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

They should break the study down into two categories, one....without an on campus stadium, and one....with an on campus stadium.

I want to hear CSS opinion and estimates based on "IF UAB HAD AN ON CAMPUS STADIUM".

How successful could UAB Football and UAB Athletics be, with an on campus stadium?

That is my question. I would like CSS team members to estimate that.

(04-08-2015 04:05 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  I hope Heather and Kristi are hot.

Well they look hot. Not sure if this is a good or bad thing....lol.

(04-09-2015 06:20 AM)TheGORILLA Wrote:  They should break the study down into two categories, one....without an on campus stadium, and one....with an on campus stadium.

I want to hear CSS opinion and estimates based on "IF UAB HAD AN ON CAMPUS STADIUM".

How successful could UAB Football and UAB Athletics be, with an on campus stadium?

That is my question. I would like CSS team members to estimate that.

It takes some fortitude to be talking about the stadium when it's not all that likely that football is coming back at all.

(04-09-2015 11:31 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(04-09-2015 06:20 AM)TheGORILLA Wrote:  They should break the study down into two categories, one....without an on campus stadium, and one....with an on campus stadium.

I want to hear CSS opinion and estimates based on "IF UAB HAD AN ON CAMPUS STADIUM".

How successful could UAB Football and UAB Athletics be, with an on campus stadium?

That is my question. I would like CSS team members to estimate that.

It takes some fortitude to be talking about the stadium when it's not all that likely that football is coming back at all.

If they're going to bring it back, they have to do it the right way. This entire Task Force is a sham IMO, and I've stated that several times, but at least we can have a document guiding the path back to football when all this is said and done.

And if a bunch of former athletics directors want to help tarnish everything Gene Bartow built at UAB with lies and accounting, that's on their consciences.

What do would the CSS members listed have to gain by offering a less thing accurate report. The report this group offer will set a standard for eliminating or investing in a Football program.
The weight of this report will be balanced by a number of number crunchers, news outlets, Athletic directors, school presidents, boosters, politicians, and untold number of other interested parties.
The CSS group are aware, that this report will either build up or tear down the Carr report, President Watts, UATBOT as well as the stakeholders in UAB.
CSS must be aware that this report will be flipped, rubbed , x-rayed, examined, and study for accuracy and bias, it will be used by Administrators as a reason to move up or down in football divisions.
The report will become a case study on how to build or not build football programs ,and generate reports that justifies footballs life or death.

(04-09-2015 12:16 PM)rebounder2u Wrote:  What do would the CSS members listed have to gain by offering a less thing accurate report. The report this group offer will set a standard for eliminating or investing in a Football program.
The weight of this report will be balanced by a number of number crunchers, news outlets, Athletic directors, school presidents, boosters, politicians, and untold number of other interested parties.
The CSS group are aware, that this report will either build up or tear down the Carr report, President Watts, UATBOT as well as the stakeholders in UAB.
CSS must be aware that this report will be flipped, rubbed , x-rayed, examined, and study for accuracy and bias, it will be used by Administrators as a reason to move up or down in football divisions.
The report will become a case study on how to build or not build football programs ,and generate reports that justifies footballs life or death.

What did Carr have to gain by offering a less than accurate report? In the industry, CSS is known for giving the customer (and in this case it is Watts) exactly he/she wants. They will just be a lot more careful of what they include in the report than Bill Carr and his assassins were.

You need to understand that in any such study has to be built largely on assumptions, and assumptions is just another word for educated opinions. As someone who has done a number financial studies I can tell you that if you don't let integrity get in the way you can shade all of those assumptions to get just about any result you want. (In the trade it is called "using a sharp pencil".) Sure others can attack your assumptions, but assumptions are not facts and therefore are defensible to some degree.

But it won't make a bit of difference. With not one, but two studies from "reputable" firms to hid behind, Watts will stand fast, as we expect him to do regardless, and their will be nothing we can do about it short of getting the BOT replaced and then firing Watts On the other hand if the second report is fair and proves that Carr was wrong about football, Watts would be on much shakier grounds. Only another totally complete report by a reputable company could balance what I expect out of CSS and scare them into doing the right thing.

