The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

There have been many efforts made recently to "save the program," from providing talking points, to petitions to sign, to tweets and emails, to impassioned pleas on tv and radio, and before the city council. All those are good, and should be continued. But as long as we allow those who oppose the program to frame the argument about whether UAB football should continue to exist, we don't have a chance.

Inevitably, the discussion from the other side always comes down to whether football makes a profit, including the Governor's uninformed attempt to weigh in this past week. Certainly, there is a need for good financial stewardship and accountability for the program to remain viable, but the primary goal of college athletics is NOT making money. If that be the case more than 75% of D-I football programs should be shut down, not to mention EVERY D-IAA, D-II, and D-III school. And we won't even begin to mention all the "non-revenue" sports.

In our state, UAB happens to be positioned between two of the most profitable football programs in all of college sports. But also numbered among the public universities with D-I and D-II football programs are Troy, South Alabama, Jacksonville State, Alabama A&M, Alabama State, West Alabama and North Alabama, none of which turns a profit. If losing money disqualifies a program from continuing to field a team, then all of those should be shut down as well. But we haven't heard the governor suggest that, now, have we?

On Thursday, I drove through campus on my way to St. Vincent's, and saw an awful lot of activity going on that will not be producing a profit. The new Student Center, being built where the old Hill Center stood until it was recently torn down, will be a great addition to the campus and to student life, but will not be "profitable." The Rec Center is world-class--and I am sure is attractive to prospective students--but I doubt they are making money. For that matter, the multiple libraries on campus, unless they are charging exorbitant fines for late books, are all "in the red." And so too the Greek organizations, and bands, and intramurals, and student government, and on an on.

Using the profit logic, maybe we should shut those down too. Likewise, we can venture to Tuscaloosa and Huntsville and Auburn and Troy, et al., and shut down every building, program, sport, and extra-curricular activity that is not paying for itself. That is, IF the point of higher education is to make money.

UAB is a university, charged with providing an environment for learning and well-rounded growth educationally and socially, in the classroom and out. And, intercollegiate athletics, and college football in particular, is a valuable asset and worthy investment for student life at a college campus, and a proven positive recruiting tool for enrollment. Which is why so many schools around the country are starting football these days, not stopping it.

My point is nothing new to UAB fans, I know, because we basically "get it." It's just those who encircle us, so used to filled 100,000 seat stadiums (for spring games!) and $25 million/year conference tv deals, don't get it. They are the exception, not the norm, not just in our state but around the country. So we must not let them frame an uninformed discussion about the future of UAB football.

My $.02.

When I get asked why UAB has a football team, I answer, "The same reason every other school in the country has one."

That and the question - How many schools have their sister institution pouring millions every year into the athletic funds of schools that we have to play (EX: FAU & USM) - without even a shot at getting similar funding by playing them ourselves? Does anyone seriously believe that AU and UA fans would sit quietly if UAB could pour millions into the programs THEY have to play?

Sometimes I feel like the State of Alabama is not worthy of an institution of UAB's caliber.

(11-22-2014 01:05 AM)FNblazer Wrote:  Sometimes I feel like the State of Alabama is not worthy of an institution of UAB's caliber.

It's just a "host" being fed off of by these (bleeping) parasites in Tuscaloosa! I hope they get a "Christmas Card" from "SACS Fifth Avenue!"

(11-22-2014 01:41 AM)Matrix Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 01:05 AM)FNblazer Wrote:  Sometimes I feel like the State of Alabama is not worthy of an institution of UAB's caliber.

It's just a "host" being fed off of by these (bleeping) parasites in Tuscaloosa! I hope they get a "Christmas Card" from "SACS Fifth Avenue!"

Sounds an awful lot about punishing the victim.

People are forgetting that UAB is the victim, not the enemy.

(11-22-2014 12:11 AM)bftb Wrote:  There have been many efforts made recently to "save the program," from providing talking points, to petitions to sign, to tweets and emails, to impassioned pleas on tv and radio, and before the city council. All those are good, and should be continued. But as long as we allow those who oppose the program to frame the argument about whether UAB football should continue to exist, we don't have a chance.

Inevitably, the discussion from the other side always comes down to whether football makes a profit, including the Governor's uninformed attempt to weigh in this past week. Certainly, there is a need for good financial stewardship and accountability for the program to remain viable, but the primary goal of college athletics is NOT making money. If that be the case more than 75% of D-I football programs should be shut down, not to mention EVERY D-IAA, D-II, and D-III school. And we won't even begin to mention all the "non-revenue" sports.

In our state, UAB happens to be positioned between two of the most profitable football programs in all of college sports. But also numbered among the public universities with D-I and D-II football programs are Troy, South Alabama, Jacksonville State, Alabama A&M, Alabama State, West Alabama and North Alabama, none of which turns a profit. If losing money disqualifies a program from continuing to field a team, then all of those should be shut down as well. But we haven't heard the governor suggest that, now, have we?

