ECU about to chop down some sports

[Guest Jonesy Bull]

1 hour ago, puc86 said:

It’s really quite simple. The market has spoken and fans are not interested in the AAC as we continue to hemorrhage money and fans which is untenable. In order to be successful we need to play more established programs our market is interested in. We are unable to force or convince better conferences to take us as a member and we cannot afford to have a slate of AAC games on our schedule with only a game or two a season anyone cares about. We are also uniquely situated to not have a debt service that requires more home games to be pay down that debt while also gaining none of the typical auxiliary benefits that come from getting people in the stadium ie beer sales. For these reasons we would probably benefit most from actually playing exclusively pay day games for interest and and turning a profit. Since home games are not an actualized benefit to us we can negotiate 2-1’s with reckless abandonment. Our market has shown that we can actually draw attendance when playing quality teams and people will pay to see them while also being excited about the games and not having to decide if it’s worth it to also pay for Tulsa et al on a Wednesday afternoon. Also kids much like fans want to play against the best and no one goes to bed dreaming at night about winning the AAC.

OK your points are taken.....but just easily and more likely imo, we would slip into oblivion.  A risk I don't think we are in a position to take.

[puc86]

1 minute ago, Jonesy Bull said:

OK your points are taken.....but just easily and more likely imo, we would slip into oblivion.  A risk I don't think we are in a position to take.

Except you are ignoring that we are currently slipping into oblivion which is exactly why we have nothing to lose by going all in on us, this course is one that has only proven one thing- it cannot be successful here.

[puc86]

2 minutes ago, brybull1970 said:

Your premise of "If something is bad and you lose on it on every transaction, you can’t make it up in volume" is correct, but its misapplied here, because:

• Going the independent route would only lead to, at most, 6 P5 games a year (see BYU as a generous comp here)
• Scheduling 6 games against P5 schools via two-for-one's nets you two home P5 games a year - a net increase of ONE home P5 game a year over what we already have
• Then you have to fill out your other 6 games against lower level G5 and FCS opponents, of which very few will be of the same caliber as our existing AAC slate - and don't expect AAC schools, other than UCF, to help us out with filling our schedule (UConn has only 1 game scheduled in the future against an AAC school)
• Any TV deal would be based on our home schedule, and we would stand to make considerably less than what we are receiving as a member of the AAC
• No bowl affiliation and no path to a NY6 bowl game as only the highest ranked conference champion is selected
• Then all of your other sports have to go play in a lesser conference

So you you are gaining ONE extra P5 home game and TWO extra P5 road games a year, at best, and in turn you are scheduling turds G5 doormats for the other six games, depriving the athletic department of TV revenue, relegating us to bottom barrel bowl games (if we qualify), eliminate any chance of making a NY6 bowl game and relegate all other sports to one-bid conferences.

UConn generated 74% more reveue than USF in 2018-19, have a storied basketball program and their football program has been put out to pasture. USF has considerably less resources, so to sacrifice all that would need to occur to achieve one extra home P5 game - if you can get it as the P5 wants to schedule more conference games - is moronic.

You have entirely missed my premise. BYU is not comparable because they have more to lose by not having home games and cannot have less than 6 home games because of their losses. We on the other hand are giving up the opportunity cost of losing money in order to have more road games. I am perfectly fine with having 4 or 5 home games a year in order to have more substantial games on most weeks and making money either home or away against teams with brand equity. We have learned that you can’t play with without getting some on you and it is time to rid ourselves of the stinky cologne that is the AAC.

[Triple B]

6 minutes ago, brybull1970 said:

Your premise of "If something is bad and you lose on it on every transaction, you can’t make it up in volume" is correct, but its misapplied here, because:

• Going the independent route would only lead to, at most, 6 P5 games a year (see BYU as a generous comp here)
• Scheduling 6 games against P5 schools via two-for-one's nets you two home P5 games a year - a net increase of ONE home P5 game a year over what we already have
• Then you have to fill out your other 6 games against lower level G5 and FCS opponents, of which very few will be of the same caliber as our existing AAC slate - and don't expect AAC schools, other than UCF, to help us out with filling our schedule (UConn has only 1 game scheduled in the future against an AAC school)
• Any TV deal would be based on our home schedule, and we would stand to make considerably less than what we are receiving as a member of the AAC
• No bowl affiliation and no path to a NY6 bowl game as only the highest ranked conference champion is selected
• Then all of your other sports have to go play in a lesser conference

So you you are gaining ONE extra P5 home game and TWO extra P5 road games a year, at best, and in turn you are scheduling turds G5 doormats for the other six games, depriving the athletic department of TV revenue, relegating us to bottom barrel bowl games (if we qualify), eliminate any chance of making a NY6 bowl game and relegate all other sports to one-bid conferences.

UConn generated 74% more reveue than USF in 2018-19, have a storied basketball program and their football program has been put out to pasture. USF has considerably less resources, so to sacrifice all that would need to occur to achieve one extra home P5 game - if you can get it as the P5 wants to schedule more conference games - is moronic.

That part is the best point and the biggest obstacle to overcome when comparing. UConn football has hoops to carry Athletics .....

[Triple B]

9 minutes ago, brybull1970 said:

I think idea is intriguing too, but when I start to do the math I worry that its sets the athletic department and the football program back.

Math always ***** everything up ....

[Triple B]

15 minutes ago, puc86 said:

You have entirely missed my premise. BYU is not comparable because they have more to lose by not having home games and cannot have less than 6 home games because of their losses. We on the other hand are giving up the opportunity cost of losing money in order to have more road games. I am perfectly fine with having 4 or 5 home games a year in order to have more substantial games on most weeks and making money either home or away against teams with brand equity. We have learned that you can’t play with without getting some on you and it is time to rid ourselves of the stinky cologne that is the AAC.

 

10 minutes ago, brybull1970 said:

Yikes.

Have you had puc on Ignore up until today ....?

[puc86]

2 minutes ago, brybull1970 said:

Yikes.

It is not me that set this value it is what the market has deemed the value of an AAC home game in Tampa. If having an AAC home game costs you money then having four on the schedule and four on the road is disastrous. If we can exchange 8 things that destroy our budget and our fan base for things that have a positive value it would be foolish to dismiss that exchange simply because it is disproportionately on the road, especially since we are uniquely situated to already play all of our games on road (and do not have to consider the need to have home games to justify and pay debt service and not earning anything beyond the ticket sell from anyone in attendance).  Let's do a thought experiment to show that volume of home games do not immediately determine the value of the lot by creating a less than plausible example who would not be more excited to have FSU, Florida, Alabama and LSU at home over seven home games of our current slate? As I said this is not a likely scenario but it does show that the value is not exclusively in volume for us so it is up to the consumer to determine where that line is and it probably includes Syracuse, Pittsburgh, WVU and Louisville if history is any indication. 

[puc86]

4 minutes ago, Triple B said:

 

Have you had puc on Ignore up until today ....?

I am just glad one of my five talking points is actually getting traction today, I was worried I was going to have to start diversifying. 

[Triple B]

26 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I am just glad one of my five talking points is actually getting traction today, I was worried I was going to have to start diversifying. 

Riiiiight, like you're reticent to insert any of those talking points into ANY conversation on a whim ...

[puc86]

3 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Riiiiight, like you're reticent to insert any of those talking points into ANY conversation on a whim ...

Ya but sometimes they have become tiresome to the same crowd and I get little to no interaction on them, the tides they are a turning or people are just bored enough to engage in this Covid apocalypse world (either way I am happy for my eventful day of discussing something I am passionate about).

Edited May 19, 2020 by puc86