NU FB: Is canceling the televised spring game the right decision?

[HerbRedman]

Take it from Dean folks, this was a necessary move. If you cut down 20% seven times we make our money back?

$8,000,000 revenue per game
-20% ($1,600,000)

x 7 games = $11,200,000

That's what Dannen says we are losing out on by playing the season at reduced capacity

Obviously 1 additional home game won't make back $11.2m, but it will severely help.

 

[Jim14510]

$8,000,000 revenue per game
-20% ($1,600,000)

x 7 games = $11,200,000

That's what Dannen says we are losing out on by playing the season at reduced capacity

Obviously 1 additional home game won't make back $11.2m, but it will severely help.

Ok. What is the cost per home game? 6.4 is revenue correct? Not including opposing team.

 

[HerbRedman]

Ok. What is the cost per home game? 6.4 is revenue correct? Not including opposing team.

No idea. I took the tweet to say that $8m/game is gross revenue all in, all sources.

No idea what the expenses # is out of that.

 

[Tell_Sackett]

The initial report I read said the game wouldn’t be televised.

Everything I read in preparing to respond to your post, says ‘Cancelled’. I’d say it won’t take place.

I understand your frustration with the cancellation, but the ‘why’ of it, I actually agree with. It sucks that we’re at this point with ‘amateur athletics’, but it is what it is. Why risk exposure of kids to other schools? With USC and Texas joining the list, it’s obvious Nebraska and Rhule aren’t alone. Add to the poaching component the risk of injury in a meaningless scrimmage and I’m even more OK with it. I loved the tradition of it and I’ve looked forward to it since it was first televised or recorded and replayed later, but times change and he’s changing with them.

I get the logic behind it but when we continue to erode our traditions, eventually it morphs into something else. College football is not the NFL, but yet that is where it's clearly heading. The traditions we hold dear are rapidly crumbling before our eyes. We are sacrificing fan engagement at multiple levels and it is hurting the product.

 

[Stan Raymond]

$8,000,000 revenue per game
-20% ($1,600,000)

x 7 games = $11,200,000

That's what Dannen says we are losing out on by playing the season at reduced capacity

Obviously 1 additional home game won't make back $11.2m, but it will severely help.

So the Miami game will bring in $6.4 million ($8 million - $1.6 million). Minus the $1 million to Tennessee and the $1.55 million to Bowling Green and the approximate $1.5 million to Miami.

So we end up with $2.4 million = $6.4 million - $4 million in payouts. And that's gross revenue before expenses.

Don't see the AD making much off this.

If we are that strapped for cash then we should have waited a couple of games to fire Frost or at least not given him that stupid ass extension. I know, different AD, but it still chaps my ass.

 

[HerbRedman]

So the Miami game will bring in $6.4 million ($8 million - $1.6 million). Minus the $1 million to Tennessee and the $1.55 million to Bowling Green and the approximate $1.5 million to Miami.

So we end up with $2.4 million = $6.4 million - $4 million in payouts. And that's gross revenue before expenses.

Don't see the AD making much off this.

If we are that strapped for cash then we should have waited a couple of games to fire Frost or at least not given him that stupid ass extension. I know, different AD, but it still chaps my ass.

Stan - your math is disingenuous. The bottom line is that as things currently stand, NU is down $11m-ish in gross revenue for playing 7 home games at -20% capacity. Any net $$ they bring in for an 8th home game is gravy. If it ends up being $2m that's still an additional +$2m they didn't have before. And it's theoretically a free win on Nebraska's schedule. There's not really a downside to it IMO.



That aside, I believe Dannen is taking the bullet for Rhule. Someone said Dannen was telling people as recently as 1 week ago that the Tennessee game was in "no danger". Then he goes and cancels it. (?)

If I had to put a wager on it, this is being driven by Rhule and Dannen is taking the bullet for him. This is 99% a competitive decision IMHO and Dannen is using the financial situation as a cover. Frankly I doubt Dannen even wanted to mess with this but he's a good AD and sometimes good ADs take bullets for their FB HCs.

 

[Stan Raymond]

Stan - your math is disingenuous. The bottom line is that as things currently stand, NU is down $11m-ish in gross revenue for playing 7 home games at -20% capacity. Any net $$ they bring in for an 8th home game is gravy. If it ends up being $2m that's still an additional +$2m they didn't have before. And it's theoretically a free win on Nebraska's schedule. There's not really a downside to it IMO.



That aside, I believe Dannen is taking the bullet for Rhule. Someone said Dannen was telling people as recently as 1 week ago that the Tennessee game was in "no danger". Then he goes and cancels it. (?)

If I had to put a wager on it, this is being driven by Rhule and Dannen is taking the bullet for him. This is 99% a competitive decision IMHO and Dannen is using the financial situation as a cover. Frankly I doubt Dannen even wanted to mess with this but he's a good AD and sometimes good ADs take bullets for their FB HCs.

I agree with you on the why. Just saying the financial excuse isn't great when you factor in all the payments, getting out of the two game series is costing us $4 million.

 

[HerbRedman]

I agree with you on the why. Just saying the financial excuse isn't great when you factor in all the payments, getting out of the two game series is costing us $4 million.

I thought it was $1m to terminate the contract? How is it costing us $4m?

But I agree with you and that's why I don't think this was Dannen's want.

 

[Jim14510]

I thought it was $1m to terminate the contract? How is it costing us $4m?

But I agree with you and that's why I don't think this was Dannen's want.

Have to pay the teams we play.

 

[Quint]

I get the logic behind it but when we continue to erode our traditions, eventually it morphs into something else. College football is not the NFL, but yet that is where it's clearly heading. The traditions we hold dear are rapidly crumbling before our eyes. We are sacrificing fan engagement at multiple levels and it is hurting the product.

