UMassHoops.com Forum Index UMassHoops.com
The Minutemen fan's home on the Net
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

New York Times weighs in on UMass football
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    UMassHoops.com Forum Index -> Football Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
sleepy sheep
Senior


Joined: 01 Dec 2007
Posts: 943
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 4:43 pm    Post subject: New York Times weighs in on UMass football Reply with quote

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/30/sports/ncaafootball/universities-chase-big-time-glory-in-fbs.html?pagewanted=1&hp

At least this article, unlike the Globe series, compares UMass to other schools that are upgrading too and doesn't limit the discussion to a UMass vacuum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
dennisdent
Junior


Joined: 04 May 2003
Posts: 639
Location: Too close to the Beltway

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excellent article, the writer did their homework. I like the quotes from Lombardi.

Max Page most be loving the attention from the NY Times--probably adding it to his bio right now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
m626t
Senior


Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 1312
Location: Western Mass

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

this article is another example of why NYC is better than Bean Town.
_________________
All due respect, and I mean that from the bottom of my heart, I'm gonna pass.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
photoman
Senior


Joined: 26 Apr 2003
Posts: 933
Location: Attleboro

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dennisdent wrote:
Excellent article, the writer did their homework. I like the quotes from Lombardi.

Max Page most be loving the attention from the NY Times--probably adding it to his bio right now.


This would hardly be the writer doing his homework: "To make the leap more concrete, UMass decided to play its home games at Gillette Stadium, the domain of the N.F.L.’s New England Patriots."

I'll give the writer an "F" on that homework because as has been stated ad nauseum, The move WOULDN'T have happened without the Gillette move. The MAC insisted on it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
InnervisionsUMASS
Hall of Fame


Joined: 04 Apr 2003
Posts: 16583
Location: Milford, MA

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

m626t wrote:
this article is another example of why NYC is better than Bean Town.


Ummmm, no.



And thank you photoman.
_________________
Stop waiting for UMass to do something big and help UMass do something big. - Shades
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
78
Hall of Fame


Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 4058
Location: Near Boston

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lombardi's comments at the end of the article are interesting. He states that there are already too many teams in FBS, and with more entering, the NCAA is going to have to make changes. Basically, establishing a top tier of teams and then lower tiers. (Although they really already do that with BCS and FBS, I guess.) His point though is will these universities who have spent the money to move up to FBS be happy when they end up being in the lowest division of FBS or however the NCAA decides to organize the teams?

Overall, I thought this was a good piece that provides a good overview of the FBS dilemma schools face.
_________________
If only I could be as great a fan as Pierce9999....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
econalum
Hall of Fame


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 2442
Location: Acton, MA

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This article was fair. And as has been stated before, by myself, and others, if you are not in the 'Top 64' - where are you? Effectively, you are in a bigger $ losing FCS. And the gaps will grow wider.

And, while UNC-Charlotte had a quick Alum commitment of several $ millions, UMASS got a big yawn from our alums, both in donations, and season tix. This gets to the root of 'do alums care about UMASS football', and 'was there lingering demand ready to be plucked'? The answer - NO. There was not a ground swell. If W-L results improve, perhaps Season tix will come.

I think that this IS the difference between the modern North versus South. Northern teams drop football, Southern seek to move up. With support.

Next year is a new season - with Charlie having a couple more months for recruiting quality athletes.

The disconnect on this message board amounts to this. The consensus of this board seems to be, like McCutcheon, that 3 or 4 more years are needed to prove out this experiment. In reality, given the UBuffalo example, 15 or more may not be enough. But, will Swammy, and the governing bodies, give UM that long to be competitive (not in wins, but in fannies in chairs)?

We'll see. I think that UMASS will have to spend a lot more money and effort to build single game buys, than season ticket sales, as folks may attend the 1 or 2 games, but not buy the package.

Like climbing Mount Everest, it is a slow slog. And some fall by the wayside.
_________________
Feeling entitled is JUST a feeling...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SJGMoney
Junior


Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 492
Location: Danvers, MA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

^ Yawn
_________________
UMass '87
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jackman
Senior


Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 1978

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

78 wrote:
Lombardi's comments at the end of the article are interesting. He states that there are already too many teams in FBS, and with more entering, the NCAA is going to have to make changes.


The NCAA already made changes. They instituted a 4 year moratorium, then added a new requirement that you have to receive an invitation to an existing FBS conference to move up. Then, through various maneuverings, they killed off one of the conferences (the WAC), thus for all intensive purposes permanently removing 10 to 16 slots in FBS because it's so hard to create a new conference.

So now all these crying BCS schools have to do to prevent more move-ups from FCS is to STOP RAIDING LOWER CONFERENCES. That's it. Do that, and there's nowhere for these teams to move-up to because the lower conferences will be full. It just looks like a rush now because they shut and locked the doors for the 4 year moratorium.

As for the NYT article, I disagree that it was fair. It just looks fair in comparison to the atrocious Boston Globe. They still used the faculty's slanted numbers as their cost source without explaining that it was slanted, and used our worst game as an attendance example without pointing out that it was on Black Friday and most MAC teams actually fared worse than UMass from the conference's decision to schedule games that day. They then say that we averaged "around 14000" attendance at McGuirk in recent years, which is simply false. Our best ever average in the modern era was 13005. The only way our average creeps north of that is if you count the Gillette Stadium games against UNH. Oops.

econalum wrote:
And, while UNC-Charlotte had a quick Alum commitment of several $ millions[...]


