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

(09-06-2022 02:50 AM)busch Wrote:  UAB schedules to Ingram's scheduling philosophy. Simple as that. Word is, he has had plenty of opportunities for home and home and 2-for-1 with attractive options.He doesn't believe in that. Wants to keep those games for the road to make money. Sucks for the fan.

That doesn't make a ton of sense. We can schedule a money game while still pursing a H/H or 2 for 1 with a P5. Now we're doing 2 H/H's year with G5 teams. If there's any P5 H/H deals or 2 for 1's to be had, just go to 1 G5 H/H.

The tricky part would be balancing the schedule so that we have at least 6 home games/yr. And in years we went to a P5 as part of a H/H or 2 for 1, we'd end up with 2 P5 road games on the schedule.

(09-04-2022 01:49 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  I want our schedule to be:
One FCS team, as local as possible. HBCU if possible.
H&H with a G5 program that will bring fans and we can travel to for the return game. No crap teams. I am still upset we are playing C-Conn without getting a HH in basketball out of it. I'd cancel that one tomorrow.
One P5 program that is a buy game that is not a "Body Bag" game.
One H&H with a crappy P5 program or a high level G5 program. (Or a AHA with a P5)

For us to play less body bag games we need to increase revenue.

IMHO DD is dead spot on in his assessments.

Agree on the buy game. We need to try to get away from scheduling our buy game against teams in the top 10. But, like you said, we'd need to increase revenue in other areas because a buy game at a top 10 team is what brings in the biggest pay day.

(09-06-2022 11:19 AM)The Answer UAB Wrote:  I cannot believe Haase still has a job at Stanford. They've obviously decided to settle for mediocrity with their basketball program.

Google up some stories about Stanford's athletic department. They've had some financial issues that likely have precluded a buyout and new coach salary. They were about to slash a bunch of non-revenue sports a year or so back.

We need someone in the media to do an in depth story on scheduling. Ask Ingram some hard questions.
WTF are we playing U-Conn HH without tying a basketball series to it? U-Conn bring ZERO Interest.
Why North Carolina A&T instead of an FCS team that will actually bring fans? (Maybe they will?).
Why are we playing Louisiana Monroe HH? No one cares to see them. Akron at least is palatable but barley.
Why are we not pursuing a P5 H&H or a two for one?
Why cant we eliminate a body bag game and play an average P5 team for less money and offset it with a GOOD G5 opponent that brings fans such as Boise or BYU or a two for one or a HH with an average P5 and sell out protective?
There are plenty of good G5 programs regionally that bring fans. Why are we not trying to schedule them? I see Georgia State and Troy, yea they will bring some fans. Ga Southern, we will see in two weeks.

I would also inquire about basketball. The WVU game being played at Legacy really pissed HCAK off and I know Mark sold us out on the home game with Auburn for pennies on the dollar. That didn't go over well with the previous staff regardless what you think of them.
How much does the AD meddle in scheduling for basketball.
AD should be helping instead of hindering scheduling for basketball. What is he doing to help?
Are we limited on the amount of road games due to contracts? I have no problem with being a buy game for a power now since we have a competitive team. Do a two for one with an Blue Blood. Play at Legacy if you have to. (I prefer Bartow).
We should be doing HH with the top 100 non power programs and stay regionally if we can.

Mark needs to start having tough questions thrown at him.

Not that it will do any good. Some of us will know if he is lying about certain things.

(09-07-2022 08:45 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  We need someone in the media to do an in depth story on scheduling. Ask Ingram some hard questions.
WTF are we playing U-Conn HH without tying a basketball series to it? U-Conn bring ZERO Interest.
Why North Carolina A&T instead of an FCS team that will actually bring fans? (Maybe they will?).
Why are we playing Louisiana Monroe HH? No one cares to see them. Akron at least is palatable but barley.
Why are we not pursuing a P5 H&H or a two for one?
Why cant we eliminate a body bag game and play an average P5 team for less money and offset it with a GOOD G5 opponent that brings fans such as Boise or BYU or a two for one or a HH with an average P5 and sell out protective?
There are plenty of good G5 programs regionally that bring fans. Why are we not trying to schedule them? I see Georgia State and Troy, yea they will bring some fans. Ga Southern, we will see in two weeks.

