According to the St. Pete Times, USF can’t afford an OCS

[TallyBull]

Baker effectively ignores USF's own CFO Sobieray and cites skeptical sports economists approvingly, without giving Sobieray an opportunity to respond to concerns raised by them in the article. Publication date clearly timed to try and shame the BoT into voting it down next week. 

Edited June 9, 2023 by TallyBull

[ahoyboy]

The Treason Times can fluck right off 

[Grateful Dad]

Great...sigh.

[michibull]

I would imagine that these “academics” have no clue what USF has saved, raised or plan with their money. This article literally means nothing but an effort to paint USF in poor publicity. 

[bulloni]

its established academics are against spending on sports in general for universities so that has to be considered.

But concern #1 in the doc makes no sense. 

Quote

Projections from a consulting group show $20.5 million in revenue against $5.3 million in expenses during the first year (expected to be 2026). Factor in the money USF would have earned from games at their current home, Raymond James Stadium, and the leftover $13 million isn’t enough to cover the debt. 

20.5-5.3 is 15.2 million, did he then subtract the money we aren't earning from Raymond James instead of adding it to get 13 million? Am I missing something?

Edited June 9, 2023 by bulloni

[bulloni]

"Larson, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma’s Department of Health Exercise Science" what a ******* source for this. I swear Baker had an idea for an article then went out to get sources that would say things to support it. How is this person qualified to give input on this stadium anymore than some random person in Tampa?

It mentions the projections are intentionally rosy, but if you look at the document attached to the agenda about the stadium study and the financials its made very clear that these are very conservative estimates on the revenue and projections. 

[bulloni]

Quote

“You start having a losing record, and that could torpedo itself very quickly,” Fried said.

Even if the Bulls start winning after four consecutive losing seasons, other issues could arise. The projections call for $60 general tickets. Fried questioned whether that’s affordable for students.

1.) We have won 4 games in 3 years. "start" having a losing record would change things with attendance makes me think this person hasn't even glanced at our situation. We are at rock bottom with performance related attendance, especially considering its 30 minutes from campus

2.) We aren't even doing student fees to fund this stadium. I highly doubt we are going to charge $60 per game for students to attend the game if we aren't having them help fund it.

This article feels like a hit piece but he got the weirdest sources and didn't have an editor to fact check anything. The times hating on USF is nothing new, but this is a new low in terms of just making up reasons to rain on a parade.

[Bull94]

It would never make economic sense to build a stadium in our situation.

it's a luxury.

 

[TallyBull]

Agreed. It's just another USF hit piece in a long line of USF hit pieces. And Baker didn't even bother to do a good job with it. 

Last week, Knight published a somewhat optimistic piece about how AAU might help USF in conference realignment. Somebody at the St. Pete Times must have told Baker "we need to put an end to this optimism RIGHT NOW - RIGHT NOW, I TELL YOU!"

Edited June 9, 2023 by TallyBull

[Bull Matrix]

St Pete times has always been a joke