Back at Sam Boyd
- Thread starter RebelMan5000
- Start date
True. Add in the loss of 2 for the price of 1 tickets for alumni, and prices are way up. I feel like a con job was done on me last year. Add in the fact the two of the better home games are likely to be played in Sam Boyd, what are they providing to us for the price increase?
The NFL schedule came out today and the Raiders play @ Carolina the weekend of the ASU game. I think there's still a possibility the Arizona State game gets played at Allegiant. Maybe by September things will be back to normal but I doubt they'll be booking concerts for 65,000 people by then. Might as well let the Rebels play there.
If they don't player every game in the new stadium, every person connected to the Las Vegas stadium board needs to be fired and replaced by a board that does their job. They have the power to overrule the Raiders, they are just a bunch of wimps!
I get the plight of La Tech being in new stadium in front of a likely small crowd.
I don't get the Raiders trying to minimize UNLV playing ASU, one of the 4 nearest universities, and one we don't often get to play at home, who happens to be a team that likely hits top 25 this year and has a well-respected NFL caliber coach. I don't expect that game to draw 65k, but it could draw 30k. 30k at allegiant for UNLV would be decent, IMO, and it's a real slap in the face (another one) by the Raiders if they show the schedule having an OPEN WEEKEND when SB1 indicates that Rebels have priority over ANY UNSCHEDULED EVENT at Allegiant.
Real bad look for Raiders from anyone who cares even a little about UNLV athletics. Real bad look for Stadium Authority Board, and by that I mean MGM and LVCVA.
I don't get the Raiders trying to minimize UNLV playing ASU, one of the 4 nearest universities, and one we don't often get to play at home, who happens to be a team that likely hits top 25 this year and has a well-respected NFL caliber coach. I don't expect that game to draw 65k, but it could draw 30k. 30k at allegiant for UNLV would be decent, IMO, and it's a real slap in the face (another one) by the Raiders if they show the schedule having an OPEN WEEKEND when SB1 indicates that Rebels have priority over ANY UNSCHEDULED EVENT at Allegiant.
Real bad look for Raiders from anyone who cares even a little about UNLV athletics. Real bad look for Stadium Authority Board, and by that I mean MGM and LVCVA.
The LVCVA has already shown their colors by just a few weeks ago by clearing house of many of their senior level employees by removing many of the positions on a permanent basis. Funny how most of the people the let go were over the age of 50, while very few of the younger employee lost their jobs on a permanent basis. Can you say age discrimination?
Everyone in the organization should be furloughed without pay. What kind of organization can you have that supports Conventions and Visitors when there aren't any.
To be honest, if it’s decided crowds cannot attend, I’d rather play in SBS this season and go to the new stadium next season. I’d much rather the first game for the Rebels in Allegiant stadium be some sort of celebration. Would feel odd have that with an empty stadium.
Anyone see the newest Fauci comments regarding the NFL? Who knows if they adopt what he suggests, but it doesn't look good for NCAA football if that what becomes the standard. Especially at the Group of 5 level. He said that every athlete should be testing multiple times a week with the day before each game being an absolute must.
Also college football has to be one of the most dangerous situations since each sideling easily has 100 people on it each. At least for the home team. Just being at the game becomes a decent sized gathering of people.
As for operational costs, I would imagine they would significantly decrease if fans are not allowed. That is a lot less people needed for that. I would imagine SBS would be a bit cheaper, even the energy cost alone during the late summer games from not playing indoors.
Though it sucks for our players and the visiting teams that were under the impression they were getting Allegiant when they scheduled this. But opening the venue to no fans, which seems to be the likely scenario at this point, if there is a season at al, does seem weird. It may save UNLV much needed money to play at SBS tis season if no fans are allowed.
Also college football has to be one of the most dangerous situations since each sideling easily has 100 people on it each. At least for the home team. Just being at the game becomes a decent sized gathering of people.
As for operational costs, I would imagine they would significantly decrease if fans are not allowed. That is a lot less people needed for that. I would imagine SBS would be a bit cheaper, even the energy cost alone during the late summer games from not playing indoors.
Though it sucks for our players and the visiting teams that were under the impression they were getting Allegiant when they scheduled this. But opening the venue to no fans, which seems to be the likely scenario at this point, if there is a season at al, does seem weird. It may save UNLV much needed money to play at SBS tis season if no fans are allowed.
Ding ding ding! If they are told, whether NCAA or conference, or some federal mandate, that college football will begin its season with no fans, it is definitely in UNLV's best interest to run SBS. I have my doubts that they would do it for a whole season because of the optics for recruits and TV.
Obviously I have no insight on the locker rooms at Allegiant, but I can imagine there are incredible benefits to NOT being in the SBS locker room... so there's that. I would imagine Arroyo pushes for Allegiant and the university ponders SBS.
