Meeps

Also, give me access to the main forums. You said my presence was a nice change from bull on bull in-fighting. Let me spread the wealth. C'mon, there's nothing like a good ol fashion gang jumping every now and then.

The necessity of an IPF was never in question. I appreciate - if nothing else, you're consistent. It's kind of a shame we've hit the end of the line. I was really hoping you'd at least attempt to rebut why renting was better, but it's clear you never believed that in the first place, and neither does Puc. Hopefully you guys will figure it out before the chairs realign in 2024 and if not, i'll be interested to see how that works out for you come realignment time.

This might surprise you but this happens across the country during big games. We have concourses that people can stand at the top of stadium to view the game. Some of this area has been blocked off because our AD build Loge suites + Roth Tower connects to this concourse. But there is about 280 degrees of standing room at the top that is unused. There is also standing room available in front of mid level seats that are elevated, so the people standing in these areas don't block people's view. Normally that space is used to go from one section to another, or down below where the concessions are. 45,000 is seats available, that's not max capacity. Between those two areas, they could probably hit 50k.

I guess this is further proof that you would rather stick your head in the sand when information is being presented from a non-bull that highlights EXACTLY why my point made sense that having an OCS is superior than renting a stadium. Instead, you opt for a fellow-bull's opinion that wasn't really backed up by anything other than it being his opinion. And you call Knight fans delusional? Delusional: a disorder where a person has trouble recognizing reality. A delusion is a false belief that is based on an incorrect interpretation of reality. The reality is that there are numerous reasons why an OCS is better, and by saying that the only way to know for sure is to have a feasibility study is EXACTLY why you're delusional. You can't admit reality because you willfully ignore evidence and use a bogus premise that "well gee - if only we had done an OCS feasibility study" - Newsflash, you did! Why don't you go through that feasibility study and prove me wrong?

This is exactly what i'm talking about. You have other people try to make points for you instead of addressing them directly yourself; and then you talk big after Puc, et al come back with counter points. Why don't YOU show how any of what I posted is incorrect? Why don't you break down your financial statements showing why renting is financially superior? We've already done the groundwork for you. Simply click on the link, go through the itemized lines and form a coherent argument in support of renting. But you're not going to do that. It's simple, you can't. There are an overwhelming amount of reasons why an OCS is better than renting. And until you can articulate why there are more reasons to rent, than own an OCS - my point remains proven.

No you're right. Renting a stadium and not getting to take advantage of "keeping the dollars associated with tickets, parking, suites, and concessions" must be an opinion, not a fact - according to you. I've already shown that UCF is turning a net positive profit of 3+ million per season and thats AFTER the stadium debt/interest is being paid off and is on track to have the whole stadium paid off in 20 years. That's a fact. It's also a fact that the maintenance over a 20 year period is also going to be FAR less than the money you're losing out over renting Ray Jay for 20 years. That statement alone trumps any argument, period. As Puc says, the blue chip programs have had stadiums that have been paid off for decades and they are reaping the rewards for that initial investment. Trying to equate a $50 million dollar OCS investment versus a $500 million-$1 billion dollar NFL stadium is not even apples to oranges. It's like apples to durian. Those massive stadiums aren't nearly as lucrative due to the incredible amount of interest alone being paid annually. To recap - these are facts: 1. In the AAC - a 65k stadium that can only be filled to half unless playing FSU/UF etc does not trump a normal AAC schedule where the stadium is filled at half capacity. 2. The "home game" advantage is 100% apparent with an OCS. (https://247sports.com/LongFormArticle/College-football-toughest-environments-2019-Clemson-Alabama-Texas-Georgia-Ohio-State-UCF-127802172/#127802172_6) Stands very close to the field (far, far closer than others) Enclosed stadium, with echoing aluminum That's how 47K sounds like 70K. We pack 47K in much, much closer than other stadiums pack in <45K in their lower bowl. "Many of the players said they were able to feed off the energy of the announced crowd of 47,795 in attendance at Spectrum Stadium.“Knight Nation was unreal,” Connors said. “That was the loudest … even away games, when we were at Michigan or South Carolina … that was the loudest stadium I’ve ever been in. 3. Team pride is exponentially elevated when the home game is played on the school's campus compared to off site in a rented stadium. 4. Bringing alumni BACK to campus, has a profound effect on people willing to donate and not just attend games. 5. Paying off a stadium WHILE STILL having money left over trumps renting a stadium and LOSING money yearly. 6. The fan experience derived from being in an OCS where traditions take root is what college football is all about. No matter how many gators fill up Ray Jay, it's never going to come close to what it will be like on black friday this year. (Even Chris Fowler and Herbstreit mentioned this during the UCF/Cincinatti game last year [that an OCS experience trumps college NFL stadium games). 7. Our net position will continue to increase year after year as the interest goes down and thus, more money being made from each home game will allow for higher coaching salaries and thus a better chance to hold onto successful coaches. 8. Being able to modify the stadium at will based on the needs of the conference (i.e. adding more and more luxury suites, expanding Roth tower, adding stadium wide alcohol and all the revenue generated goes to the school) is fundamentally better than watching that income go to the Glazers/City of Tampa Bay. TripleB, feel free to dispute any of these in favor of your current situation being superior than finding a way to build an OCS.