I would also inquire about basketball. The WVU game being played at Legacy really pissed HCAK off and I know Mark sold us out on the home game with Auburn for pennies on the dollar. That didn't go over well with the previous staff regardless what you think of them.
How much does the AD meddle in scheduling for basketball.
AD should be helping instead of hindering scheduling for basketball. What is he doing to help?
Are we limited on the amount of road games due to contracts? I have no problem with being a buy game for a power now since we have a competitive team. Do a two for one with an Blue Blood. Play at Legacy if you have to. (I prefer Bartow).
We should be doing HH with the top 100 non power programs and stay regionally if we can.

Mark needs to start having tough questions thrown at him.

Not that it will do any good. Some of us will know if he is lying about certain things.

Things that seem to be simple from the outside perspective seems to be very hard for the athletic department to accomplish. What is it? Why is it? Can we not hire people that only have the best interest in the UAB at heart or are we forever destined to be 2nd fiddle even amongst our own? I think we should be playing 7 homes games period. New stadium, businesses downtown love the weekend traffic, get our attendance average up to 30k and it should be a no brainer. If we have winning season this year, it will be 6 years in row and we need to capitalize on our on the field success by leveraging that blazer popularity during schedule for revenue sports.

(09-07-2022 12:20 PM)kdblazer Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 08:45 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  We need someone in the media to do an in depth story on scheduling. Ask Ingram some hard questions.
WTF are we playing U-Conn HH without tying a basketball series to it? U-Conn bring ZERO Interest.
Why North Carolina A&T instead of an FCS team that will actually bring fans? (Maybe they will?).
Why are we playing Louisiana Monroe HH? No one cares to see them. Akron at least is palatable but barley.
Why are we not pursuing a P5 H&H or a two for one?
Why cant we eliminate a body bag game and play an average P5 team for less money and offset it with a GOOD G5 opponent that brings fans such as Boise or BYU or a two for one or a HH with an average P5 and sell out protective?
There are plenty of good G5 programs regionally that bring fans. Why are we not trying to schedule them? I see Georgia State and Troy, yea they will bring some fans. Ga Southern, we will see in two weeks.

I would also inquire about basketball. The WVU game being played at Legacy really pissed HCAK off and I know Mark sold us out on the home game with Auburn for pennies on the dollar. That didn't go over well with the previous staff regardless what you think of them.
How much does the AD meddle in scheduling for basketball.
AD should be helping instead of hindering scheduling for basketball. What is he doing to help?
Are we limited on the amount of road games due to contracts? I have no problem with being a buy game for a power now since we have a competitive team. Do a two for one with an Blue Blood. Play at Legacy if you have to. (I prefer Bartow).
We should be doing HH with the top 100 non power programs and stay regionally if we can.

Mark needs to start having tough questions thrown at him.

Not that it will do any good. Some of us will know if he is lying about certain things.

Things that seem to be simple from the outside perspective seems to be very hard for the athletic department to accomplish. What is it? Why is it? Can we not hire people that only have the best interest in the UAB at heart or are we forever destined to be 2nd fiddle even amongst our own? I think we should be playing 7 homes games period. New stadium, businesses downtown love the weekend traffic, get our attendance average up to 30k and it should be a no brainer. If we have winning season this year, it will be 6 years in row and we need to capitalize on our on the field success by leveraging that blazer popularity during schedule for revenue sports.

Yep. Agree with both of you. UAB always seems to handicap itself or shoot itself in the foot constantly.

JMO but I think Mark is doing what those that sign his check want him to do. In the race of college athletics we're the only ones with a restrictor plate.

(09-07-2022 08:45 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Why North Carolina A&T instead of an FCS team that will actually bring fans? (Maybe they will?).

Do I think they will travel to the UAB game on a Thursday? Probably not...

But North Carolina A&T is the largest HBCU in the United States with an enrollment of 13,222. They ranked #12 in FCS home attendance last year (including teams that had playoff games at home) and had better home attendance in 2021 than Alabama State, Alabama A&M, UNA, and ETSU.

But I'd still rather have an in-state team that will bring fans.

(09-07-2022 01:04 PM)biglizard Wrote:  JMO but I think Mark is doing what those that sign his check want him to do. In the race of college athletics we're the only ones with a restrictor plate.

Agree and I don't think it's the BOT. The medical side of the campus has always resented the subsidy for athletics. Ingram's number one priority has probably been set by that side and it's to keep expenses in check.

I get Auburn wanting to play at a bigger arena due to them having a big fan base in Birmingham, but why West Virginia? Why should they care?

(09-07-2022 01:25 PM)BlazerGreen Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:04 PM)biglizard Wrote:  JMO but I think Mark is doing what those that sign his check want him to do. In the race of college athletics we're the only ones with a restrictor plate.

Agree and I don't think it's the BOT. The medical side of the campus has always resented the subsidy for athletics. Ingram's number one priority has probably been set by that side and it's to keep expenses in check.

It's not the medical side. Has the last name of a school Mike Anderson is coaching at currently.

It'll be interesting to see next year when we move to the AAC if we start to increase the budget. I believe Mike Aresco alluded to the fact that all the incoming teams made commitments to the conference that they would increase their level of investment. But investment increases can't come only from additional revenue. The institution needs to increase the commitment to athletics if we want to remain competitive with the top of the AAC that are spending a lot more than we are currently.

Speaking of revenue, I wonder how much more money we'll make off of having an additional home football game this year vs only 5 last year? They also raised season ticket prices slightly for both football and basketball and I believe will do so again next year. Would also be curious to know how much we're bringing in with our 50% cut of concessions and parking for football games. That's a new revenue source we didn't have at LF.

(09-07-2022 01:54 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:25 PM)BlazerGreen Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:04 PM)biglizard Wrote:  JMO but I think Mark is doing what those that sign his check want him to do. In the race of college athletics we're the only ones with a restrictor plate.

Agree and I don't think it's the BOT. The medical side of the campus has always resented the subsidy for athletics. Ingram's number one priority has probably been set by that side and it's to keep expenses in check.

It's not the medical side. Has the last name of a school Mike Anderson is coaching at currently.

And is currently paid $1.1 million per year, despite having no experience or education to qualify him for the position.

The SOM Senators were heroic during The Return.

Fire Ray Watts.

(09-07-2022 01:54 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:25 PM)BlazerGreen Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:04 PM)biglizard Wrote:  JMO but I think Mark is doing what those that sign his check want him to do. In the race of college athletics we're the only ones with a restrictor plate.

Agree and I don't think it's the BOT. The medical side of the campus has always resented the subsidy for athletics. Ingram's number one priority has probably been set by that side and it's to keep expenses in check.

It's not the medical side. Has the last name of a school Mike Anderson is coaching at currently.

Kinda what I figured. The subsidy is capped and miniscule compared to the overall university budget.

This guy is a hemorrhoid on the university system.

You sir have just insulted hemorrhoids.

(09-07-2022 02:36 PM)biglizard Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:54 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:25 PM)BlazerGreen Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:04 PM)biglizard Wrote:  JMO but I think Mark is doing what those that sign his check want him to do. In the race of college athletics we're the only ones with a restrictor plate.

Agree and I don't think it's the BOT. The medical side of the campus has always resented the subsidy for athletics. Ingram's number one priority has probably been set by that side and it's to keep expenses in check.

It's not the medical side. Has the last name of a school Mike Anderson is coaching at currently.

Kinda what I figured. The subsidy is capped and miniscule compared to the overall university budget.

This guy is a hemorrhoid on the university system.

That's kinda my point. UAB isn't willing to spend the $ to do what needs to be done. They nickel and dime the program and therefore stunt its growth. That could be the BOT doing but the med side has definitely objected to the subsidy in the past. Bottom line, the school (not the foundation) continues to go through the motions with athletics. That was happening before Watts ever became president. Spend enough to keep it going but not enough to excel. Same story, different decade. i don't see it changing unless we became a fixture in the Top 25 in basketball and football. That's what it will take for attendance and donations to reach sustainable levels. That's a high bar but in this market that's where it sits. Or maybe we become some billionaire's pet project.

(09-07-2022 03:16 PM)BlazerGreen Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 02:36 PM)biglizard Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:54 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:25 PM)BlazerGreen Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:04 PM)biglizard Wrote:  JMO but I think Mark is doing what those that sign his check want him to do. In the race of college athletics we're the only ones with a restrictor plate.

Agree and I don't think it's the BOT. The medical side of the campus has always resented the subsidy for athletics. Ingram's number one priority has probably been set by that side and it's to keep expenses in check.

It's not the medical side. Has the last name of a school Mike Anderson is coaching at currently.

Kinda what I figured. The subsidy is capped and miniscule compared to the overall university budget.

This guy is a hemorrhoid on the university system.

That's kinda my point. UAB isn't willing to spend the $ to do what needs to be done. They nickel and dime the program and therefore stunt its growth. That could be the BOT doing but the med side has definitely objected to the subsidy in the past. Bottom line, the school (not the foundation) continues to go through the motions with athletics. That was happening before Watts ever became president. Spend enough to keep it going but not enough to excel. Same story, different decade. i don't see it changing unless we became a fixture in the Top 25 in basketball and football. That's what it will take for attendance and donations to reach sustainable levels. That's a high bar but in this market that's where it sits. Or maybe we become some billionaire's pet project.

The hard cap was unavoidable; our side lacked much leverage there (it's the university's money) and it let them save face by still shouting "Fiskul Sponsbilty!" and pretending that the shutdown had anything to do with finances. The lack of an inflation slider was a problem from the start; I spotted that at the time but in 2015 it was less of a concern (though really, with the constant rise in prices for college educations, housing health care etc. it was obvious then that those increases couldn't be offset by cheap oil and cheap Chinese flatscreen TVs forever, and inflation would spread to other sectors).

The entire University System is woefully mismanaged, from the top ($1.1million/zero qualifications) on down. It's the most valuable asset of the people of Alabama, and we allow a handful of failgrandsons to treat it as their toy/piggybank. The list is just endless, from coal rights through concrete corruption to sweetheart dorm overbuilding, all of them unexamined by a robotic board that never actually discusses anything in public view or sees a single negative vote cast on any issue.

This is one usually-unspoken reason why they so deeply despise UAB athletics: their petty attempts to undercut its success give a glimpse of the huge iceberg of vile, reeking corruption under the surface.

(09-07-2022 04:15 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 03:16 PM)BlazerGreen Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 02:36 PM)biglizard Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:54 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(09-07-2022 01:25 PM)BlazerGreen Wrote:  Agree and I don't think it's the BOT. The medical side of the campus has always resented the subsidy for athletics. Ingram's number one priority has probably been set by that side and it's to keep expenses in check.

It's not the medical side. Has the last name of a school Mike Anderson is coaching at currently.

Kinda what I figured. The subsidy is capped and miniscule compared to the overall university budget.

This guy is a hemorrhoid on the university system.

That's kinda my point. UAB isn't willing to spend the $ to do what needs to be done. They nickel and dime the program and therefore stunt its growth. That could be the BOT doing but the med side has definitely objected to the subsidy in the past. Bottom line, the school (not the foundation) continues to go through the motions with athletics. That was happening before Watts ever became president. Spend enough to keep it going but not enough to excel. Same story, different decade. i don't see it changing unless we became a fixture in the Top 25 in basketball and football. That's what it will take for attendance and donations to reach sustainable levels. That's a high bar but in this market that's where it sits. Or maybe we become some billionaire's pet project.

The hard cap was unavoidable; our side lacked much leverage there (it's the university's money) and it let them save face by still shouting "Fiskul Sponsbilty!" and pretending that the shutdown had anything to do with finances. The lack of an inflation slider was a problem from the start; I spotted that at the time but in 2015 it was less of a concern (though really, with the constant rise in prices for college educations, housing health care etc. it was obvious then that it couldn't be offset by cheap oil and cheap Chinese flatscreen TVs forever).

The entire University System is woefully mismanaged, from the top ($1.1million/zero qualifications) on down. It's the most valuable asset of the people of Alabama, and we allow a handful of failgrandsons to treat it as their toy/piggybank. The list is just endless, from coal rights through concrete corruption to sweetheart dorm overbuilding, all of them unexamined by a robotic board that never actually discusses anything in public view or sees a single negative vote cast on any issue.

This is one usually-unspoken reason why they so deeply despise UAB athletics: their petty attempts to undercut its success give a glimpse of the huge iceberg of vile, reeking corruption under the surface.

Preaching to the choir. That mismanagement is going to cost UAB some of its best research talent too (not to mention coaches). It's just a matter of time.

(09-07-2022 04:33 PM)BlazerGreen Wrote:  Preaching to the choir. That mismanagement is going to cost UAB some of its best research talent too (not to mention coaches). It's just a matter of time.

It already has. In the next few years, the first woman will be named a Nobel Laureate in Medicine, an honor she's earned more than once, which makes it a matter of time. It will be an enormous media event. She'll be listed as "University of Pennsylvania" when it should read "UAB."

A Nobel for the SOM allowed to walk away.

Scheiss auf den Kürbiskopf.

Just realized that Maryland will be at Charlotte this weekend. Duke played at Charlotte last year but as we said earlier those NC schools aren't afraid to travel to in state G5 schools. I am surprised about Maryland though.
What's crazy to me is that Charlotte's stadium is tiny! It's a little over 15k which is 1/3 the size of Protective Stadium.