If they do not allow fans, it would be time for UNLV football to cancel the season. The state of Nevada has no money, 78% of the tax base is gone until gaming/hotels are allowed to open, and there is no way they could afford the cost of keeping athletics without any income. Either fans are allowed to attend, or they are in deep shit. The one advantage is you could social distance fans in that stadium!
Maybe it’s time for the “rainy day”/education marijuana fund to be used? Where is it by the way? Anybody seen it?
I am really curious what the operating costs are for the game and how much of a loss they would take per game.
There is TV money, i know not much, but the Cal and ASU games may pay a bit more not sure what channel they are going to be on. There is a "pay me" game at Iowa State, probably not the greatest as those go. Also no cream puff warm up game this season where they would have to pay the visiting team with no TV coverage.
My point is, it is not like the football program gets a lot of revenue from hosting games. I wonder if it would be that much more of a loss with reduced operating costs on game day without fans. Especially if they move to SBS for most, if not all of the games.
Of course there are trickle down effects. There may be other teams, even within conference, that will have an even harder time financially paying for this season.
Attendance will be down, but TV ratings will be much, much higher. I know we are somewhat locked in to the TV contract. I'm not sure if the new one gives you bonuses for making the higher profile channels like the older contract did. Money will be generated, but how will it be distributed?
I can see the power schools trying to get a bigger piece considering the revenues change, and maybe it trickles down to us. Who knows.
I would think decisions need to be made relatively soon.
When will players have to be on campus? How many tests will be needed and can we get our hands on them? How many sick players before we cancel a game? Who pays if a game is cancelled?
Will there be fans in the stadium - if so how many? If no fans how will TV be handled? Will there be enough TV $$ to pay for the program? If not where will the $$ come from?
Can we afford to travel to away games? If so will we stuff an airplane to keep down costs or have two or three to maintain distance? Will we cancel distant away games and go by bus to all conference games instead of fly?
If DRF is gone who will make these decisions?
When will players have to be on campus? How many tests will be needed and can we get our hands on them? How many sick players before we cancel a game? Who pays if a game is cancelled?
Will there be fans in the stadium - if so how many? If no fans how will TV be handled? Will there be enough TV $$ to pay for the program? If not where will the $$ come from?
Can we afford to travel to away games? If so will we stuff an airplane to keep down costs or have two or three to maintain distance? Will we cancel distant away games and go by bus to all conference games instead of fly?
If DRF is gone who will make these decisions?
The other thing is the kind of test. The typical covid test is a pain. The collection is extremely uncomfortable. Test daily? If there were a fingerstick test that was reliable, that’d be ideal for testing at that frequency.
The danger is more about the spread. You get 100+ people on the sideline then have them interact with the 100+ people on the other sideline, then you can have some problems. Players may be low symptomatic or asymptomatic carriers. Coaches, referees, etc are susceptible, plus everyone they come in contact with.
You would have to test everyone and that is a lot of tests every week. Is that morally acceptable using 200 tests for 1 of what, 50+ college football games every week? Are tests that plentiful now? Will they be in the fall? Will there be a second wave of cases in the fall?
Who knows? There are a lot of unknown factors out there.
I understand the spread very well, but the simple fact is we are either going to live life or shutdown everything until we find a vaccine which could be a year, two years, or never. There has never been a goal to stop the spread, only a goal to flatten the spread which has been done at this point, nothing short of permanently staying away from other people will do anything more than slow down the spread. I will not get into how many people do or do not actually have the virus, how many people have actually died from the virus or from other causes while they have the virus, or those listed as dying from the virus without testing, etc... It comes down to the ability of a school to absorb the financial impact. While the schools with large TV contracts can go without fans in attendance, schools like UNLV do not have the funds to do the same, and the state is totally broke, with a current loss of 78% of their tax base without hotel/gaming, so how will they offset the millions in tickets revenue that will be lost through football and basketball not being able to have fans in attendance? The bottom line is the money will not just magically show up to bail UNLV out unless there are some very generous boosters willing to foot the bills?
I regards to testing, all that will do is tell them when it is already too late to do anything about it. Testing of players will tell them once the virus has already gone through an incubation period, at which point other players and coaches will have already been exposed to the virus.
I regards to testing, all that will do is tell them when it is already too late to do anything about it. Testing of players will tell them once the virus has already gone through an incubation period, at which point other players and coaches will have already been exposed to the virus.
"shutdown everything until we find a vaccine which could be a year, two years, or never."
College sports is rapidly becoming meaningless in the grand scheme.
Even six months of continued shutdown would be the start of a demand based depression. People not working will not buy new stuff and new stuff won't get built. And the people making the new stuff will be laid off etc.etc.etc.
