Jump to content

gossamorharpy

Members
  • Content Count

    320
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

217 Excellent

About gossamorharpy

  • Rank
    Three-Star Recruit

Recent Profile Visitors

1,801 profile views
  1. I just dont see this working out given how many schools are in play, how many players for each team, and the fact there's no centralized figure running point with this. NBA is having such a tough time getting this going and we're talking about pros who are paid, 22 teams of 12-15 players a coaching staff that all are in a "bubble" in one place. The NBA, mind you, is also America's leading professional league when you think of how in order the league is with internal affairs and even they are having an incredibly difficult time navigating this. The fact that they're having a tough time with this when Adam Silver is loved by most and the players union holding the most power out of all sports league gives me minimal hope that 5 power conferences, all with unique agendas and geography based challenges, can pull something similar off. You compare that process to the shadow organization known as NCAA, 120+ D1 schools, FCS schools that are on the schedule, TV crews, traveling plans, hotels, etc. On top of all of this, I haven't heard one thing regarding how media companies are going to factor in here which certainly has to happen for these universities to even have a season. You take away fans from the stadium (even at a reduced number) thats significant loss of direct money from game day sales along with loss of community revenue (tailgating, bars around stadium, etc). While media outlets still will make money from broadcast revenue, I would have to think some of this needs to be routed back to schools to help make up for the loss of gameday revenue. When only 20ish (might be even lower) were breaking even or turning a profit, a very likely scneario exists where an AD or two says this isn;t worth it, we're cancelling the season. A handful of these reactions impacts schedules tremendously on top of the risk of teams getting this virus. I think we are also overestimating how much of the public will actually want to go to these games. Also of note, if Moos' requires masks in the stadium, does that mean the whole university gets $0 financial resources from the Fed GoV?
  2. This assumes antibodies= you can't become sick again which seems to still be up in the air
  3. wish the guy best of luck, dude left it out on the field for us last year despite some gnarly injuries. I hope he spent his time thinking this decision through and he can be at peace with it moving forward. As far as I'm concerned, football is a brutal AF game and if your head and heart isn't 100% there then you shouldn't be out on the field. Clearly he wasn't 100% onboard with things here and thats ok, he isn't the first to transfer and certainly won't be the last. While he did have a great opportunity to shatter career records here, it happened to fall in one of the worst stretches in progrum history and perhaps there's an element where he just wants to win once during his college career. From a Nebraska standpoint, nothing to do but to thank him for his time and move forward. Silver lining here is we got rid of a guy on the fence (bad apple is too strong of a word, but i suspect detractor is ok to use) and this opens the door for a few to step up in a big way. I will miss JD a bit but frankly, his body size limits his impact in a meaningful way when he's the #1 receiver. He's a gamer, don't get me wrong, but I saw a pretty noticeable difference in his consistent impact and playmaking last year compared to when he had a guy like Stanley drawing attention years prior. Will miss him for sure, but I'm not going to lose sleep over losing a guy who racked up stats but never translated into wins for the team
  4. I mean, i think we all said good bye to amateurism close to 2 decades ago, no? I did not see the Klatt comments... I would say obviously kids are way safer at home, I was more making the argument that if theres no regular students on campus than the football players would be in an ever safer situation with no one else there... but obviously nothing tops being at home interacting with no one as far as thats concerned
  5. I don't know if the main concern is lack of students on campus. I would think the bigger concern is, what do you do with a team where 1-5 people get sick and you have a utah jazz/ nets situation where a whole team is quarantined? I feel like no kids on campus might actually make football easier to pull off as they could just house them on campus, minimal people and still play games with no fans which is going to be the situation anyways. Meanwhile, they would still be remote students like everyone else will most likely be come the fall
  6. Iowa... Good to great teams consistently beat and beat up on the teams they should. A sound victory against iowa, in my opinion, is more indicative of where the progrum is vs. an establish good team that is still a step above where we are. Once we consistently take down Iowa then consistent success against wisconsin is next
  7. The promise I made was my opinion and def not a promise I should be hanging my hat on as its not based on any inside source lol. Should have clarified that the statements were loosely connected More so just connecting the dots. I don't see how a majority university, or really any mid-level and above with 1000+ students is going to be able to have on campus living and education if a return to normal means we're still restricting large gatherings. If the concern of fans in the stands is too many people, I don't see how a large dorm, dining hall, common services that makes up a university would exist in that world.