I stand corrected, you are capable of producing a post without being disparaging in the process. Puc's way involves producing points and counterpoints, yours posts fail to address anything specifically. One could say your approach is the ol' college group project effort. Supply a bunch of fluff and see if anything sticks. When that fails, use name calling as a distraction. Both approaches failed woefully because there hasn't been a single thing either of you have said that has shown why renting is superior in any way, regardless of where our two programs are or have been. On the other hand, we've provided a myriad of reasons why an OCS is better from both a financial and fan standpoint. We'll just have to agree to disagree since you vehemently think we're wrong, and facts be damned.

What high school stadiums have 44,000 seats? Hint: there aren't any. However, there are several P5 teams that don't even have stadiums with as many seats as we have. Furthermore, the stadium was built from the ground up with the capability of going to 65,000. But, you know - facts and all that be damned. Saying this AAC is the best for us and the worst for you, is a red herring and has zero to do with the current discussion. If what you guys are doing is superior, why is usf never a front runner in expansion discussions? If usf is mentioned, it is ALWAYS in conjunction with UCF. However, there are plenty of references saying UCF + Cinci/Houston makes more sense. As for saying your program has done a better job at figuring out what conferences, what specifically has usf done? That's like saying, well - I played the lottery and won. It wasn't luck, I am just good!! If you think this time we'll get it right, and you won't - then I guess there is a part of you that believes we've done something superior. Care to shed some light on that?

If you truly believe that, hey - that's great. I know there are a number of members here who disagree with that notion. Enjoy rearranging chairs on the deck of the titanic. Like I mentioned before, you should pay a visit to Orlando and see for yourself what an OCS does for a program before you make any lasting judgement.

Do you find that throwing insults at people and offering zero to discussions, works in real life? In addition to the barrage of insults, you come across like you've actually proven something. Here's a newsflash - you haven't offered a single thing to disprove anything of what I or SquareKnight have presented. Instead, you have rode Puc's coat tails, all the while ignoring all the facts we've thrown your way. It's absolutely comical that you think I haven't proved my point and then some. But this is to be expected from someone like you where rationale and discourse is clearly above your capability. Now that i've exposed just how inept you are, i'm sure the next step for you is to remove me from the board. Then again, that would just prove my point.

According to the feasibility study, there is interest in an OCS, just not what was proposed. The study suggested building a lavish 30k seat stadium for a ridiculous amount of money. That doesn't satisfy two things, 1. 30k isn't large enough and 2. A $200+ million dollar stadium would be incredibly taxing on the athletics department. It takes vision to see that having an OCS; one that is affordable has long term benefit. But your standards are through the roof of what you should build and thus the lack of any forward traction. As they say, a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. The longer your athletics procrastinates about building an OCS - the farther out of reach it will become.

Because your program was elevated to the Big East without a body of work that justified the move. You've tasted the finer things in life and are in denial that it's all going to come back. You play at an NFL stadium and swallowing the pill of a Spectrum stadium-like OCS would be like going from the CEO to a mid-level manager. The difference is, the ladder can be climbed back up but you're not ready or willing. Instead, you stay unemployed sending out your resume to CEO jobs but that phone is never going to ring.

