UConn needs a plan

[Waquoit]

I get the point, the status quo is unsustainable. That doesn't mean we quit now. If we do, we're nothing but Rhody for the rest of our lives.

 

[pepband99]

Swap "Stay in AAC" for Collect Underpants, and "Join Big 10" for Profit, and that diagram reflects the expectations of 95% of this board.

It beats "drop football" for step 2, and "the true abyss" for 3, which is apparently your plan.

 

[Exit 4]

Plan is rather simple. Remain in the AAC through the mid 2020s when hopefully there will be another serious round of CRA where we either upgrade our status (B1G or ACC expansion) or if the P5 narrows, we collect better conference mates to enhance the AAC. That's it. Nothing more to it.

As for funding, UConn may have to drop a couple sports in the years ahead. Facilities will no longer be improved at the same pace, coaching staffs will be paid less and we'll have more admin churn. That all said, we still can probably run a decent program even on a skinny G5 budget.

 

[HuskyJ]

It’s a catch 22, So long as the AAC controls our Tier 3 rights UCONN is vastly underpaid to its detriment, but without those rights a good portion of the conference will get CUSA type money to the detriment of the conference which needs to keep improving. Either way UCONN loses. If we remain stuck here for too much longer creative thinking will be needed.

 

[junglehusky]

Nelson is not wrong that UConn should be thinking long term about future revenue streams. But, as always, he sees a world where UConn's outcome is always due entirely to decision made by UConn's leaders, and that's not reality. UConn can make a "plan" to sell their T3 on the market and to increase revenue. But execution of that "plan" probably requires 10, 20-something conditions to be met by outside conditions / parties not under UConn's control.

 

[Exit 4]

It’s a catch 22, So long as the AAC controls our Tier 3 rights UCONN is vastly underpaid to its detriment, but without those rights a good portion of the conference will get CUSA type money to the detriment of the conference which needs to keep improving. Either way UCONN loses. If we remain stuck here for too much longer creative thinking will be needed.

I think we are here until the great mid 2020 shake up when we'll see the B1Gs long term plans of a mega conference finally coalesce which will trigger backfill or spawn new castoffs.

 

[CTMike]

You are right, because every step UConn has taken so far has been tip top. Just look back to 2010-2011. How many schools coming off a national championship in basketball and a major conference championship in football got demoted to mid-major status the next year? It takes some talent to screw things up that badly.

Whenever I point out that the current situation is completely unsustainable, you and the rest of the Big 10 fanboys attack me, as if it is my fault the school is in this situation. You can search posts of mine from 2011 through 2013 where I pointed out that UConn was going to be playing in front of 20k people if it didn't do something, and look what happened. Even people taking shots at me in this thread, like Fishy, agree with where this is going to end up if the school continues to do nothing.

The Big 10 is NEVER happening, and I no longer see a viable path into the ACC. We will know soon enough about the Big 12, but if it doesn't happen in the next month or two, that door is shut. It is unlikely any conference is coming to our rescue. UConn has to rescue itself, and that is not going to happen while waiting for ESPN to give more money to the AAC. If UConn wants to show it deserves $20MM+ in media rights a year from someone, it should be generating more than $2MM.

I'm 99% sure I've typed this post before, but here we go :
No one is attacking or blaming you. Yes, UConn screwed up badly - look who was steering the ship at the time things went south (Hathaway et al, lest you put names in my mouth). Yes, the status quo is unsustainable (Do you really want a cookie for predicting smaller crowds in the AAC, as if you were the only one to think that?). Yes, UConn should explore out of the box options.

However - there are real world constraints on our current option set, and you have never once proposed a solution that's actually viable given our constraints. You've merely shouted louder that the fire is getting hotter. Gee, thanks.

UConn's plan - and it is a plan, whether you happen to agree with it or not - is to make themselves as attractive as possible in all areas so that when a slot opens up, we will be the most attractive option - simultaneously, have discreet discussions with the decision makers. No one knows when that slot will open. But you control the things you can control to always be ready for the next move. Previous administrations failed spectacularly at this.