On Thursday, I drove through campus on my way to St. Vincent's, and saw an awful lot of activity going on that will not be producing a profit. The new Student Center, being built where the old Hill Center stood until it was recently torn down, will be a great addition to the campus and to student life, but will not be "profitable." The Rec Center is world-class--and I am sure is attractive to prospective students--but I doubt they are making money. For that matter, the multiple libraries on campus, unless they are charging exorbitant fines for late books, are all "in the red." And so too the Greek organizations, and bands, and intramurals, and student government, and on an on.

Using the profit logic, maybe we should shut those down too. Likewise, we can venture to Tuscaloosa and Huntsville and Auburn and Troy, et al., and shut down every building, program, sport, and extra-curricular activity that is not paying for itself. That is, IF the point of higher education is to make money.

UAB is a university, charged with providing an environment for learning and well-rounded growth educationally and socially, in the classroom and out. And, intercollegiate athletics, and college football in particular, is a valuable asset and worthy investment for student life at a college campus, and a proven positive recruiting tool for enrollment. Which is why so many schools around the country are starting football these days, not stopping it.

My point is nothing new to UAB fans, I know, because we basically "get it." It's just those who encircle us, so used to filled 100,000 seat stadiums (for spring games!) and $25 million/year conference tv deals, don't get it. They are the exception, not the norm, not just in our state but around the country. So we must not let them frame an uninformed discussion about the future of UAB football.

My $.02.

+1

Excellent Post!

A couple of points...

The new Student Center and the Rec at least break even, even if they don't make a "profit", and so too the libraries. They're paid for by student fees. So is football, and I think something that should be discussed is that if football is expected to break even (I don't think anyone expects a real profit) then perhaps increases in student fees should be discussed. A UAB education is still a bargain compared to many schools.

(11-22-2014 03:41 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  A couple of points...

The new Student Center and the Rec at least break even, even if they don't make a "profit", and so too the libraries. They're paid for by student fees. So is football, and I think something that should be discussed is that if football is expected to break even (I don't think anyone expects a real profit) then perhaps increases in student fees should be discussed. A UAB education is still a bargain compared to many schools.

Hence my point. Those entities do not otherwise have the sources of revenue to "turn a profit," but they receive university support through student fees because they are seen as a necessary part of the whole college experience. My argument is, football is just as valuable, both for the betterment of current students and as a recruiting tool for future students.

(11-22-2014 10:01 PM)bftb Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 03:41 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  A couple of points...

The new Student Center and the Rec at least break even, even if they don't make a "profit", and so too the libraries. They're paid for by student fees. So is football, and I think something that should be discussed is that if football is expected to break even (I don't think anyone expects a real profit) then perhaps increases in student fees should be discussed. A UAB education is still a bargain compared to many schools.

Hence my point. Those entities do not otherwise have the sources of revenue to "turn a profit," but they receive university support through student fees because they are seen as a necessary part of the whole college experience. My argument is, football is just as valuable, both for the betterment of current students and as a recruiting tool for future students.

And keep current and future alumni engaged.

(11-22-2014 10:01 PM)bftb Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 03:41 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  A couple of points...

The new Student Center and the Rec at least break even, even if they don't make a "profit", and so too the libraries. They're paid for by student fees. So is football, and I think something that should be discussed is that if football is expected to break even (I don't think anyone expects a real profit) then perhaps increases in student fees should be discussed. A UAB education is still a bargain compared to many schools.

Hence my point. Those entities do not otherwise have the sources of revenue to "turn a profit," but they receive university support through student fees because they are seen as a necessary part of the whole college experience. My argument is, football is just as valuable, both for the betterment of current students and as a recruiting tool for future students.

But football is receiving funding from sources other than student fees. Student fees for the library and HUC can be seen as user fees. Researchers in the medical school seeing $2m of their IER taxes being spent on football is not a user fee. I don't disagree with you, but you have to be able to see the other side of the argument. And, perhaps students and alumni need to be willing to open up their wallets a little more to quell that argument. Of course that's not even being discussed, right now it's either status quo or shut it down. Someone needs to work on and publicize something inbetween, because in the current funding environment "break even" is going to be the mantra for the athletics department.

(11-23-2014 04:24 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 10:01 PM)bftb Wrote:  

(11-22-2014 03:41 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  A couple of points...

The new Student Center and the Rec at least break even, even if they don't make a "profit", and so too the libraries. They're paid for by student fees. So is football, and I think something that should be discussed is that if football is expected to break even (I don't think anyone expects a real profit) then perhaps increases in student fees should be discussed. A UAB education is still a bargain compared to many schools.

Hence my point. Those entities do not otherwise have the sources of revenue to "turn a profit," but they receive university support through student fees because they are seen as a necessary part of the whole college experience. My argument is, football is just as valuable, both for the betterment of current students and as a recruiting tool for future students.