This is a false equivalence. There is a reason UCF has been one of the top schools in the AAC year in and year out for attendance. No matter how much both programs inflate their numbers, UCF is averaging far more actual fans in the stadium than usf is and i'm not just referring to 2017 and 2018. You guys were 7-0 with an abysmal fan turnout. Maybe just maybe there are several facets that bring people to games and having pride is a major factor.

I think you're spinning your tires on this. It's a fact that after all the gross revenue and expenses come in, UCF is still making $3 million in profit (not per game, but at the end of the year). That number would be much higher but we keep adding more things to the stadium that have to be paid off first (comes out of the total profits) plus we owe several million in interest each year. It's also a fact that at the end of the year, usf is losing several million dollars that has to be subsidized.

You kind of just proved our point. You said the difference is between our programs is based on the increased athletic fee's collected due to having a larger student body. "When you fall back to 0-12 the numbers will not be particularly favorable regardless of where you play the games" Does our student body population fluctuate based on what the football team is doing? The fee's collected when the team is doing well shouldn't be a major factor based on everything you've been saying. Why would anyone blame the OCS due to a significant drop in attendance? Our coach basically mailed it in and the team essentially gave up. People aren't keen on spending money when that situation occurs (see usf's bowl attendance last year).

Botching what part up? We've already established that $2-$3 million in revenue per game is being attained. Puc steered the conversation to net versus gross. We've also proven that UCF is coming ahead in the green with making $3+ million in profits after settling the debt from stadium corp. So not only is the stadium being paid off, we're also making money. USF on the other hand is losing several million each year and that's without an OCS that comes with interest and maintenance. I've moved onto OCS > Renting because we've moved past the initial conversation. That probably went over your head because like most usf fans, living in denial is far more gratifying than facing reality.

So if the difference in revenue is not directly attributed to having an OCS, how is UCF's revenue significantly more than USF? The 2018-2019 numbers are going to show a larger and larger gap. Ray Jay is simply giving you guys a deal where you don't make much if any at all on home games. The Big East war chest is running out and Strong's salary is no longer being subsidized. UCF is constantly adding more and more revenue generating premium seating and amenities. If/when they ever do decide to do stadium wide alcohol sales, that number is going to balloon. The stadium will be paid off sooner rather than later and the ensuing maintenance will be a drop in the bucket compared to the interest on the initial loan. In your defense, I do understand that a stadium with 30k seats is a non-starter. Instead of pretending like usf deserves an NFL quality stadium, why not see the hand writing on the wall and compromise? If not, you guys are going to get lapped.

Looks like you didn't make $5 trillion. https://www.usf.edu/business-finance/resource-management-analysis/documents/operating-budget-17-18.pdf https://www.usf.edu/business-finance/resource-management-analysis/documents/operating-budget-18-19.pdf According to this information USF athletics is losing money each year. 2016-2017 Football related expenses: $10,605,958 2018-2019 Football related expenses: $9,495,317 https://www.usf.edu/business-finance/resource-management-analysis/documents/operating-budget-17-18.pdf 2016-2017 Total Revenue: $40,594,297 Total Expenditures: $45,727,464 USF had to transfer in $7,316,244 to cover the expenses + whatever. Ending balance: $2,184,031 2017-2018 Total Revenue: $35,669,815 Total Expenditures: $47,420,315 USF had to transfer in $9,745,777 to cover the expenses + whatever. Ending balance $203 In contrast: https://flauditor.gov/pages/nonprofit_forprofit rpts/2017 ucf athletics association inc.pdf UCF has the following: 2016 Total revenue: $52,394,526 Total expenses: $47,117,670 2017 Total revenue: $57,476,374 Total expenses: $48,901,937 No matter how you slice it, UCF is making significantly more money than usf is. And you guys? You have to have usf academics bail our your athletics each year by transferring in millions. The cost of your athletics is about to go way up. 2018 and onward are going to show an even larger and larger divide. But keep sticking your head in the sand about renting is a better position for you guys.