While I think it's the best plan for now, it's also not a guarantee. You may have noticed that UConn has hired multiple skilled fundraisers in the last couple of years, from the Foundation to our new AD and his new assistant. This serves multiple purposes, the first objective being survival. The next objective is the continual improvements. If things were to work out sooner on the conference front, more can go in to improvements. If not, fundraising will be a critical lifeline.

Long term - I think that AAU is a goal for Herbst, her focus on research is not a coincidence. But that designation benefits the university as a whole, I don't think the primary objective is to satisfy any B1G requirements - though it's a nice side benefit if anything happens in 2024-2025.

If you disagree with the plan, by all means come up with a better one - but given multiple opportunities over the years, you haven't. Again that's not an attack or blame, that's a reflection of the very difficult position the university has been boxed in to. There are no easy answers, and saying "do something" doesn't make it so.

 

[NYUConn]

Nelson is not wrong that UConn should be thinking long term about future revenue streams. But, as always, he sees a world where UConn's outcome is always due entirely to decision made by UConn's leaders, and that's not reality. UConn can make a "plan" to sell their T3 on the market and to increase revenue. But execution of that "plan" probably requires 10, 20-something conditions to be met by outside conditions / parties not under UConn's control.

Also I love how all of Nelson's post involve some moaning of "What is the plan for closing the revenue gap?" Yet, he's stated that dropping football down to FCS or Independent and going all sports to the Big East is somehow going to help.

Football drives revenue in college sports. Independent of TV money, football generates much larger payouts annually through gate revenue, bowl revenue (both through individual appearances and the conference as a whole), merchandise rights and numerous other incidentals that you don't even think of (such as youth camps, athletic department fundraisers, etc. etc.).

The "plan" is that keeping Football at a competitive FBS level will do a much better job of closing the revenue gap then if we went all in on basketball and let football die on the vine.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Also I love how all of Nelson's post involve some moaning of "What is the plan for closing the revenue gap?" Yet, he's stated that dropping football down to FCS or Independent and going all sports to the Big East is somehow going to help.

Football drives revenue in college sports. Independent of TV money, football generates much larger payouts annually through gate revenue, bowl revenue (both through individual appearances and the conference as a whole), merchandise rights and numerous other incidentals that you don't even think of (such as youth camps, athletic department fundraisers, etc. etc.).

The "plan" is that keeping Football at a competitive FBS level will do a much better job of closing the revenue gap then if we went all in on basketball and let football die on the vine.

Your math is dead wrong. Football is a huge net negative financially for all the schools outside the P5 except Notre Dame, Boise and BYU.

You keep putting words in my mouth about football. I have issues with football's financials and it has some serious long-term challenges with concussions. But I am not saying that we need to drop football to save basketball, I am saying that the Board of Trustees or the state legislature will eventually decide to drop football to save the school's budget, and by that point basketball will already have been irrevocably damaged. Everything about the AAC is wrong, from the membership to the revenue to the fact that it sucks at basketball. Either we need to fix the AAC, or get out, and if Herbst doesn't move quickly, someone else is going to make that decision for her.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Plan is rather simple. Remain in the AAC through the mid 2020s when hopefully there will be another serious round of CRA where we either upgrade our status (B1G or ACC expansion) or if the P5 narrows, we collect better conference mates to enhance the AAC. That's it. Nothing more to it.

As for funding, UConn may have to drop a couple sports in the years ahead. Facilities will no longer be improved at the same pace, coaching staffs will be paid less and we'll have more admin churn. That all said, we still can probably run a decent program even on a skinny G5 budget.

Your plan will cost at least $100 million, probably more like $150 million, between now and 2025. I can not see a state legislature supporting UConn spending that kind of money on a football program that gets 20-25k fans a game when cops, teachers and firemen are being laid off and likely having their pensions cut.