That's not an accurate description. Charlotte struggled quite a bit to sell its FSLs for the initial fundraising. They had to push back the deadline at least a half a dozen times. There was a lot of anxiety on the Charlotte message boards about this. Granted, Charlotte demanded a much larger financial commitment from its fans than UMass did. On the other hand, Charlotte is spending $45 million to construct a stadium smaller than McGuirk.

If UMass ticket sales are $700k under budget every single year for the next 60 years in a row, that still won't amount to the $45 million Charlotte is spending before taking a single snap of transitional FCS football. THAT is a risk. UBuffalo for its part spent about $40 million in 2012 money on their stadium back in the 90s. UMass spending $0 to play in Gillette Stadium is the least amount of risk anyone has ever taken on FBS football, yet somehow we're the poster child for foolhardy gambles on big time football. How do they get away with writing this crap? It's inaccurate and unfair.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CrooksisRhyming
Hall of Fame


Joined: 19 Apr 2005
Posts: 2743
Location: Oak Square

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 5:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jackman, I don't know what you drink, but if I ever get the opportunity, I'm buying.
_________________
"Wherever I go, I’ll never be bashful about being from UMass, baby.” -Victor Cruz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
wmmmfan
Sophomore


Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Posts: 219

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jackman you are spot on with your comments, UMass has the least amount at risk of any team to have ever made this move.

The other point some people are missing and this article points out is the additional publicity and increased revenue from applications/admissions this move could generate.

Is there a specific fund individuals can donate to for the building going up at McGuirk? I don't think I've seen anything for it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Berkman
Hall of Fame


Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 3751
Location: The Berkshires

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From what I was told in the past, there in no general fund drive for individuals to contribute to but I am sure that they will accept any funds you would like to contribute. Their main fund raising effort was geared to major donors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lane one
Junior


Joined: 17 Aug 2003
Posts: 676

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If they start collecting money for a specific purpose, they must use it for that purpose. I suspect they want to get the major donor set up to get them most of the way there before taking smaller amounts. Right now, the best thing you can do is send a check to the athletic department, and ask it to be earmarked for football. They need to show a groundswell of support (in terms of # of donors and total $) from alumni to get the heavy hitters to donate what they need for facilities.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
InnervisionsUMASS
Hall of Fame


Joined: 04 Apr 2003
Posts: 16583
Location: Milford, MA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jackman wrote:
78 wrote:
Lombardi's comments at the end of the article are interesting. He states that there are already too many teams in FBS, and with more entering, the NCAA is going to have to make changes.


The NCAA already made changes. They instituted a 4 year moratorium, then added a new requirement that you have to receive an invitation to an existing FBS conference to move up. Then, through various maneuverings, they killed off one of the conferences (the WAC), thus for all intensive purposes permanently removing 10 to 16 slots in FBS because it's so hard to create a new conference.

So now all these crying BCS schools have to do to prevent more move-ups from FCS is to STOP RAIDING LOWER CONFERENCES. That's it. Do that, and there's nowhere for these teams to move-up to because the lower conferences will be full. It just looks like a rush now because they shut and locked the doors for the 4 year moratorium.

As for the NYT article, I disagree that it was fair. It just looks fair in comparison to the atrocious Boston Globe. They still used the faculty's slanted numbers as their cost source without explaining that it was slanted, and used our worst game as an attendance example without pointing out that it was on Black Friday and most MAC teams actually fared worse than UMass from the conference's decision to schedule games that day. They then say that we averaged "around 14000" attendance at McGuirk in recent years, which is simply false. Our best ever average in the modern era was 13005. The only way our average creeps north of that is if you count the Gillette Stadium games against UNH. Oops.

econalum wrote:
And, while UNC-Charlotte had a quick Alum commitment of several $ millions[...]


That's not an accurate description. Charlotte struggled quite a bit to sell its FSLs for the initial fundraising. They had to push back the deadline at least a half a dozen times. There was a lot of anxiety on the Charlotte message boards about this. Granted, Charlotte demanded a much larger financial commitment from its fans than UMass did. On the other hand, Charlotte is spending $45 million to construct a stadium smaller than McGuirk.

If UMass ticket sales are $700k under budget every single year for the next 60 years in a row, that still won't amount to the $45 million Charlotte is spending before taking a single snap of transitional FCS football. THAT is a risk. UBuffalo for its part spent about $40 million in 2012 money on their stadium back in the 90s. UMass spending $0 to play in Gillette Stadium is the least amount of risk anyone has ever taken on FBS football, yet somehow we're the poster child for foolhardy gambles on big time football. How do they get away with writing this crap? It's inaccurate and unfair.





I just wanted to quote this so that people can read it again.
_________________
Stop waiting for UMass to do something big and help UMass do something big. - Shades
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
SJGMoney
Junior


Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 492
Location: Danvers, MA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

^ And I want to point to it so people read it a third time. G-damn Jackman, that was well said
_________________
UMass '87
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    UMassHoops.com Forum Index -> Football Forum All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 1 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
subRed style by ktauber