But football is receiving funding from sources other than student fees. Student fees for the library and HUC can be seen as user fees. Researchers in the medical school seeing $2m of their IER taxes being spent on football is not a user fee. I don't disagree with you, but you have to be able to see the other side of the argument. And, perhaps students and alumni need to be willing to open up their wallets a little more to quell that argument. Of course that's not even being discussed, right now it's either status quo or shut it down. Someone needs to work on and publicize something inbetween, because in the current funding environment "break even" is going to be the mantra for the athletics department.

We do need to take into account the argument from the other side. Thanks for bringing that into the discussion. THEY also need to take into account the amount of money that will be left at the table if they get their way. There's a helluva lot of money they could benefit from that'll never be donated. It'll make the 2 mil they're upset about look like pocket change. That's why it's an imperative we let Watts and anyone else know of this goes down the wallets will go back into the pockets

My thought is if the athletic budget is getting out of hand, fire the AD and bring in someone else to whittle it down... don't just kill football. Heck, I'd rather see us drop to FCS than lose football completely.

I really hope worst-case scenario is drop a division to free up money in the budget to build our own stadium and practice facilities.

(11-23-2014 05:45 PM)UABslant Wrote:  My thought is if the athletic budget is getting out of hand, fire the AD and bring in someone else to whittle it down... don't just kill football. Heck, I'd rather see us drop to FCS than lose football completely.

I really hope worst-case scenario is drop a division to free up money in the budget to build our own stadium and practice facilities.

Wait...dropping a division would actually cost UAB more money. It doesn't "free up" anything. You realize that, right? I think everyone agrees that there is fat that needs trimming, but dropping football to FCS is not going to help when expenses barely drop while revenue nosedives...and I'm just referring to lost revenue from CUSA, not counting the lost donations to the entire athletic department as people walk away from every program even basketball (a home slate of Big South opponents? no one, not new money or old, is going to tolerate that).

(11-23-2014 05:45 PM)UABslant Wrote:  I'd rather see us drop to FCS than lose football completely.

(11-23-2014 06:02 PM)blazr Wrote:  

(11-23-2014 05:45 PM)UABslant Wrote:  My thought is if the athletic budget is getting out of hand, fire the AD and bring in someone else to whittle it down... don't just kill football. Heck, I'd rather see us drop to FCS than lose football completely.

I really hope worst-case scenario is drop a division to free up money in the budget to build our own stadium and practice facilities.

Wait...dropping a division would actually cost UAB more money. It doesn't "free up" anything. You realize that, right? I think everyone agrees that there is fat that needs trimming, but dropping football to FCS is not going to help when expenses barely drop while revenue nosedives...and I'm just referring to lost revenue from CUSA, not counting the lost donations to the entire athletic department as people walk away from every program even basketball (a home slate of Big South opponents? no one, not new money or old, is going to tolerate that).

Yep! Add to all that the fact that you cannot justify our coaches salaries in lesser conferences for BB, SB,etc. We would probably lose them all eventually...

(11-23-2014 09:25 PM)WesternBlazer Wrote:  

(11-23-2014 06:02 PM)blazr Wrote:  

(11-23-2014 05:45 PM)UABslant Wrote:  My thought is if the athletic budget is getting out of hand, fire the AD and bring in someone else to whittle it down... don't just kill football. Heck, I'd rather see us drop to FCS than lose football completely.

I really hope worst-case scenario is drop a division to free up money in the budget to build our own stadium and practice facilities.

Wait...dropping a division would actually cost UAB more money. It doesn't "free up" anything. You realize that, right? I think everyone agrees that there is fat that needs trimming, but dropping football to FCS is not going to help when expenses barely drop while revenue nosedives...and I'm just referring to lost revenue from CUSA, not counting the lost donations to the entire athletic department as people walk away from every program even basketball (a home slate of Big South opponents? no one, not new money or old, is going to tolerate that).

Yep! Add to all that the fact that you cannot justify our coaches salaries in lesser conferences for BB, SB,etc. We would probably lose them all eventually...

The best coach on the southside is Getman, I would hate to lose him.

I'm talking hypothetically about saving the football program, regardless of what happens. (of course I want to stay at the FBS level and build facilities to grow our program)

Would we as fans rather keep the program, even if it means playing FCS ball, or just have it cut altogether?

Point is, I would rather be playing FCS ball than no ball at all.

(11-24-2014 01:43 AM)UABslant Wrote:  I'm talking hypothetically about saving the football program, regardless of what happens. (of course I want to stay at the FBS level and build facilities to grow our program)

Would we as fans rather keep the program, even if it means playing FCS ball, or just have it cut altogether?

Point is, I would rather be playing FCS ball than no ball at all.

FCS with an on campus stadium would be better than no football. With the changes to the landscape that's basic what being in a non power 5 league is.

We know FCS wouldn't make a great deal of financial sense, but the BOT isn't about making sense.