 

[pepband99]

Your plan will cost at least $100 million, probably more like $150 million, between now and 2025. I can not see a state legislature supporting UConn spending that kind of money on a football program that gets 20-25k fans a game when cops, teachers and firemen are being laid off and likely having their pensions cut.

...at the cost of the basketball program? I'll take my chances, even with the legislature.

Next...

 

[Exit 4]

Your math is dead wrong. Football is a huge net negative financially for all the schools outside the P5 except Notre Dame, Boise and BYU.

You keep putting words in my mouth about football. I have issues with football's financials and it has some serious long-term challenges with concussions. But I am not saying that we need to drop football to save basketball, I am saying that the Board of Trustees or the state legislature will eventually decide to drop football to save the school's budget, and by that point basketball will already have been irrevocably damaged. Everything about the AAC is wrong, from the membership to the revenue to the fact that it sucks at basketball. Either we need to fix the AAC, or get out, and if Herbst doesn't move quickly, someone else is going to make that decision for her.

The risk that this all ends badly is a risk we have to take.

Quitting now and running to the big east means permanent disadvantage for our state institution. It means Syracuse, BC and Rutty will have superiority in perpetuity for media attention, fandom and ultimately support...even if two of the three are private.

We are riding this train until 2030.

 

[Exit 4]

Your plan will cost at least $100 million, probably more like $150 million, between now and 2025. I can not see a state legislature supporting UConn spending that kind of money on a football program that gets 20-25k fans a game when cops, teachers and firemen are being laid off and likely having their pensions cut.

We will run it like the university of Buffalo, Akron, Toledo, Tulsa and all the others who play at our level and have so for dozens of years w/o substantive tv money. They all do it and we will too. It boils down to coaches (salaries and head count) and facilities and we already have the facilities.

 

[NYUConn]

Your math is dead wrong. Football is a huge net negative financially for all the schools outside the P5 except Notre Dame, Boise and BYU.

You keep putting words in my mouth about football. I have issues with football's financials and it has some serious long-term challenges with concussions. But I am not saying that we need to drop football to save basketball, I am saying that the Board of Trustees or the state legislature will eventually decide to drop football to save the school's budget, and by that point basketball will already have been irrevocably damaged. Everything about the AAC is wrong, from the membership to the revenue to the fact that it sucks at basketball. Either we need to fix the AAC, or get out, and if Herbst doesn't move quickly, someone else is going to make that decision for her.

My friend, I think you better reread my post. I never claimed that football is profitable at the moment, but that it is a revenue generator. There's a difference.

UConn football staying competitive at the FBS level is an investment in the future of the Athletic Department. The school's BoT sees it and most people here do as well.

The reason why the P5 has profitable programs is simple: TV money. It's not that fielding a FBS football program is inherently a losing enterprise.

Look at UConn football as a long play on the future of our athletic department. At some point in the future I believe it will hit and we'll be looking at a truly profitable enterprise.

However, if we strip it down and give up on it now that is the equivalent of selling the program off at a substantial loss.

 

[huskymedic]

 

[Pudge]

UMass?

That's what I think about when Nelson starts one of these thought balloon going nowhere rants.

You need certain things today to keep competitive. And to think that the College Sports environment is going to stay static is idiocy. In 10 years ... YEAH ... I predict it is going to far different. Count on that!

 

[junglehusky]

ISPs are instituting data caps... if higher resolution streaming becomes standard they'll be more than happy to charge you extra for the extra GB you're going to need to get your entertainment. What does the "plan" say about that?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

UMass?

That's what I think about when Nelson starts one of these thought balloon going nowhere rants.

You need certain things today to keep competitive. And to think that the College Sports environment is going to stay static is idiocy. In 10 years ... YEAH ... I predict it is going to far different. Count on that!

We aren't going to make it to 2025 as a major athletic department unless we do something now.

