UConn needs a plan | Page 8 | The Boneyard

UConn needs a plan

Status
Not open for further replies.

whaler11

Head Happy Hour Coach
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,376
Reaction Score
68,269
I didn't know there was a right of first refusal. I don't recall your post pointing that out, but I would welcome a link if you have one. I don't remember ever seeing any positive ideas from you, probably because there have never been any.

I think UConn athletics is in its final years as a national program. I think the school and the league are going to pray for a miracle from ESPN, and when the next contract looks like this one, the Board of Trustees is going to pull the plug, slashing costs until we look like a MAC program. Ollie will take the next NBA job, Geno will retire, and we will be lucky to be UMass by the time it is done.

That is what I think will happen, because have not seen anything from anybody that indicates innovative thinking in growing revenues.

The ability of ESPN to match, in theory should have increased NBC's bid. You missed the obvious - NBC doesn't spend money on anything but the Olympics and the NFL and they admit publicly that they use the NFL as a loss-leader.

Nothing you have proposed generates enough money to change that outcome if you believe it.

Maybe you can squeeze a few million more out - so the subsidy is 25 or 26 instead of 28 or 29.

What difference does that make?

UConn turning into UMass? You are the one floating the plan that would have UConn/Buffalo/Army and UMass in the same football division. What would turn UConn into UMass faster than playing that disgusting division every year in football?

We got it - you want UConn to drop football and join the Big East - you are giving up. I don't know why you don't just come out and say that.
 
Last edited:

whaler11

Head Happy Hour Coach
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,376
Reaction Score
68,269
image.png
I didn't know there was a right of first refusal. I don't recall your post pointing that out, but I would welcome a link if you have one. I don't remember ever seeing any positive ideas from you, probably because there have never been any.

I think UConn athletics is in its final years as a national program. I think the school and the league are going to pray for a miracle from ESPN, and when the next contract looks like this one, the Board of Trustees is going to pull the plug, slashing costs until we look like a MAC program. Ollie will take the next NBA job, Geno will retire, and we will be lucky to be UMass by the time it is done.

That is what I think will happen, because have not seen anything from anybody that indicates innovative thinking in growing revenues.

BTW the ability to match was common knowledge. Is a picture better than a link? You tell me.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
43,953
Reaction Score
32,129
View attachment 14016

BTW the ability to match was common knowledge. Is a picture better than a link? You tell me.

And that is when I realized we were screwed.

Are you and zls the same person? Otherwise, you didn't know it either.

The ability of ESPN to match, in theory should have increased NBC's bid. You missed the obvious - NBC doesn't spend money on anything but the Olympics and the NFL and they admit publicly that they use the NFL as a loss-leader.

Nothing you have proposed generates enough money to change that outcome if you believe it.

Maybe you can squeeze a few million more out - so the subsidy is 25 or 26 instead of 28 or 29.

What difference does that make?

UConn turning into UMass? You are the one floating the plan that would have UConn/Buffalo/Army and UMass in the same football division. What would turn UConn into UMass faster than playing that disgusting division every year in football?

We got it - you want UConn to drop football and join the Big East - you are giving up. I don't know why you don't just come out and say that.

WE HAVE NO MONEY TO PAY FOR ANY OF THIS. Stop telling me that Buffalo is bad. No s%$# Buffalo is bad, but what are the options? We need to cut costs. What do you want to happen?

I will say it again because you are being extra dense today.

Here are the choices:

1) Raise more revenue from TV (joining a P5 league is not an option)

2) cut costs

3) Ask undergrads to pay the subsidy (about $1,400 per undergrad)

4) Ask ticket holders to pay the subsidy (about $1,000 per season ticketholder)

5) Ask the state to pay the subsidy (which is what we are effectively doing).

6) Find a sugar daddy to pay it.

Choices 3 through 6 are not remotely realistic long-term, even through we are actually currently doing one of those choices. Those are the ONLY options. Pick one.
 

pepband99

Resident TV nerd
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
3,714
Reaction Score
9,487
And that is when I realized we were screwed.