Profit is not synonymous with net. I never claimed nor did Bianchi claim that there is a net profit of 4 million per home game. Based on the original premise that home games make $3-$4 million (per Bianchi), we don't have data to prove or disprove that. However, we can take numbers from previous years and see how much is actually coming in. While it did not show the range quoted, it shows that there is a net positive after all is said and done. You can claim that those numbers are subsidized by the student athletic fee, but every G5's athletic budget is subsidized in that manner. What I am suggesting is that UCF is better off with the OCS due to the very nature that owning > renting. There isn't an itemized spreadsheet that breaks down exactly what was made with football only versus what the expenses were football only. Since the vast majority of income is football related, we have to assume the lion share of the income is directly attributed to football. I've repeatedly asked for you guys to show me how solvent your program is by renting so we can have a real discussion of whether renting really is superior, but instead - it looks like name calling and assumptions trump reason.

First and foremost, renting something means your money goes automatically goes to a net negative. The only benefit to playing at Ray Jay is IF you move to a P5 - then it works out in your favor. However, as it stands, having an OCS that you can afford is going to be superior in pretty much every facet while in the AAC. 1. Game Day atmosphere is better. (No tarping off swaths of seats, having other teams stuff such as a pirate ship in there that detracts from your team.) 2. Enhances team pride 3. Brings Alumni back to campus 4. Modifiable to needs (can increase stadium seating, make more premium seating, alcohol sales etc...) 5. Having a true home allows the fan base to create/engage in tradition At the end of the day, having an OCS garnered $4,959,403 from Game tickets, $3,945,893 in sponsorship, and $808,164 (other) which I assume includes concessions for the 2017 season. That comes to $1,618,910 per home game (x6) excluding the AAC Champ game. Puc wanted the bottomline, which is a net positive of $3,355,218 thats AFTER all expenses including paying the stadium loan principal + interest which is on track to be done and paid off excluding maintenance/major additions in approximately 20 years. Let's just say maintenance over that time costs several million, then we'll say 25 years max. Not only do we reap the above benefits, we have an investment that is on track to be paid off while also pocketing additional revenue per year after expenses. Meanwhile, the cost of building an OCS continues to rise each year. By the time USF pulls the trigger, the same OCS (not saying you're going to build what we did) would cost north of $70 million. Can you show me how USF is breaking even or making money at Ray Jay after expenses? USF has been receiving money from former big east departures and your HC's salary has been subsidized by Texas. Both of those are drawing to a close. Strong's salary jumps to $2.5 million in 2019. At the end of the day, when the numbers come out for the 2019 season and onwards, I think it's safe to say UCF is going to naturally bring in more and more money as each year goes by and the debt load from the stadium is diminished.

The need to sell the stadium isn't where the profit would come from. Having little to no debt on a stadium means that the bulk of the revenue generated from the stadium goes straight to profit. While it's true there are going to be upgrades and maintenance along the way, they won't be nearly as much as the stadium itself unless there is something major like adding 15,000 seats. Then again, that would also expedite the loan payment process. In the end, instead of rent (throwing money away) they are reinvesting into themselves by paying off the stadium.

Agreed. 1.5 million in profit is not a game changer and it appears that the stadium won't be paid off for approximately 20 years. Then again, I suppose the same argument could be made with renting a home versus buying a home. In the end, owning the home is always going to be better. Does USF profit from Ray Jay at all minus expenses?

First off, that was a direct quote from the Orlando Sentinel. I didn't make that up. Secondly, if you are getting hung up on the $4 million mark. The document you included does not go into detail on a per game analysis, however - it is safe to assume that the $3.571 million figure in the report is not the total revenue UCF made through the fiscal year of 2018. A simple calculation of 44,000 seats x $100 dollars per seat (this is a rough average if you combined both seats that sell for $30 and seats that sell for $1000 and averaged them. That would amount to $4.4million for ONE game. That doesn't include food/beverage sales and naming right income etc etc. If you combine our premium seating, (Cabana Club, Roth Tower, Loge suites and playing field level suites) you most certainly can get to the figure he is quoted saying. Here is another direct quote: "It’s no wonder White doesn’t want to schedule two-for-ones and give up a home game and the $3 million in revenue that comes with it." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/mike-bianchi-commentary/os-sp-ucf-aac-scheduling-mike-bianchi-0519-20190518-ugmegu3u6raotgtuvzoq3br74u-story.html%3foutputType=amp So to answer your question, yes it is entirely possible that UCF makes $3-4 million per home game after all is said and done and yes it is a cash cow. Why do you think most P5's covet home games so much? Because they are trying to break even or need the home game advantage?

You mind sharing what year that was?