Jump to content



UAlbany Athletics- America East-
SOCIAL MEDIA: UAlbany Facebook- UAlbany Instagram- UAlbany Twitter- UAlbany Blog-
MEDIA: Albany Student Press- America East TV- ESPN3- Schenectady Gazette- The Team 104.5 ESPN Radio- The Team 104.5 ESPN Radio Archive interviews- Times Union College Sports- Times Union Sports- WCDB- WOFX 980-
FALL SPORTS LINKS: CAA Football-
WINTER SPORTS LINKS: College Insider- Pomeroy Ratings- Real TimeRPI-
SPRING SPORTS LINKS: Inside Lacrosse- Lax Power Backup Stick-
OTHER FORUMS: America East Forum- Any Given Saturday Forum- Championship Subdivision forum(1-AA Discussion) The Hen House - Siena Forum- Stony Brook Forum- Vermont Forum
Sign in to follow this  
godanesgo99

Butts in the Seats 2018 edition

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Dane96 said:

Doesn’t save money to move to the NEC.  I don’t know why these ridiculous posts continue.  Football issue is coaching.  Not money. The money would be the same with less buy games.  

I agree on getting money games, but in the NEC you can decrease the scholarship amounts and save money there and a better chance at reaching the playoffs. Ridiculous or not, we’ve won with less in the past. Any home attendance boosts since moving to the CAA has strictly been from playing in a new stadium not the new conference. BUT if the big, big boosters are donating only because of the fact we play in the CAA then fine. 

Either way glad basketball season is upon us. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The nec has the exact same scholarship amounts.  All of the schools but two offer 63 scholarship based on a combo of scholarships and other school grant in aids.  That’s why they play FBS schools as a counter. 

 

We would not save money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dane 96, 

I do not have your inside information, but I must question your fact that "We would not save money." Combo scholarships, grants in Aid, academic scholarships exist at all levels of college sport. The Ivy league claims they do not offer athletic scholarships at all, but I assure you Yale has MORE lacrosse players on scholarship than UA lacrosse. John Hopkins in lacrosse and RPI & Union in hockey do not offer athletic scholarships; but especially Hopkins in lacrosse you'd be hard pressed to find a more successful program. So I question including combo's etc in your cost comparisons.

The fact is the NEC allows less athletic scholarships and that would SAVE us money. In the NEC, UA had LESS coaches, LESS travel and a considerably SMALLER budget. Ford used student coaches and volunteers; and did not have a staff of high prices assistants and associate head coaches. Of course he did have paid help, but he made LESS after 40 years than the current coach does now and his staff payroll was a fraction of now. Money SAVED. 

In the NEC we did frequently play MONEY games. In the NEC we competed for championships pretty nearly every year. You are certainly entitled to your opinion that UA should stay in the caa!  I was never for the move and obviously I was in the minority (certainly adding support to your position); but I cannot agree with your assessment that UA would not save money by going back; and do ask when do you feel and how much is it going to cost us to compete for championships every year in the caa, like we once did in the NEC.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your facts are 100% wrong.  And, I’ll leave it at that.  I can say that for a fact.  The only savings we would see are in the one or two charter flights we take per year that have not been paid for by the money from a buy game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to re-iterate, our losing is not a money issue.  IT IS A COACHING ISSUE.  

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And too be clear, by saying not saving money...I don't consider a 500k savings enough to move the needle.  Sure, we would save about 500k on travel and game day expenses.  That's about it other than taking us down to the  minimum coaches (which would mean removing TWO or THREE low end paid assistants, maybe totaling a $100k).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dane96 said:

And to re-iterate, our losing is not a money issue.  IT IS A COACHING ISSUE.  

 

This... It's absolutely absurd to judge what this program can be by looking at the product as a result of one individual with the support of an ad running it into the ground. Fire both of them... Replace with competent people and you won't even think about going back to the NEC. 

 

This whole argument is rediculous.. 

And schoorship counts? What is that... A line item on the books for 63 people on an 18k student campus? Absurd...you still would have 63 people in the team or more that would need room and board. You want to drop down from a league that is the top of the FCS heap in an effort to what? Play st Francis and Bryant? 

 

They aren't losing because they can't compete, don't have facilities or budget... They are losing because they hired and then extended a LOSER! Fire him and let's see if this is still a thing in 3 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NM. Less than a week till hoops. Let's focus on getting butts in the seats in SEFCU. Convince friends to buy tickets. Convince your employer to buy advertising at SEFCU. Support the companies that advertise and let them know why you are doing it. Add value to their sponsorship dollars to ensure they continue. 

Want SEFCU upgrades? Help build the program.

Edited by godanesgo99
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, godanesgo99 said:

UA doesn't save net money moving backwards long term if the goal is to improve, become a FCS power, and eventually try to move to FBS. The problem is most don't see them improving with the current regime. A move back might help short term, but it is really just giving up. If giving up football ambition is what is decided, I am all for it. Casey Stadium becomes the beat club sport Stadium in the country and a top level Lacrosse Stadium. I'd rather them continue on their path trying to grow, but even the resources a bit, giving a better percentage to the sport that can bring national attention faster with upgrades to SEFCU and more resources for hoops.

 

I'm all in favor of absolutely gutting Gattusos budget if they can't fire him... As we essentially put the program on ice and wait out his contract. Right now we are spending big bucks to watch Gattuso drive this program off the cliff. He can do that just as well with a big haircut. 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

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
Sign in to follow this  

×