Are you and zls the same person? Otherwise, you didn't know it either.



WE HAVE NO MONEY TO PAY FOR ANY OF THIS. Stop telling me that Buffalo is bad. No s%$# Buffalo is bad, but what are the options? We need to cut costs. What do you want to happen?

I will say it again because you are being extra dense today.

Here are the choices:

1) Raise more revenue from TV (joining a P5 league is not an option)

2) cut costs

3) Ask undergrads to pay the subsidy (about $1,400 per undergrad)

4) Ask ticket holders to pay the subsidy (about $1,000 per season ticketholder)

5) Ask the state to pay the subsidy (which is what we are effectively doing).

6) Find a sugar daddy to pay it.

Choices 3 through 6 are not remotely realistic long-term, even through we are actually currently doing one of those choices. Those are the ONLY options. Pick one.

This is what makes your "argument" so infuriating - you're saying that:
"That is what I think will happen, because have not seen anything from anybody that indicates innovative thinking in growing revenues."

...but you would have absolutely no idea of movement on at least 1/2 of your points above. Maybe they're all in play? Maybe none? who knows? In your mind, though, as you can't see any movement, we should drop football, and anyone who disagrees is in fantasy land.
 

whaler11

Head Happy Hour Coach
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,376
Reaction Score
68,269
And that is when I realized we were screwed.

Are you and zls the same person? Otherwise, you didn't know it either.



WE HAVE NO MONEY TO PAY FOR ANY OF THIS. Stop telling me that Buffalo is bad. No s%$# Buffalo is bad, but what are the options? We need to cut costs. What do you want to happen?

I will say it again because you are being extra dense today.

Here are the choices:

1) Raise more revenue from TV (joining a P5 league is not an option)

2) cut costs

3) Ask undergrads to pay the subsidy (about $1,400 per undergrad)

4) Ask ticket holders to pay the subsidy (about $1,000 per season ticketholder)

5) Ask the state to pay the subsidy (which is what we are effectively doing).

6) Find a sugar daddy to pay it.

Choices 3 through 6 are not remotely realistic long-term, even through we are actually currently doing one of those choices. Those are the ONLY options. Pick one.

LOL I knew it because it was posted a bunch of times - Is that really what your argument has been reduced to, that I learned it from other posters? You still miss the point that counting on NBC to spend money was a fool's errand with or without the ESPN ability to match.

I will leave you alone to spin your crazy ideas that can't and won't work - but you've got them so everyone else is wrong.
 

UConn Dan

Not HuskyFanDan; I lurk & I like
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
2,854
Reaction Score
9,795
ESPN's first right of refusal on old Big East contract (and NBC's lowball offer):
image.gif
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
20,513
Reaction Score
44,465
LOL I knew it because it was posted a bunch of times - Is that really what your argument has been reduced to, that I learned it from other posters? You still miss the point that counting on NBC to spend money was a fool's errand with or without the ESPN ability to match.

I will leave you alone to spin your crazy ideas that can't and won't work - but you've got them so everyone else is wrong.
ESPN right of first refusal was discussed ad nauseum both on here and by regional talking heads. If that is when you realized we were screwed, maybe you should refrain from offering solutions. Marinato knew of espn right of first refusal as he mentioned it publicly on several occasions. The old big East guard loved espn more than anyone.

Looking back compare the right of first refusal in the Big East contract vs the Big 12's pro rata increase for expansion. I know hindsight is 20 20, but the BE, didn't have the best negotiators on their side that is for sure.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
43,953
Reaction Score
32,129
LOL I knew it because it was posted a bunch of times - Is that really what your argument has been reduced to, that I learned it from other posters? You still miss the point that counting on NBC to spend money was a fool's errand with or without the ESPN ability to match.

I will leave you alone to spin your crazy ideas that can't and won't work - but you've got them so everyone else is wrong.

Is there a 7th option? What is it? PLEASE share it with us.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
43,953
Reaction Score
32,129
ESPN right of first refusal was discussed ad nauseum both on here and by regional talking heads. If that is when you realized we were screwed, maybe you should refrain from offering solutions. Marinato knew of espn right of first refusal as he mentioned it publicly on several occasions. The old big East guard loved espn more than anyone.