Many politicians want to print money and give out checks. This will work - for a while - but the only country that can buy that debt is China and they are not in as good a shape as they were a few years ago. The only reason we are able to sell our debt at the interest rates we currently see is because our economy is so strong. But with a weak economy interest will go up and our payments will require more borrowing - a circular disaster.
A depression is 10% GDP reduction for three or more years. Unless we say "Fu*k it" and open up we'll be very lucky not to experience one. Take care of the old and open up society.
Its not all or nothing. It is not shut everything down OR act like corona doesn't exist.
Truth is college football is the trickiest to justify bringing back due to all of the people involved with the teams. Team meeting are large groups, and have two large groups from different areas of the country meet for a game kind of seems irresponsible.
Basketball much easier proposition. Significantly less people involved.
Football is important financially for these institutions I get that. For many places it pay the bills for the entre athletic department. College athletes are a low risk for getting sick, not for getting infected.
I get that more and more people are testing positive without be affect much at all. The mortality % is dropping. But that doesn't mean this thing isn't dangerous. Trying to compare numbers to a flu during normal life vs corona with stay at home orders isn't valild. The flu doesn't ravage Italy and New York like Corona has.
I do think people should start to return to normal lives with safe practices as much as they can. The idea of herd immunity has it's merits. I think the NBA, MLB, even the NFL could figure out safe ways of returning to play given their resources. But logistically I do think college football has the biggest hurdles for this. Going back to work is one thing, allowing crowds to happen is another.
As for testing. Well there is antibody testing that basically is an equivalent of a vaccine if positive. Standard testing may be too late, but still important information. Wouldn't you want to know if someone tested positive? You can at least reduce potential for spread that way before letting a kid interact with a group of people they don't regularly stay in contact with.
Also thinking of finances, special deals could be worked out. Guess what? If college sports are cancelled, the TV networks lose out on money too! With no fans, and people bored AF, TV viewership will go through the roof. Advertising revenue will be much bigger. Amending contracts for more revenue sharing may be in everyone's best interests if it is the only way games can be played and broadcasts can happen. Acting like all the current financial structure is set in stone isn't necessarily true.
Now the MWC may not have the leverage to drive the bus on this, but there could be a trickle down effect. Even so, like I said, having a game to broadcast is better than not having one. If they can figure out something to save the games I think they do this.
Now the MWC may not have the leverage to drive the bus on this, but there could be a trickle down effect. Even so, like I said, having a game to broadcast is better than not having one. If they can figure out something to save the games I think they do this.
In theory, with regards to testing, yes. It’s very easy to presume that a positive IgG is essentially the same as a vaccine and it gives way to immunity. Herd immunity % = positives that recovered + vaccinated /total population. You’d like to get that number as high as possible.
I’ve made the same assumption many times because it’s just the way these things work. But we are going to have to wait longer for this to find out if IgG actually equals immunity and for how long? It’s a new virus, it hasn’t been around a year plus so it’s hard to assess lifetime immunity or even for 4 months, a year, 5 years.
In theory the comment "antibody testing that basically is an equivalent of a vaccine if positive" would be true, but in truth there is a very high level of false negatives with this test, so in truth it isn't going to be accurate enough to catch an outbreak before it happens. In regards to the number of people that have actually been infected/died from this virus, the numbers are all over the place, and the hospitals are busy firing people that come out with the fact that a large percentage of those who died actually died from other causes (how do I know this, because I know 2 medical professionals that lost their jobs for refusing to sign off on the cause of death being from the virus). It is also interesting how deaths from other causes like heart attacks, cancer, etc.. have virtually disappeared in the hospitals. Do you believe these diseases no longer exist? While I do believe that this virus is infecting people, and that people are dying, I do not believe that the number of deaths is accurate, and I also agree with the belief that the infection rate is 10 to 20 times as high as listed. Why is the infection rate important? Because if the rate is much higher, then the true mortality rate is much lower.
The good news is that it looks like the Hotel Casino industry is planning on a soft open at the end of the month. If everything goes well , and they are allowed to start opening back up, this will be the first step back towards ultimately letting crowds together at athletic events.
Hospitals are in a rough spot. Many around the country are operating at 50% capacity, maybe less. Hospitals are forced to furlough or fire doctors and other staff. Hospitals apparently get a stipend for treating COVID cases. So anyone hat has any of the long list of COVID symptoms gets flagged as such. Which no doubt taints the numbers as well.
It is bad science, but they are somewhat forced to do this to stay operational and keep people employed.
I agree with most of what you say. I do think business should start moving towards normal. It does seem that this thing isn't as dangerous as we thought or feared.
I do think there is danger there, and this thing has more significance than other diseases, at least until there are more proven treatments and or a vaccine.
Gathering in groups will and should be the last thing to return to normal. I would love to have football this fall, it just makes me nervous.
Last edited:
