Kevin Scarbinsky @KevinScarbinsky
UAB President Ray Watts announces school will decide whether to reinstate football by June 1.
The city double downs it's monetary support. UAB student fees will increase. The pressure is now on. And ...
ESPN @espn UAB football fans aren't going down without a fight, pledging $6 million to save the program: http://es.pn/1PvdGdn
Looking good?
So much has been uncovered about how corrupt these people are, I think the new pledges are just added weight on their plates. I'm cautiously optimistic.
Also - why announce this after a decision has been made unless it's to overturn that prior decision. I mean why go through all the criticisms of a 'no' decision twice? On the other hand --- with the changed circumstance there might be pressure to review *and* this time there will be no 'in person' announcement.
I don't get this one. There was very little student or community support for UAB when they did have a football ( based on poor football attendance) What will change this time? The climate is more difficult to compete in college football and the odds of have a successful program are worse now then they were even a year ago.
lol, you're crazy if you think watts will suddenly change his mind...
In addition to the 'financial support' mentioned in the OP the 'decision maker(s) will now have this to explain away *if* their prior decision stands. That's a lot - BTW, note the disclaimer at the end
>>>
http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footbal...dvised-cut
[i]...UAB was "ill-advised" to cut its football, bowling and rifle teams, an independent study conducted by consulting firm OSKR showed.
"From a net cash-flow perspective," UAB should've kept the now-axed programs, California-based OSKR said in its 156-page report, via CBS Sports. OSKR was hired last month by a UAB athletics task force, which unanimously selected the firm for the study.
OSKR concluded that three disbanded sports returned a $75,000 positive return based on the 2013-14 financial data and that the football program could generate between $500,000 to $2.2 million in annual profits, according to AL.com. ...
... OSKR further stated the actual cost of the tuition portion of an athletic scholarship is "effectively nil" and estimated the average cost of education per athlete at $3,600 — meaning UAB overstates its scholarship costs by $1,846,979, according to AL.com.
... OSKR wrote. "The fact that colleges have convinced the public that raising their prices to students somehow hurts their bottom line is a wonderful little magic trick, but a savvy analyst should know better, especially for a university with growth targets."
UAB spokesman Jim Bakken responded to the study with a statement released Thursday. He said the decision to disband the programs was "based on the best information available at the time."... [i]
(05-14-2015 07:19 AM)baruna falls Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get this one. There was very little student or community support for UAB when they did have a football ( based on poor football attendance) What will change this time? The climate is more difficult to compete in college football and the odds of have a successful program are worse now then they were even a year ago.
You are clueless. The difference is that now, the UA BOT's sabotage of the program is out in the open and they will no longer be able to take decisions to keep UAB football from obtaining success.
A few years ago, UAB wanted to hire Jimbo Fisher. The UA BOT made them hire Calloway instead.
UAB also raised funds for a 30k seat on-campus stadium to replace cavernous, aging Legion Field (off campus in a not-so-nice neighborhood) as the home of the program. Building the stadium would have been at no cost to the UA system. The UA BOT did not allow construction.
So why did the UA BOT ever allow UAB to have a football team in the first place?
(05-14-2015 07:53 AM)CalallenStang Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 07:19 AM)baruna falls Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get this one. There was very little student or community support for UAB when they did have a football ( based on poor football attendance) What will change this time? The climate is more difficult to compete in college football and the odds of have a successful program are worse now then they were even a year ago.
You are clueless. The difference is that now, the UA BOT's sabotage of the program is out in the open and they will no longer be able to take decisions to keep UAB football from obtaining success.
A few years ago, UAB wanted to hire Jimbo Fisher. The UA BOT made them hire Calloway instead.
UAB also raised funds for a 30k seat on-campus stadium to replace cavernous, aging Legion Field (off campus in a not-so-nice neighborhood) as the home of the program. Building the stadium would have been at no cost to the UA system. The UA BOT did not allow construction.
Ha, I am clueless. Nothing is going to change with the UA BOT unless everyone is fired, and no one is going to be fired. I study systems for my job and I can tell you that nothing has or will change with the UA BOT or UAB football unless people are removed from their jobs.
You are very naive if you thing 20 years of control and little support for UAB will change anytime soon.
I feel bad for UAB fans, but I just don't think this is going to work.
(05-14-2015 07:57 AM)blunderbuss Wrote: [ -> ]So why did the UA BOT ever allow UAB to have a football team in the first place?
Probably not so that a money making, viable program could be removed based on poor information --- all creating ill will at the university. But that's just a guess.
Even if it is reinstated, they have to return as an FCS program. They basically got the death penalty.
F'em. They didn't support it until it's gone. If I were CUSA I'd still dump them. It's a shat show from top to bottom.
(05-14-2015 07:19 AM)baruna falls Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get this one. There was very little student or community support for UAB when they did have a football ( based on poor football attendance) What will change this time? The climate is more difficult to compete in college football and the odds of have a successful program are worse now then they were even a year ago.
They averaged over 23k per game last year.
(05-14-2015 08:19 AM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ]Even if it is reinstated, they have to return as an FCS program. They basically got the death penalty.
Is this true?? Haven't seen anything stating this but that would certainly set them back.
(05-14-2015 07:53 AM)CalallenStang Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 07:19 AM)baruna falls Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get this one. There was very little student or community support for UAB when they did have a football ( based on poor football attendance) What will change this time? The climate is more difficult to compete in college football and the odds of have a successful program are worse now then they were even a year ago.
You are clueless. The difference is that now, the UA BOT's sabotage of the program is out in the open and they will no longer be able to take decisions to keep UAB football from obtaining success.
A few years ago, UAB wanted to hire Jimbo Fisher. The UA BOT made them hire Calloway instead.
UAB also raised funds for a 30k seat on-campus stadium to replace cavernous, aging Legion Field (off campus in a not-so-nice neighborhood) as the home of the program. Building the stadium would have been at no cost to the UA system. The UA BOT did not allow construction.
In fact raised $75M for an OCS.
(05-14-2015 08:30 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 07:19 AM)baruna falls Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get this one. There was very little student or community support for UAB when they did have a football ( based on poor football attendance) What will change this time? The climate is more difficult to compete in college football and the odds of have a successful program are worse now then they were even a year ago.
They averaged over 23k per game last year.
Numbers fudging
(05-14-2015 08:30 AM)PT_american Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 08:19 AM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ]Even if it is reinstated, they have to return as an FCS program. They basically got the death penalty.
Is this true?? Haven't seen anything stating this but that would certainly set them back.
I dont think anyone knows. Kind of unprecedented.
(05-14-2015 08:34 AM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 08:30 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 07:19 AM)baruna falls Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get this one. There was very little student or community support for UAB when they did have a football ( based on poor football attendance) What will change this time? The climate is more difficult to compete in college football and the odds of have a successful program are worse now then they were even a year ago.
They averaged over 23k per game last year.
Numbers fudging
Are you nuts? LOL. They actually had a new coach and were bowl eligible. I really dont understand ECU fans. Have always respected the program going back to the 80's. But literally some of the worse online posters in the world. Literally the only group of people advocating the killing of another school's program by outside interests
(05-14-2015 08:32 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 07:53 AM)CalallenStang Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 07:19 AM)baruna falls Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get this one. There was very little student or community support for UAB when they did have a football ( based on poor football attendance) What will change this time? The climate is more difficult to compete in college football and the odds of have a successful program are worse now then they were even a year ago.
You are clueless. The difference is that now, the UA BOT's sabotage of the program is out in the open and they will no longer be able to take decisions to keep UAB football from obtaining success.
A few years ago, UAB wanted to hire Jimbo Fisher. The UA BOT made them hire Calloway instead.
UAB also raised funds for a 30k seat on-campus stadium to replace cavernous, aging Legion Field (off campus in a not-so-nice neighborhood) as the home of the program. Building the stadium would have been at no cost to the UA system. The UA BOT did not allow construction.
In fact raised $75M for an OCS.
They raised actual dollars? If so, where did it go?
(05-14-2015 08:47 AM)blunderbuss Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 08:32 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 07:53 AM)CalallenStang Wrote: [ -> ] (05-14-2015 07:19 AM)baruna falls Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get this one. There was very little student or community support for UAB when they did have a football ( based on poor football attendance) What will change this time? The climate is more difficult to compete in college football and the odds of have a successful program are worse now then they were even a year ago.
You are clueless. The difference is that now, the UA BOT's sabotage of the program is out in the open and they will no longer be able to take decisions to keep UAB football from obtaining success.
A few years ago, UAB wanted to hire Jimbo Fisher. The UA BOT made them hire Calloway instead.
UAB also raised funds for a 30k seat on-campus stadium to replace cavernous, aging Legion Field (off campus in a not-so-nice neighborhood) as the home of the program. Building the stadium would have been at no cost to the UA system. The UA BOT did not allow construction.
In fact raised $75M for an OCS.
They raised actual dollars? If so, where did it go?
They had $75M in pledges, renderings , the works. UA BOT struck the item from the agenda prior to the meeting it would have been voted on in 2011. Literally the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming la la la la I cant hear you.