Looking back compare the right of first refusal in the Big East contract vs the Big 12's pro rata increase for expansion. I know hindsight is 20 20, but the BE, didn't have the best negotiators on their side that is for sure.

Depending on how you define "the Big East", 14 of the 17 schools came out of realignment much better than most probably imagined they would do (well, Whaler knew those 14 would turn out great, just ask him). Only 3 schools lost in realignment: UConn, Cincinnati, and South Florida.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
6,374
Reaction Score
16,572
Depending on how you define "the Big East", 14 of the 17 schools came out of realignment much better than most probably imagined they would do (well, Whaler knew those 14 would turn out great, just ask him). Only 3 schools lost in realignment: UConn, Cincinnati, and South Florida.

I normally ignore all that you post ...

But, you continuously fail to recognize that our University and our Athletic Department has little in common with Catholic / Private colleges in the urban North. You do the best you can with what's in your opportunity set ... and I truly don't believe our place on the College Sports landscape is where we are today.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
20,513
Reaction Score
44,465
Depending on how you define "the Big East", 14 of the 17 schools came out of realignment much better than most probably imagined they would do (well, Whaler knew those 14 would turn out great, just ask him). Only 3 schools lost in realignment: UConn, Cincinnati, and South Florida.

I know you like to think you're way ahead of the curve with what you're proposing, but you're not. Everyone on this board knows things are tenuous at best for uconn athletics going forward. We also know our athletic subsidy is really not overwhelmingly greater than our competitors.

You seem to be upset that you don't know what uconn is doing for the future.
 

HuskyHawk

The triumphant return of the Blues Brothers.
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
31,862
Reaction Score
81,489
So what do we do about it?

Two choices:

1) Cut costs
2) Add revenue (Joining a P5 league is not part of this option for at least 9 years).

Which do you prefer?

This has no factual basis in reality. None. Revenue can increase by increased attendance, it will definitely increase when the AAC has a new deal in 3 years as well. Those are going to happen, even with the status quo. There is also no basis to conclude that a P5 invite can't happen for 9 years. It could happen in 2 months, or anytime really.

You tarnish your valid points by painting the "status quo" as if our current revenue stream is fixed and static. It is not. You saying it is doesn't make it so. The UConn Nike deal expires in two years by the way. It will increase, and UA will be in the mix.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
43,953
Reaction Score
32,129
I know you like to think you're way ahead of the curve with what you're proposing, but you're not. Everyone on this board knows things are tenuous at best for uconn athletics going forward. We also know our athletic subsidy is really not overwhelmingly greater than our competitors.

You seem to be upset that you don't know what uconn is doing for the future.

I am upset that UConn Athletics is on track to be third or fourth tier within a relatively short time frame. I have spent a lot of time and money on the basketball and football program, and had a lot of fun following both over the years, and they will likely be so different (and worse) as to be unrecognizable within just a few years. Maybe there is nothing anyone can do about it, but it doesn't look like anyone is even trying.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
43,953
Reaction Score
32,129
I normally ignore all that you post ...

But, you continuously fail to recognize that our University and our Athletic Department has little in common with Catholic / Private colleges in the urban North. You do the best you can with what's in your opportunity set ... and I truly don't believe our place on the College Sports landscape is where we are today.

14 teams came out of the Big East in great shape, and we didn't. Scoreboard.
 

junglehusky

Molotov Cocktail of Ugliness
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
7,186
Reaction Score
15,555

Second, UConn is clearly following through on their plan to expand the responsibilities of the athletic department beyond the field of play and into fundraising. Any of Benedict, Cegles or Goetz has the skills to run the day-to-day operations of the department while the others play the long game of raising the funds necessary to keep UConn in the top tier of athletic universities.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
43,953
Reaction Score
32,129

Second, UConn is clearly following through on their plan to expand the responsibilities of the athletic department beyond the field of play and into fundraising. Any of Benedict, Cegles or Goetz has the skills to run the day-to-day operations of the department while the others play the long game of raising the funds necessary to keep UConn in the top tier of athletic universities.