I felt this way a decade ago. Now I think it’s just gone. At least the version of college football I grew up with is gone. I’d also add it was never as squeaky clean as I pretended it was, even growing up watching Nebraska in the ’70’s in the Big 8.

Now, it’s just another product marketed to me in a way I don’t particularly care for. l still really enjoy college football and in particular the Huskers. I have a hard time not engaging in a non Nebraska game I come across on the TV any given day or night of the week, so for all the faults money has injected into the sport, I’m still obviously gripped by it. It’s definitely changed and I don’t think for the better.

 

[Tell_Sackett]

I felt this way a decade ago. Now I think it’s just gone. At least the version of college football I grew up with is gone. I’d also add it was never as squeaky clean as I pretended it was, even growing up watching Nebraska in the ’70’s in the Big 8.

Now, it’s just another product marketed to me in a way I don’t particularly care for. l still really enjoy college football and in particular the Huskers. I have a hard time not engaging in a non Nebraska game I come across on the TV any given day or night of the week, so for all the faults money has injected into the sport, I’m still obviously gripped by it. It’s definitely changed and I don’t think for the better.

I agree that the game felt more pure and was likely better off when the payments were in the shadows. Ironic.

Losing the regional rivalries and traditional conference tie-ins in many ways parallels NASCAR's rapid growth which alienated the base by placing too much emphasis on expanding into new markets. We can clearly see where that left them. CFB has lost sight of what made it great imo.

 

[Quint]

I agree that the game felt more pure and was likely better off when the payments were in the shadows. Ironic.

Losing the regional rivalries and traditional conference tie-ins in many ways parallels NASCAR's rapid growth which alienated the base by placing too much emphasis on expanding into new markets. We can clearly see where that left them. CFB has lost sight of what made it great imo.

It’s no longer a great sport that just happens to make money for many of the schools and media outlets. It’s now almost entirely about money with the window dressing of tradition and sport.

 

[Stan Raymond]

I thought it was $1m to terminate the contract? How is it costing us $4m?

But I agree with you and that's why I don't think this was Dannen's want.

$1 million to Tennessee
$1.55 million to Bowling Green
I'm guessing around $1.5 million to Miami

 

[HerbRedman]

$1 million to Tennessee
$1.55 million to Bowling Green
I'm guessing around $1.5 million to Miami

Oh 2 teams for 2026 and 2027. I get it

 

[vailhusker]

 

[huskerj12]

It seems so overly cautious/paranoid but I dunno, seems like everybody is done with it for some reason. Another casualty of the braindead way the sport is run in the free-for-all era.

 

[Eaton Beaver]

Awesome video!

 

[HerbRedman]

It seems so overly cautious/paranoid but I dunno, seems like everybody is done with it for some reason. Another casualty of the braindead way the sport is run in the free-for-all era.

Again, it's not about actual losing of the player. Most of the time these good programs are able to keep the guys they want.

This is 100% about having your top guys' heads turned by another program... and then you have to put major effort and sometimes $$$ into persuading them to stay. It's a massive pain in the ass for these programs and it's something they don't want to have to deal with.

I work in a recruiting/sales manager role. Just to recruit one top sales guy takes a ton of effort. Months and years of effort. I don't want to have to re-recruit my people any more than is absolutely necessary. It's exhausting just to get them to sign with you in the first place. I don't think people appreciate how annoying it is when one of your top guys is getting poached by the competition.

 

[huskerj12]

Again, it's not about actual losing of the player. Most of the time these good programs are able to keep the guys they want.

This is 100% about having your top guys' heads turned by another program... and then you have to put major effort and sometimes $$$ into persuading them to stay. It's a massive pain in the ass for these programs and it's something they don't want to have to deal with.

I work in a recruiting/sales manager role. Just to recruit one top sales guy takes a ton of effort. Months and years of effort. I don't want to have to re-recruit my people any more than is absolutely necessary. It's exhausting just to get them to sign with you in the first place. I don't think people appreciate how annoying it is when one of your top guys is getting poached by the competition.

Oh I absolutely get that! My thought is just that the nature of the sport now means that what you're describing is going to happen constantly whether teams hold a spring game or not. It's wild to think that a spring game would make that stuff SO MUCH WORSE that it's worth cancelling a big moneymaker tradition. But again, it's not just us so clearly there's something to it, it's just hard to wrap my head around.

 

[HerbRedman]

Oh I absolutely get that! My thought is just that the nature of the sport now means that what you're describing is going to happen constantly whether teams hold a spring game or not. It's wild to think that a spring game would make that stuff SO MUCH WORSE that it's worth cancelling a big moneymaker tradition. But again, it's not just us so clearly there's something to it, it's just hard to wrap my head around.

My $.02 on it is BECAUSE we make a big deal out of the spring game, that's created an air of perceived significance in the players' minds. (When everyone knows the spring game is just a glorified practice)

Example: if a 3rd string RB (who thinks he's hot shit) only gets 2 carries in the spring game...since it's on TV and in front of 60,000 fans, it's perceived as a big deal to him. When in actuality it's just a glorified practice and not a big deal. But he's a lot more suseptible to a call from another school saying "you're obviously not in their plans."

You wouldn't have this issue if it was a closed door practice - bc no one would know about it. And the coaches could control the narrative of it with the player. But putting the thing on TV and in front of 60k people you heighten this phenomenon 100x.


As Rhule said, he's happy to revisit the spring game once we introduce contracts for the players. But as it is now, it's a stupid thing to do because the ROI is terrible. There's not benefit out of the game to justify the shit that comes with it that you have to deal with.