(04-09-2015 01:01 PM)CajunBlazer Wrote:  

(04-09-2015 12:16 PM)rebounder2u Wrote:  What do would the CSS members listed have to gain by offering a less thing accurate report. The report this group offer will set a standard for eliminating or investing in a Football program.
The weight of this report will be balanced by a number of number crunchers, news outlets, Athletic directors, school presidents, boosters, politicians, and untold number of other interested parties.
The CSS group are aware, that this report will either build up or tear down the Carr report, President Watts, UATBOT as well as the stakeholders in UAB.
CSS must be aware that this report will be flipped, rubbed , x-rayed, examined, and study for accuracy and bias, it will be used by Administrators as a reason to move up or down in football divisions.
The report will become a case study on how to build or not build football programs ,and generate reports that justifies footballs life or death.

What did Carr have to gain by offering a less than accurate report? In the industry, CSS is known for giving the customer (and in this case it is Watts) exactly he/she wants. They will just be a lot more careful of what they include in the report than Bill Carr and his assassins were.

You need to understand that in any such study has to be built largely on assumptions, and assumptions is just another word for educated opinions. As someone who has done a number financial studies I can tell you that if you don't let integrity get in the way you can shade all of those assumptions to get just about any result you want. (In the trade it is called "using a sharp pencil".) Sure others can attack your assumptions, but assumptions are not facts and therefore are defensible to some degree.

But it won't make a bit of difference. With not one, but two studies from "reputable" firms to hid behind, Watts will stand fast, as we expect him to do regardless, and their will be nothing we can do about it short of getting the BOT replaced and then firing Watts On the other hand if the second report is fair and proves that Carr was wrong about football, Watts would be on much shakier grounds. Only another totally complete report by a reputable company could balance what I expect out of CSS and scare them into doing the right thing.

I have a theory on that, my friend. I believe Carr went through the motions, and as you quite rightly and accurately point out, they knew the answer to be arrived at before they started. If you're going to kill it, you need a report, right?

CSS on the other hand, has to know that this report will be evaluated six ways to Sunday by everyone, and assuredly OKSR. There reports contain a lot, a whole lot, of assumptions, and people can disagree on just what they will be. At the end of the day I don't think this report will be nearly as one sided as the Carr Report. CSS is a reputable firm, and they have to know that if they send some homer report out their credibility is ruined. Also, Watts is on public record saying he wants the report to include what would be needed to reinstate the programs.

I think Watts did everyone a favor. If OKSR had been used, he would have been able to say they are biased. I don't think that will be the case here.

Truthfully though, and I've said this before, it is all about the Football Foundation and how much support they, and the City can come up with to set the program on a sound financial footing, in the opinion of the BOT. Is that fair? No, but it is the reality.

I appreciate all you do.

Watts already played the "biased" card when he rejected OSKR. He does not get two bites at that apple.

If the report is favorable he can cry all he wants.

I would be surprised if a favorable report would change much. Any reasonable report will detail the high economic demands that returning the program will no doubt entail, which will be used as the primary reason by Watts for ignoring the report's findings. Montgomery seems like the only realistic option and even that is a long shot.

I was optimistic about football's return after the season ticket drive began and OSKR got chosen for the new review. I am no longer optimistic. That said, I'll continue fighting in Montgomery because I think that is the only realistic option. #FreeUaB

My thoughts are w/ the new report, it'll state higher expenses including the new cost to attend scholarship stipulations (even though it's not a requirement) & due to having start over w/ coaches/players along w/ long overdue investment already needed, that Watts & Co will deny again saying it's just too expensive to restart program up again & that we can't afford it.

The biggest problem is that football money is already being spent on other things like basketball and new track teams.

That's where Watts & Co will say we can't afford to add fb as there's no money left to spend on it hence why he's on such a quick spending spree

I'm under the impression that the Men's Cross Country Team would be cut if the other sports came back. However, knowing Watts and how he operates, he'll use them as a reason not to bring back football.

I don't think Watts is going to allow football back, no matter what the report or the ATF says.

He has to go.

(04-09-2015 06:36 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote:  I don't think Watts is going to allow football back, no matter what the report or the ATF says.

He has to go.

Bingo.

The review committee is a dog and pony show that some have bought hook line and sinker.

(04-09-2015 06:36 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote:  I don't think Watts is going to allow football back, no matter what the report or the ATF says.

He has to go.

100% truth!

Precisely. He didn't speak at the fall commencement. At the upcoming graduation ceremony, boos and FRWs need to rain down regardless of his involvement this time around.

Absolutely.