It is funny that all these posters think it is completely realistic for another conference to increase UConn's rights fees from $2MM to $25MM, but don't think that UConn needs to do anything now to show it deserves that kind of increase. Why on earth would any league pay UConn anywhere near a full share of revenue when UConn is only making $2MM a year now?

I hate the AAC, but it is absurd that a conference with the kind of programs and metro areas in its footprint is not getting paid a lot more. A big part of it is the stupid right of first refusal that the Big East had with ESPN, but a lot of it is self-inflicted. Throwing their hands up and doing nothing is not an option right now. I would rather UConn athletics do something crazy and die fighting, then keep the status quo and die on its knees.

It looks like most of this board prefers death on their knees.

 

[Stainmaster]

It looks like most of this board prefers death on their knees.

That's what going to the NBE entails. So no, you're the one who prefers death on your knees.

 

[NYUConn]

Why on earth would any league pay UConn anywhere near a full share of revenue when UConn is only making $2MM a year now?

Because, despite making peanuts in TV money, UConn generated $72 Million in revenue last year and was in the black. They generated more revenue than 5 current P5 programs and outpaced the second closest G5 program (Cincy) by $20 million.

Not to mention we are top-to-bottom one of the most successful and competitive Athletic Departments in the nation.

This idea that because we are making peanuts in TV money that we aren't a valuable property is insane and shows you either have a rudimentary understanding of the economics behind college athletics or are simply being willfully ignorant to prove your own misguided point.

 

[junglehusky]

I would rather UConn athletics do something crazy and die fighting, then keep the status quo and die on its knees.

I would too.

There are manylevels of "do something crazy" with various levels of risk. There are smart people at UConn and other places trying to come up with creative solutions. Saying "let's try something crazy" isn't a plan, though.

 

[NYUConn]

Why on earth would any league pay UConn anywhere near a full share of revenue when UConn is only making $2MM a year now?

Also, lest you try to use our subsidy as rationale for our competitiveness with other schools, if you remove the subsidies UConn still outpaced the next closest G5 program in revenue (still Cincy) by over $15 Million and is right there with RU, Washington State and Utah in the rankings.

With Subsidy included:

48. UConn, $72.1 Million
49. Rutgers, $70.5 Million
50. Colorado, $67.8 Million
51. Oregon State, $64.8 Million
52. Washington State, $54.1 Million
53. Cincy, $52.5 Million

With Subsidies removed:

48. Oregon State, $58.3 Million
49. Colorado, $55.6 Million
50. Utah, $53.6 Million
51. Washington State, $48.1 Million
52. Rutgers, $47.2 Million
53. UConn, $44.7 Million
54, Cincy, $29.4 Million

Point is we are a P5 program regardless of where we are playing at the moment. To deviate from what we are doing right now is madness and will only put us at a competitive disadvantage in the long run.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Because, despite making peanuts in TV money, UConn generated $72 Million in revenue last year and was in the black. They generated more revenue than 5 current P5 programs and outpaced the second closest G5 program (Cincy) by $20 million.

Not to mention we are top-to-bottom one of the most successful and competitive Athletic Departments in the nation.

This idea that because we are making peanuts in TV money that we aren't a valuable property is insane and shows you either have a rudimentary understanding of the economics behind college athletics or are simply being willfully ignorant to prove your own misguided point.

$28 million of that revenue was university subsidy. In other words, it doesn't count.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Also, lest you try to use our subsidy as rationale for our competitiveness with other schools, if you remove the subsidies UConn still outpaced the next closest G5 program in revenue (still Cincy) by over $15 Million and is right there with RU, Washington State and Utah in the rankings.

