CSNbbs

Full Version: NCSTATE postponed their 2017 game at Troy
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Someone at the athletics department needs to be on the phone to Pike county today
(10-23-2015 05:32 AM)bladhmadh Wrote: [ -> ]Someone at the athletics department needs to be on the phone to Pike county today

If NC St. postponed that game it is because they already have a better game lined up.
We're talking about playing Troy, not NC State.
(10-23-2015 05:56 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-23-2015 05:32 AM)bladhmadh Wrote: [ -> ]Someone at the athletics department needs to be on the phone to Pike county today

If NC St. postponed that game it is because they already have a better game lined up.

It's because they don't want to play on the road.

They eventually will try and buy out this game I suspect.
(10-23-2015 06:39 AM)the_blazerman Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-23-2015 05:56 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-23-2015 05:32 AM)bladhmadh Wrote: [ -> ]Someone at the athletics department needs to be on the phone to Pike county today

If NC St. postponed that game it is because they already have a better game lined up.

It's because they don't want to play on the road.

They eventually will try and buy out this game I suspect.

they are going to play one of the neutral site early season games
If we play at Troy, the least they can do is give us all a tour of the new field house the lyingpumpkinheadedcretinouscatturd Ray Watts paid for with money we're having to replace.
(10-23-2015 06:29 AM)UABslant Wrote: [ -> ]We're talking about playing Troy, not NC State.

Gotcha.Reading comprehension fail on my part....lol
Some things that need to be looked at. A Ingram is insisting on two guarantee games for us which will be two road games. B. If A is indeed true and Clark cannot change his mind then we will need a home game in 2017 and this would be a road game. C, teams are ringing the phone off the hook wanting to play us and I would hate to go on the road three times OOC in 2017 with such a young team when we can most likely find someone to start a series in Birmingham. If it's one guarantee game sure go for it. If it's true let's get two home games in 2017 OOC. If Ingram keeps insisting on two buy games then maybe we go on the road three times in 2018 after we get a year under our belt?

Scheduling needs to be smart and put us in the best position to be successful.

That said with the team I feel like Clark is putting together I like our chances in Pike County but let's be smart about scheduling.
Is there a specific reason for 2 money games? If it is to help with getting new projects completed it may be worth it, though if we truly care about the players health and safety, that wouldn't even be an option.
(10-23-2015 08:45 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote: [ -> ]...but let's be smart about scheduling.

I have seen little evidence of "smart" with regard to Ingram.
(10-23-2015 09:13 AM)blazers9911 Wrote: [ -> ]Is there a specific reason for 2 money games? If it is to help with getting new projects completed it may be worth it, though if we truly care about the players health and safety, that wouldn't even be an option.

I've heard the Finis is the one pushing/mandating this. My thinking, he thinks two money games are guarantee losses which would hurt attendance, hinder recruiting, slow momentum etc.
One might think that a non-conference game would have already been scheduled.
(10-23-2015 09:57 AM)blazinrunner Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-23-2015 09:13 AM)blazers9911 Wrote: [ -> ]Is there a specific reason for 2 money games? If it is to help with getting new projects completed it may be worth it, though if we truly care about the players health and safety, that wouldn't even be an option.

I've heard the Finis is the one pushing/mandating this. My thinking, he thinks two money games are guarantee losses which would hurt attendance, hinder recruiting, slow momentum etc.

I could be wrong, but I get the feeling that Ingram may have changed his view to align with Clark's view. I suspect we will ultimately play just one money game per year.
(10-23-2015 09:57 AM)blazinrunner Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-23-2015 09:13 AM)blazers9911 Wrote: [ -> ]Is there a specific reason for 2 money games? If it is to help with getting new projects completed it may be worth it, though if we truly care about the players health and safety, that wouldn't even be an option.

I've heard the Finis is the one pushing/mandating this. My thinking, he thinks two money games are guarantee losses which would hurt attendance, hinder recruiting, slow momentum etc.

Fess needs to just become an AD at Tuscaloosa since he seems to be an expert on running a department. Genius like that shouldn't be wasted on the practice of law in Cullman
(10-23-2015 10:01 AM)the Dragon Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-23-2015 09:57 AM)blazinrunner Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-23-2015 09:13 AM)blazers9911 Wrote: [ -> ]Is there a specific reason for 2 money games? If it is to help with getting new projects completed it may be worth it, though if we truly care about the players health and safety, that wouldn't even be an option.

I've heard the Finis is the one pushing/mandating this. My thinking, he thinks two money games are guarantee losses which would hurt attendance, hinder recruiting, slow momentum etc.

I could be wrong, but I get the feeling that Ingram may have changed his view to align with Clark's view. I suspect we will ultimately play just one money game per year.
This is what I hope.
I think that's where we were headed with just one money game before the shutdown, the 2015 schedule only had one money game with Tennessee and the 2016 schedule only had Kentucky. I have heard that Coach Clark only wants just one money game. I've taking classes with some former players and if you ask them they only preferred just one money game.
To what extent is the number of "money games" related to need for income for the FB program? UAB's money needs are in the millions so a few hundred thousands for a game is not as significant IF the big funding is coming in from backers / boosters.

Some major programs are paying almost $2 million to favored schools, but those are probably still exceptional. If UAB can get such games, it makes sense to play them.
(10-23-2015 09:49 AM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-23-2015 08:45 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote: [ -> ]...but let's be smart about scheduling.

I have seen little evidence of "smart" with regard to Ingram.

Band dad you raise a good point.
(10-23-2015 12:59 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]To what extent is the number of "money games" related to need for income for the FB program? UAB's money needs are in the millions so a few hundred thousands for a game is not as significant IF the big funding is coming in from backers / boosters.

Some major programs are paying almost $2 million to favored schools, but those are probably still exceptional. If UAB can get such games, it makes sense to play them.

I haven't seen any $2 million buy games. We could get $1 million maybe. But, isn't it important for us to get to a bowl game ASAP? If we had not played 2 buy games in 2014, we very well could have been 7-5 and bowling.

From a financial view, upon our initial return, we can expect a large home attendance, which means way more money from home games than we used to get. With that, the buy games become less essential, and playing a winnable game instead gives us better chances for post-season play and improved recruiting.
Remember, Ray Watts is expecting a bowl appearance in year 1
Pages: 1 2
Reference URL's