(02-25-2021 10:01 AM)cubucks Wrote:  

(02-24-2021 05:33 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-24-2021 05:18 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Advertising it as doing a solid for HBCUs is what trips me up. They're treating the games as if its a completely different situation than scheduling Southern Utah or Northern Colorado - which is not. I'm all for HBCUs getting higher profile games. I want to see that group of schools succeed at the highest levels. However, this is really UCLA trying to save face for substituting their games with Michigan with FCS schools and I can't blame them.

Michigan cancelled that series and left UCLA in a bad spot, not only because they had to replace those games but because it's impossible to replace the game-day revenue they would have gotten from one home game vs. Michigan.

The real issue with playing FCS teams is this: Whether UCLA plays an HBCU at home, or Southern Utah, or Northern Colorado, or, Utah State or Colorado State, the issue, from the accounting point of view, is that paying a G5 team to play there costs twice as much as paying an FCS team, while generating about the same amount of game-day revenue.

It would be nice if these decisions could be made without regard to money, but that's not the world in which college football exists.

It's just Michigan, they cancelled on us last year too.

Be careful of Florida A&M, Bethune Cookman and North Carolina A&T. All three had FBS scalps.