Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

Hovadipo

College Football Thread

Recommended Posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LIHoosier said:

I don’t really understand the deal so I can’t say who is right. Seems odd the schools would need upfront money for anything 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, str8baller said:

I don’t really understand the deal so I can’t say who is right. Seems odd the schools would need upfront money for anything 

Yea, they really shouldn't need this if they were responsible.  But ADs can't help but overspend.

Off the top of my head: IU's AD got a $30M loan from IU -- we've got the donors to cover it but it's still out there.  OSU had a $38M deficit in FY2024.  I know Washington is broke from overspending on their stadium and reduced media rights for a period after joining the B1G.  I'm sure there are many other examples of financial distress throughout the conference if we looked closely, especially with rev share kicking in and donors needing to also fund ever increasing amounts of NIL.

I'm sure the rationale will be that this helps schools adjust to the rev share era until the media rights increase more, which the media rights will.  But.  But!  We all know all the schools are probably going to spend an influx of cash fairly irresponsibility and get themselves back into not so great situations.

As you mentioned, it will be interesting what the actual terms of the deal are.  16 of the 18 schools are clearly pretty gung ho about it, so much so they're ready to go around USC and UM.  Wild.

As a fan, I guess I don't care much.  Is what it is.  If $100M comes in and that helps with a Memorial Stadium renovation... well I have to admit that would be pretty nice!  lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, str8baller said:

I don’t really understand the deal so I can’t say who is right. Seems odd the schools would need upfront money for anything 

Don't forget that athletic departments are "non-profit," which means they don't have a bunch of money saved from profitable years. They have to spend what they bring in. That's why years with decreased revenue, like during COVID, can really, really hurt them. Up front money allows them make quick, expensive purchases without having to go through the trouble of getting donor money or loans from their schools. Most of the money would probably be squandered, since athlete departments (and the schools themselves) aren't really incentivized to spend money well or run efficiently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer is probably as simple as “almost everyone stinks”, but how exactly did Louisville only drop 4 spots after losing at home to Cal? Or UVA drop 6 after losing at home to Wake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, str8baller said:

I don’t really understand the deal so I can’t say who is right. Seems odd the schools would need upfront money for anything 

I don’t either but I can’t think of a single thing/experience that private equity has touched and made better, so it’s a firm no from me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

I don’t either but I can’t think of a single thing/experience that private equity has touched and made better, so it’s a firm no from me. 

Note that the deal would be with the University of California pension system, who isn’t classic private equity and is much more passive or put differently not operationally involved.  

No one will care about this, but technically “private equity” owns tens of thousands of companies and many do very well or even great.  In general mostly only the bad ones get noticed or make the news.  Other types of ownership have their pros and cons too.

Everyone can feel how they want about this, I don’t care, but I’ll wait to see the terms of the deal here.  The B1G doesn't have to do anything, so I'm optimistic the terms are favorable, but we'll see...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

I don’t either but I can’t think of a single thing/experience that private equity has touched and made better, so it’s a firm no from me. 

The bank accounts of the billionaires who own the private equity firms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kind of a bummer — the Rose Bowl is a much more interesting venue than SoFi.

I guess they’re really hoping they can sell more premium seats and tickets at SoFi.  They’ll have to to make up that buyout.

 

IMG_0108.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pagoda said:

Kind of a bummer — the Rose Bowl is way cooler than SoFi.

I guess they’re really hoping they can sell more premium seats and tickets at SoFi.  They’ll have to to make up that buyout.

 

IMG_0108.jpeg

It's also about 20 minutes closer to campus, so they're probably hoping they actually get some students to show up too, lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Pagoda said:

Kind of a bummer — the Rose Bowl is a much more interesting venue than SoFi.

I guess they’re really hoping they can sell more premium seats and tickets at SoFi.  They’ll have to to make up that buyout.

I've been to both venues and they both have pros and cons. For nostalgic reasons, watching IUFB play in the Rose Bowl last year was pretty freakin awesome. But watching the Colts play in SoFi this year was an overall better experience for me personally. I think this is probably a better move for UCLA due to location. Time will tell though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

I've been to both venues and they both have pros and cons. For nostalgic reasons, watching IUFB play in the Rose Bowl last year was pretty freakin awesome. But watching the Colts play in SoFi this year was an overall better experience for me personally. I think this is probably a better move for UCLA due to location. Time will tell though. 

They have been complaining about how far the Rose Bowl is from campus for years, and for them to pay out that amount of money to get out of the lease is pretty crazy from a department that is hurting for money.  They must really think they can get more money playing at So-Fi to make this move.  Getting their team on track would be beneficial to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lebowski said:

I've been to both venues and they both have pros and cons. For nostalgic reasons, watching IUFB play in the Rose Bowl last year was pretty freakin awesome. But watching the Colts play in SoFi this year was an overall better experience for me personally. I think this is probably a better move for UCLA due to location. Time will tell though. 

I was also at the Rose Bowl game last year. It was great as was downtown Pasadena, filled with celebrating IU fans, that night. Great time!

That being said, being a hour away from campus, when there is traffic, is not ideal (to say the least).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×