With Subsidy included:

48. UConn, $72.1 Million
49. Rutgers, $70.5 Million
50. Colorado, $67.8 Million
51. Oregon State, $64.8 Million
52. Washington State, $54.1 Million
53. Cincy, $52.5 Million

With Subsidies removed:

48. Oregon State, $58.3 Million
49. Colorado, $55.6 Million
50. Utah, $53.6 Million
51. Washington State, $48.1 Million
52. Rutgers, $47.2 Million
53. UConn, $44.7 Million
54, Cincy, $29.4 Million

Point is we are a P5 program regardless of where we are playing at the moment. To deviate from what we are doing right now is madness and will only put us at a competitive disadvantage in the long run.

Some of that $44MM is from exit fees, and will be running off soon.

That said, i agree with your general point. Why shouldn't UConn make more in TV money if it is capable of generating this much revenue? There is clearly demand for the product, yet UConn gives it away.

 

[NYUConn]

Some of that $44MM is from exit fees, and will be running off soon.

That said, i agree with your general point. Why shouldn't UConn make more in TV money if it is capable of generating this much revenue? There is clearly demand for the product, yet UConn gives it away.

To your first point, of course subsidies count. Why wouldn't and shouldn't they? For starters nearly everyone in the P5 or G5 has a subsidy of some sort. These are state universities who serve the public interest. If the people of the state elect representatives who believe in these athletic programs and see fit to fund them to a certain level, why shouldn't that count towards revenue generated? When a state announces it's financials annually the money they take in from taxes is cited as revenue, so why should we all of a sudden categorize taxpayer money for UConn sports as something different?

Also, If you look at the American 990 that was posted elsewhere on the board, the amount of money the conference took in total from exit fees and entry fees in 2013 was just over $7 Million. Which means at best UConn is being subsidized to the tune of 1-2 million per year in exit fees at this point, so the bulk of that $44 million is earned revenue from our athletic department.

And why is UConn "giving it away" I invite you to look at my post on page 1 as to why your pipe dream plan of streaming UConn sports on Netflix is completely unworkable.

 

[zls44]

And why is UConn "giving it away" I invite you to look at my post on page 1 as to why your pipe dream plan of streaming UConn sports on Netflix is completely unworkable.

Because if UConn votes against something and loses the vote 13-1, they're giving it away.

#nelson'd

 

[shizzle787]

Plan is rather simple. Remain in the AAC through the mid 2020s when hopefully there will be another serious round of CRA where we either upgrade our status (B1G or ACC expansion) or if the P5 narrows, we collect better conference mates to enhance the AAC. That's it. Nothing more to it.

As for funding, UConn may have to drop a couple sports in the years ahead. Facilities will no longer be improved at the same pace, coaching staffs will be paid less and we'll have more admin churn. That all said, we still can probably run a decent program even on a skinny G5 budget.

There are only so many sports that we can drop, but I think cross country is the first to go. It is not an olympic sport. The Big 5 (basketball, football, baseball, soccer, hockey) should all stay as well as the olympic sports (swimming & diving and track & field). Golf and tennis I think we should keep for now but reassess later.

 

[shizzle787]

There are ways to reduce spending. A) Stop buying motor scooters for athletes. B) Cut sports we can't afford to have (namely cross country and maybe golf and tennis). There are ways to increase revenue. A) Win in football which results in more season ticket holders and more revenue. B) Schedule even tougher in basketball. Instead of 7 brand name opponents out of 13 in the non-conference for basketball, we need a minumum of 9 every year (with the other four being UMass, URI, Fairfield, Quinnipica, or Ivys).

 

[FartMan69]

We will run it like the university of Buffalo, Akron, Toledo, Tulsa and all the others who play at our level and have so for dozens of years w/o substantive tv money. They all do it and we will too. It boils down to coaches (salaries and head count) and facilities and we already have the facilities.

I mean you're post isn't off base but lumping us in with those schools makes me want to yarf.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

UConn is going to feel the consequences of not addressing the revenue issue even if we are invited to the Big 12. The buy in is going to be enormous. Boise figured out a way to get a better deal, why can't we? I think about 2/3's of the AAC would be better off with no conference TV contract and selling their content on their own. In 3 pages, no one has been able to defend the AAC deal.