-Media relationship (I won a national award for my work covering the team about 10 years ago and got $100 and a football from the FWAA. No bonus from paper), so they have no stake in whether the coverage helps sell subscriptions and ads. That is actually coming to an end, IMO. I think UConn's fall from grace as a hot commodity has caused newspapers to suffer. Less interest, less sales, no more travel, reduced staff affects the journalist's livelihood. Upstart websites (Bleacher, SB Nation) and even The Athletic tie content to revenue production, meaning the writer has to be tied to revenue generation now. That was not always the case and is a change from traditional media.

So, in an era of declining revenue in newspapers, where content is now tied to revenue, why would you continue to agitate your customers? Speaking now as a publisher and not only a journalist, it's a question we have to ask. I don't know the answer.

Tell the truth is foremost. That is why the readers buy the paper. Good news and bad news have to be reported. But, how about other editorial choices?

Why does the journalist have to prove total independence from the team as far as wanting a team to be successful? It's weird and counterintuitive. I think harping on the negative, under the guise of independence, has created content that rings as inauthentic and totally divorces the customer from the work. It's like the media wants to antagonize their customer in many respects just to antagonize.

Here's what we wanted to do at the @UConndaily (Sign up at uconndaily.com

*What does the reader fan want to read? -- This comes from my time at ESPN after I left the Horde. I look at our job as to get content and information to fans. That's the job. Get them stories they want to read that help them understand their favorite team better. We are writing for the fans. That's who reads us.

You have to create content that the fans want. Informing them of bad news is a big part of that. Fans are passionate about the team, shouldn't you also be passionate about covering the team? I think you have to be passionate about the team you cover. If you are passionate, you will go after James Bouknight for running from police and try and find out what happened. So, negative news and news that reflect badly on the team and school are certainly apart of delivering honest and robust coverage. Fans want bad news.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

John - thank you. I did not realize The Athletic has gone to pay as read model. I guess that is great for the person who has the coverage for a winning team or a really big name. That also makes it imperative to learn different information or to be perceived as a source of different information in order to drive activity toward the article.

You bring up so many great points - PS - love the UCONN Daily!!

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I was thinking more along the lines of the concession prices, etc. Yet how come the rent fees get put on our budget if the state is UConn, etc

On the other hand, the University subsidizes the state's awful basketball and middling football venues.

It's all coming from the same bucket though. The AD budget is a small drop in the budget for the amount of funding the state gives to UConn.

We're really going to argue over UConn getting to show the revenue from some hot dogs at the XL Center, as opposed to keeping Hartford happy so they continue to throw money at the school?

 

[CL82]

It's all coming from the same bucket though. The AD budget is a small drop in the budget for the amount of funding the state gives to UConn.

We're really going to argue over UConn getting to show the revenue from some hot dogs at the XL Center, as opposed to keeping Hartford happy so they continue to throw money at the school?

I think that’s a false choice.

I think that you can make a good case that the CDRA is being unfair in their pricing toward UConn. If you have a state legislator raise the issue in that context you probably have an easy go getting it through.

 

[Irishfan]

Season tickets for UConn games in the chairbacks required a seat donation of over $750 per seat. That boosts revenue quickly

That‘s pretty cheap, but even if there were only 5,000 of these season tickets, the seat donations alone would exceed $3.7 million.

 

[huskymedic]

The Hearst CT take on UConn AD Finances:



Alternate access link

 

[UCFBfan]

The Hearst CT take on UConn AD Finances:



Alternate access link

I love the dig at the football team by adding the stat on their record this year and the past 4. I didn't happen to catch anything in there about the basketball team, that also lost money, and how they haven't had a winning record or made the post season since 2016. Once again, I like how they twist the narrative. He doesn't come out and say football is the problem or cut it, but it is the only program with it's own point about it's failure last season.

 

[billybud]

I assumed that pointing out the football record was a shorthand way of explaining declined football revenue...ticket sales, donations, etc as mentioned in the UConn admin quote.