  8. Friend's wife works in the finance department for a local P5 university- budgetary and resource planning to be specific, and their leading model that they're providing to the regents and board is assuming a 2020-2021 year where no on campus services are provided until Jan 2021 at the earliest. Obviously they have various scenarios in flight but often rumored return to normalcy plans that still restrict public gathers in excess of 500 or 1000 people would still rule out all universities we're talking about. Key word in my comment is planning. There is also a decision date at hand here. Most likely these universities will probably make a call in the June timeframe knowing they can't just wait until right before the year starts to make a final call.
  9. lol well then no sports... I promise you the whole kids going back to campus thing isn't happening in the fall. All major universities are planning on remote based education unless something drastic changes in the next 60 days. Pandemic+ dorms+dining halls+ common areas+thousands of people= not happening
  10. This also assumes that once you get it you can't get it again... which I believe still isn't confirmed right? I just want my football weekends back...
  11. True, I think the potential legal issues they'd want to avoid tho is if they threw caution to the wind and something happens widespread in the team itself. Similar to many large companies pushing their employees to work remote much sooner than the government stepped in, no one wants that situation both for the health of their people and for publicity reasons. Also, the same question can be asked for "could also catch something from someone at college all the time". That not might even be a possibility given there's a similar scenario being discussed where colleges and their greater student population will be going remote for the foreseeable future. Truly crazy times these are
  12. Solid point... Kind of aligns with one of the points i mentioned- all it takes is for 1 person to be severely ill from this to then shutdown the whole team. Football aside, are universities really going to have an appetite to take on that risk for the sake of playing a game? Sports fandom aside, I would hope more rational decisions are made tied to whats really important in the grand scheme of life
  13. Well aware of that but couple counter points. This Land and building you bring up, its not like this is office space in Manhattan NY they are renting out- the expenses I was referring to have nothing do with stadium and land expenses which at this point are probably $0 to the university (outside of maintenance and upkeep) given its a state school and these grounds have been there for 150+ years. I was more referring to money/costs associated with still having to pay coaches their salaries, S&C, logistic related positions (travel coordinators, AD/front office personnel that handle all of the behind the scenes work with running a season), marketing departments, splitting revenue with non conf schools who have to pay their way to Lincoln. there's never a scenario that would make the expenses go away... but you know what ADs and NCAA officials probably want to avoid? Losing money on sunk costs with the assumption the revenue will still be there, only to find out the season gets paused halfway through and there goes that "revenue" the helps cover all of the costs detailed above. If you really think execs at ESPN/ABC/Fox are still going to pay universities what they receive today, I've got beach front property in idaho i'd like to sell you Money will not be the main reason here, it will be a public health decision. But I think its naive for someone to assume money implications don't factor into this equation
  14. lol, think its a different kind of face mask bud.
  15. I don't know if we can automatically assume conferences and schools are still going to get pay outs or close to full pay outs as expected. NBA and MLB commissioners and Players Association leaders have all commented on the direct cut they are all going to have to take due to significantly less revenue from media due to no games and a change in the process. Before coronavirus, there was already a pretty large disparity between the 20 or so college programs that turn a profit and those that are losing money. You take away guaranteed money P5 conf teams get on top of that? Not so sure ADs will automatically be able to act business as usual if the funds arent there in the same capacity. While it might be easy to just assume TV revenue can make up for it, I don't necessarily know thats the case. Nebraska is one of the few programs to turn a profit and is in an even smaller group that can fund the AD department without state/university funds. When you consider the fact that the AD department had an 8 mil surplus under normal conditions and only 3 sports actually turned a profit (football, m bball and volleyball); I don't know how you can assume there isn't a monetary factor in play here when you're removing 90k fans paying good money 8 saturdays a year and the sponsorship money that also comes in from companies that want to place their logo and company name on various marketing avenues on gameday. When you remove football which is, by far, the largest revenue driver, you find yourself which much harder business centric questions in a world where not everyone can get a free lunch. https://www.omaha.com/sports/college/huskers/blogs/nebraska-top-25-nationally-but-middle-of-big-ten-in-athletic-department-revenues/article_a99caf1a-211c-57f9-9759-32c82dcbd328.html NU’s revenues of $120,205,090 ranked seventh in the Big Ten. Its expenses — $112,571,632 — ranked 24th nationally and eighth in the league. Iowa’s revenues ($130,681,467) and expenses ($128,869,211) ranked 18th and 15th nationally, respectively. https://nebraska.rivals.com/news/big-red-business-nebraska-s-financial-performance-paint-it-black
×
×
  • Create New...