The "sugar daddy" plan. Better than nothing I guess.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
5,476
Reaction Score
13,065
Let's talk plan
We are coming off horrendous football years and have incurred about s $ 5000 shortfall in football. .
The way we do accounting the full cost of student aid is charged as an expenditure,with 85 scholarship players that makes up a significant piece of the $14,000 dollar football budget.
We are not that far from making football revenue neutral even in the AAC
We can readily get football back to a neutral position even in the AAC
Football even for G5 schools is the only sport where revenue increases are even possible.
For instance Uconn shared in the AAC $23,000m playoff / Boel distribution
In addition to the media deal. There was $80,000m distributed to G5 schools
We can increase revrnue by $2500m annually just by getting attendance back to early PP numbers
Why would you even consider dropping the only sport that sacould ve your athletic Dept.
Of 22 sports only one made money ,women's BB lost over $2,000m
22 is actually in the upper end for P5
Should we drop some sports probsbly.
Although the women's tourney is very profitable for the NCAA teams get $0 money
That's an outrage
Just an aside when UConn went FBS our endowment was about $150,000 it's now at $400,000 plus
Is football responsible? It didn't hurt
 
Last edited:

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
43,953
Reaction Score
32,129
Let's talk plan
We are coming off horrendous football years and have incurred about s $ 5000 softball in football. .
The way we do accounting the full cost of student aid is charged as an expenditure,with 85 scholarship players that makes up a significant piece of the $14,000 dollar football budget.
We are not that far from making football revenue neutral even in the AAC
We can readily get football back to a neutral position even in the AAC
Football even for G5 schools is the only sport where revenue increases are even possible.
For instance Uconn shared in the AAC $23,000m playoff / Boel distribution
In addition to the media deal. There was $80,000m distributed to G5 schools
We can increase revrnue by $2500m annually just by getting attendance back to early PP numbers
Why would you even consider dropping the only sport that sacould ve your athletic Dept.
Of 22 sports only one made money ,women's BB lost over $2,000m
22 is actually in the upper end for P5
Should we drop some sports probsbly.
Although the women's tourney is very profitable for the NCAA teams get $0 money
That's an outrage
Just an aside when UConn went FBS our endowment was about $150,000 it's now at $400,000 plus
Is football responsible? It didn't hurt

Football is revenue neutral in the AAC? Huh?
 

The Funster

What?
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,949
Reaction Score
8,655
The "sugar daddy" plan. Better than nothing I guess.

You really lack the ability to see anything other than your own narrative don't you? Clearly UConn is looking at all forms of alternative income but you just dismiss it as looking for a "sugar daddy".
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
5,476
Reaction Score
13,065
Football is revenue neutral in the AAC? Huh?
Our football revenue was $9,000m last year,
Do I have to tell you how bad we've been, so those numbers are historic lows.
A winning year gets you to $11,000m or $12,000m just in attendance.
A better bowl
A bigger playoff distribution
One only away paydays
Yes it's doable
Listen if anything I'm a basketball purest .
so I have no football agenda
Schools are fighting to be G5 I couldn't understand that until you look at the dollar potential of that sport even for those left behind.
Neutrality is doable but even if you get close its very beneficial to the school.

Plus football is $14,o00m of a $70,000 budget that includes 17 sports that contribute nothing.
So any solution that removes the only possible way of increasing revenue is counterproductive .
No comment on endowment?
 

CTMike

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
11,420
Reaction Score
40,763
Every 5-6 years, when heading to NJ or points south, I think : hmm, maybe the GWB won't be so bad this time. And every 5-6 years, I regret giving it the benefit of the doubt.

I say this because this is exactly how I feel trying to have a logic and fact based discourse with a gd lunatic named NelsonMuntz.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
311
Guests online
3,076
Total visitors
3,387

Forum statistics

Threads
155,799
Messages
4,032,013
Members
9,865
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom