...if revenue lost due to coronavirus is so great some schools and programs can't afford to keep going?

Here's something we discussed on my sports talk radio show...SEC ADs and commissioner Greg Sankey have openly discussed the Coronavirus threat to 2020 college football. IF the entire season is threatened it's projected (all sports) could see a financial loss of $20 billion, which could cause a large portion of individual sports programs and athletic departments to not be able to financially afford re-starting operations.

Why? Most football programs (and almost all non-football programs) are financially supported by state subsidies and student fees in addition to sponsorship dollars and fans' discretionary dollars. If states earmark that money elsewhere as part of recovery efforts, if student populations fall off, if advertisers have to keep their money in house to right their own ship, and if fans' livelihoods are affected and they can't afford to attend/donate we're talking about a major major major MAJOR economic impact.

What happens with programs (big and small) that were already on the brink of financial ruin? What will programs on the come up like App State do? How will things re-organize in the wake of all this?

We already know P5 conferences want to break away from the rest of college football as a whole. It's also safe to bet that revenue will return to P5 football first. If so what is the moral obligation of P5 football to help re-start smaller college football?

***Note*** This is a purely hypothetical, what-if, doomsday scenario conversation.

I am not sure using the term moral obligation and Prig5 in the same sentence, paragraph, or internet post can be done AND taken seriously.

With that said-
MLB needs MiLB and MLB's desire to cut out teams is going to only hurt MLB down the road. Maybe it is the difference between a very, very slow decline in the sport vs a faster decline but cutting MiLB is not going to help the long term prospects of pulling in fans, though it will save MLB some $ in the near term.

If the Prig5 pulls away and takes nearly all the resources then it will be some short term gains but long term many of us that follow G5 schools and FCS and smaller colleges may not substitute a Prig5 school. I just will not watch college football. I'll find other things to do with my time and money. They, the Prig5, would be wise to keep this in mind. Hopefully there are enough out there that feel the same way. Look at March Madness, one reason it is so successful is the possible upsets and Cinderella stories that play out year after year. By defination the Prig5 schools can't really be Cinderella stories or at least not very compelling Cinderalla stories.

I'm not at all convinced that the P5 has any real desire to separate from G5. There are certainly elite programs that like to talk about the gap, but those are some of the same programs who continue to schedule some of the easiest OOC out there (Alabama). Without the G5 (and even FCS), the P5 would be forced to beat up on each other in order to deliver a schedule and that isn't in the best interest of programs where fans LOVE undefeated teams.

With regard to a "moral obligation", I don't know if that is a "thing" with regards to athletics. I do think the P5 will do what is in their own best interest. I also think this could spell the end of some programs..or the down-grade of some programs if the 2020 season isn't played.

Yosef84,

I hadn't thought of that. How many low-budget programs might consider the FCS route. We'll see who REALLY wants to invest in FBS football pretty quickly.

Money will someday be the downfall of college football. Maybe a reset would not be a bad thing.

APPdiesel wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:37 pm

Yosef84,

I hadn't thought of that. How many low-budget programs might consider the FCS route. We'll see who REALLY wants to invest in FBS football pretty quickly.

Or who can afford to.

I'm sure there are at least 25 FBS programs who are seriously considering temporarily shelving or completely moth-balling their programs because of this.

If that happens WTH are the legal/organizational ramifications? If you drop football for 2 years, what happens when you're ready to come back? Automatic re-entry into your previous conference or are you on your own to create new leagues out of the cast-offs?

It’s becoming more obvious that regionalized conferences are the way to go, especially for the G5’s. Reduced travel expenses, larger crowds and more compelling games simply makes more sense. Annual games against ECU, Charlotte, Marshall, etc would really be a boost to us.

APPdiesel wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:22 pm

I'm sure there are at least 25 FBS programs who are seriously considering temporarily shelving or completely moth-balling their programs because of this.

If that happens WTH are the legal/organizational ramifications? If you drop football for 2 years, what happens when you're ready to come back? Automatic re-entry into your previous conference or are you on your own to create new leagues out of the cast-offs?

Rings eerily of ETSU.

bigdaddyg wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 26, 2020 3:27 pm

It’s becoming more obvious that regionalized conferences are the way to go, especially for the G5’s. Reduced travel expenses, larger crowds and more compelling games simply makes more sense. Annual games against ECU, Charlotte, Marshall, etc would really be a boost to us.

To most folks, the idea of regional conferences has always made sense. The concept of spreading out in order to broaden "markets" has failed dramatically for G5 conferences. The problem is that G5 schools don't command a high enough percentage of the market by themselves to demand attention and spreading out the conferences makes it more difficult to build those intense rivalries. By contracting and having multiple programs in a given market, I would think the ability to actually command attention (and dollars) in that market would be increased. It just makes sense.

I think the problem today isn't getting people to agree on the concept of more regional conferences. The problem is how we get there from where we are. That involves significant cooperation, which isn't common strength these days.

Fans can have their egos and their unique "I like school A but I don't want to be associated with school B". But thankfully these decisions aren't up to emotional fans, they're up to administrators who *should* think logically.

I read this morning that as of right now the schools in the NC system plan to reopen in the fall with students. Would that mean that they all plan to play sports as well? In my mind for sports to happen it’s got to be a 100% deal nationwide. How can the universities in say, 35 states reopen to students and play football while 15 remain on line with no on campus students and no football? It’s almost a foregone conclusion that fall camp won’t start on time. How on earth can the season begin at the first of September if the entire normal schedule is delayed?

In regards to the notion of the P5’s breaking away and only playing each other they would quickly resemble the current NBA model. There are a handful of true contenders, some perennial.500 programs and some perennial teams that suck like the Hornets. If schools like Wake, Vanderbilt, Kansas, etc can’t play FCS or lower level G5’s they will be stuck with 4-8 records (or worse). You might as well say goodbye to the bowl system as well.

bigdaddyg wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 30, 2020 10:22 am

I read this morning that as of right now the schools in the NC system plan to reopen in the fall with students. Would that mean that they all plan to play sports as well? In my mind for sports to happen it’s got to be a 100% deal nationwide. How can the universities in say, 35 states reopen to students and play football while 15 remain on line with no on campus students and no football? It’s almost a foregone conclusion that fall camp won’t start on time. How on earth can the season begin at the first of September if the entire normal schedule is delayed?

In regards to the notion of the P5’s breaking away and only playing each other they would quickly resemble the current NBA model. There are a handful of true contenders, some perennial.500 programs and some perennial teams that suck like the Hornets. If schools like Wake, Vanderbilt, Kansas, etc can’t play FCS or lower level G5’s they will be stuck with 4-8 records (or worse). You might as well say goodbye to the bowl system as well.

OR maybe they would come up with a bowl system that actually means something.

APPdiesel wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:37 pm

Yosef84,

I hadn't thought of that. How many low-budget programs might consider the FCS route. We'll see who REALLY wants to invest in FBS football pretty quickly.

I think we need to see several teams drop down to FCS anyway. A lot of programs are barely making it now and really need to drop down so they can lower their budgets.

Look at these numbers from last year. If the NCAA were to set the minimum attendance of 17,000 a year then 18 schools would have to drop down and if you set it at 18,000 then probably another 9 teams would have to drop down.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_ ... e/2019.pdf

There are 3 teams who can't even average 10,000 a game. I'm sure not playing ball would possibly make some programs consider dropping down to FCS.

Time to reinstate turnstiles and actually count an accurate number of fans and enforce the rules. When the NCAA lets you count tickets sold you can flub the numbers however you want. Michigan has been padding their attendance numbers with stadium employees for years.

AppStFan1 wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 30, 2020 12:15 pm

APPdiesel wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:37 pm

Yosef84,

I hadn't thought of that. How many low-budget programs might consider the FCS route. We'll see who REALLY wants to invest in FBS football pretty quickly.

I think we need to see several teams drop down to FCS anyway. A lot of programs are barely making it now and really need to drop down so they can lower their budgets.

Look at these numbers from last year. If the NCAA were to set the minimum attendance of 17,000 a year then 18 schools would have to drop down and if you set it at 18,000 then probably another 9 teams would have to drop down.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_ ... e/2019.pdf

There are 3 teams who can't even average 10,000 a game. I'm sure not playing ball would possibly make some programs consider dropping down to FCS.

Sure but the MAC loses the attendance battle as a consequence of being on ESPN with all weeknight games in November. How do you not take that in consideration? Some schools just don't draw.

AppSt94 wrote: ↑

Fri May 01, 2020 5:09 pm

AppStFan1 wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 30, 2020 12:15 pm

APPdiesel wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:37 pm

Yosef84,

I hadn't thought of that. How many low-budget programs might consider the FCS route. We'll see who REALLY wants to invest in FBS football pretty quickly.

I think we need to see several teams drop down to FCS anyway. A lot of programs are barely making it now and really need to drop down so they can lower their budgets.

Look at these numbers from last year. If the NCAA were to set the minimum attendance of 17,000 a year then 18 schools would have to drop down and if you set it at 18,000 then probably another 9 teams would have to drop down.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_ ... e/2019.pdf

There are 3 teams who can't even average 10,000 a game. I'm sure not playing ball would possibly make some programs consider dropping down to FCS.

Sure but the MAC loses the attendance battle as a consequence of being on ESPN with all weeknight games in November. How do you not take that in consideration? Some schools just don't draw.

Weeknight games definitely need to get thrown out, if you are going to enforce the rule.

AppSt94 wrote: ↑

Fri May 01, 2020 5:09 pm

AppStFan1 wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 30, 2020 12:15 pm

APPdiesel wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:37 pm

Yosef84,

I hadn't thought of that. How many low-budget programs might consider the FCS route. We'll see who REALLY wants to invest in FBS football pretty quickly.

I think we need to see several teams drop down to FCS anyway. A lot of programs are barely making it now and really need to drop down so they can lower their budgets.

Look at these numbers from last year. If the NCAA were to set the minimum attendance of 17,000 a year then 18 schools would have to drop down and if you set it at 18,000 then probably another 9 teams would have to drop down.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_ ... e/2019.pdf

There are 3 teams who can't even average 10,000 a game. I'm sure not playing ball would possibly make some programs consider dropping down to FCS.

Sure but the MAC loses the attendance battle as a consequence of being on ESPN with all weeknight games in November. How do you not take that in consideration? Some schools just don't draw.

If they played on Saturdays they would have more fans in the stands but much harder to get TV viewers. On a Tuesday when there is no other football many of us will tune in just because it is all that is on TV. I would never see the MAC if they played on Saturday every time. Their choice.

A couple interesting comparisons.

Akron hosted Buffalo on a Saturday and had around 16,000. They hosted EMU and had just under 11,000 during the week. They also hosted Ohio during the week and had 21,400. A school like App was effected even more and we still had more than 18,000. We had 18,800 hosting GSU in Boone during the week and two weeks before we had 27,700 hosting ULM on a Saturday.

Numbers are definitely effected but several MAC schools seem to want eyeballs on TV more than the people in the stands. Tough decision for them but since TV brings in more money they are making the right choice. Seriously, I bet TV viewership drops 50-75% on Saturday compared to the weekday MAC games.