The case against Ianello

[johnnyzip84]

+1. These past two years have been neither competitive nor entertaining. It's not about the money. It's about the time I've wasted, not enjoying myself, dragging myself to games we rarely were given chances to compete, much less win. My family and I don't need this and are not buying this horrible product in 2012 if no change is made

I have been privileged to attend many games in a friend's suite since the stadium opened. They feel that it has been a complete waste of money. Food and drink only go so far. When going to a game--in a luxury suite--is a dreaded weekly burden, something needs to change. My friends and I cannot and will not tolerate another game of Ianello-ball. So, personally speaking, I know of tens of thousands of dollars that the coach is ALREADY costing UA. Not to mention the empty stands and many other suite owners whose renewal notices will go unreturned. College football is a big business. UA better realize that and get in the game....or get out altogether. They're putting a coach and product on the field that's like milquetoaste compared to Cardinal Mooney, Chagrin Falls, Mentor, St. V. It's pathetic, Luis.

College is about EDUCATION. If football is all about big business then it should be left to those willing to take financial risk for financial reward.

You seem to be OK with others footing the bill in all things. The university to provide your entertainment and your friends to provide access that entertainment. Your attitude is exactly what is wrong with society today. "Give me", "Provide it for me", "I/we deserve it"

Ridiculous post. You missed the entire point. How much revenue is UA going to lose holding onto The Grim Reaper as head coach? College may be about education, but college football has nothing to do with education and everything to do with entertainment and revenue generation. I simply don't understand how UA puts ANY butts in the seats other than parents/family anymore. You talk about financial risk. How about the financial risk of building a 68 million dollar football stadium without the ability to sell any tickets to events held there? You're OK with that? You're OK with suite/box subscribers walking away?

Football in the MAC generates REVENUE but not INCOME. YES...I am OK suite/box subscribers walking away rather than asking students to subsidize their entertainment. College football is just not that important. Colleges should NOT be in business to provide entertainment. Sorry...you just don't get it. Sports are intended to enhance the student experience. But not at any cost. Mount Union, Xavier, Dayton and other schools have great student experience and don’t ask its students to subsidize football for the entertainment of a few fans.

The ship you wish for sailed long ago. FBS college football is almost entirely about revenue generation. While I would agree that maybe it shouldn't be so, this is a FBS program operating in a FBS league. You can advocate that UA should perhaps go small-time in football (aren't we there already?) but UA obviously hasn't figured out what it wants to be. They have spent money on facilities as if they would like to be a larger FBS program and have yet failed to do ANYTHING which would allow for additional revenue generation to support those moves. What exactly is the point of a 68 million dollar stadium? How do you pay for that facility? Do you believe that the advocates for its creation pointed to "enhanced student experience" alone as justification? How much "additional revenue" was anticipated through luxury box sales, catering, team shop sales, tickets, etc? If the Doug Snyder vision were uniformly applied the team would be FCS or smaller, it would play in a stadium seating 10K and would just be a nice little adjunct to Fall weekends. Come to think of it, that would actually be a gigantic improvement over where the program is right now, but still, that's not what UA appeared to be going for when the whole Infocision thing started. Now that the facilities are built and as long as UA is FBS, they must generate revenue. You wish it weren't so, but someone has to pay, and "revenue generators" sure as hell aren't lining up right now are they?

That's exactly the reality Dr P faces. There's really no turning back at this point.

[Captain Kangaroo]

That's exactly the reality Dr P faces. There's really no turning back at this point.

The Remora was hired to:

1.) Hire a winning football coach

2.) Fill InfoCision

His stadium is empty, and his coach has lost 95% of his games after 2 seasons. In the UA Dean's office, that grades-out somewhere between Blutarsky and Daniel Day.

Top-to-bottom, even though we just did it 2 1/2 years ago, we gotta change again.

[Doug Snyder]

+1. These past two years have been neither competitive nor entertaining. It's not about the money. It's about the time I've wasted, not enjoying myself, dragging myself to games we rarely were given chances to compete, much less win. My family and I don't need this and are not buying this horrible product in 2012 if no change is made

I have been privileged to attend many games in a friend's suite since the stadium opened. They feel that it has been a complete waste of money. Food and drink only go so far. When going to a game--in a luxury suite--is a dreaded weekly burden, something needs to change. My friends and I cannot and will not tolerate another game of Ianello-ball. So, personally speaking, I know of tens of thousands of dollars that the coach is ALREADY costing UA. Not to mention the empty stands and many other suite owners whose renewal notices will go unreturned. College football is a big business. UA better realize that and get in the game....or get out altogether. They're putting a coach and product on the field that's like milquetoaste compared to Cardinal Mooney, Chagrin Falls, Mentor, St. V. It's pathetic, Luis.

College is about EDUCATION. If football is all about big business then it should be left to those willing to take financial risk for financial reward.

You seem to be OK with others footing the bill in all things. The university to provide your entertainment and your friends to provide access that entertainment. Your attitude is exactly what is wrong with society today. "Give me", "Provide it for me", "I/we deserve it"

Ridiculous post. You missed the entire point. How much revenue is UA going to lose holding onto The Grim Reaper as head coach? College may be about education, but college football has nothing to do with education and everything to do with entertainment and revenue generation. I simply don't understand how UA puts ANY butts in the seats other than parents/family anymore. You talk about financial risk. How about the financial risk of building a 68 million dollar football stadium without the ability to sell any tickets to events held there? You're OK with that? You're OK with suite/box subscribers walking away?

Football in the MAC generates REVENUE but not INCOME. YES...I am OK suite/box subscribers walking away rather than asking students to subsidize their entertainment. College football is just not that important. Colleges should NOT be in business to provide entertainment. Sorry...you just don't get it. Sports are intended to enhance the student experience. But not at any cost. Mount Union, Xavier, Dayton and other schools have great student experience and don’t ask its students to subsidize football for the entertainment of a few fans.

The ship you wish for sailed long ago. FBS college football is almost entirely about revenue generation. While I would agree that maybe it shouldn't be so, this is a FBS program operating in a FBS league. You can advocate that UA should perhaps go small-time in football (aren't we there already?) but UA obviously hasn't figured out what it wants to be. They have spent money on facilities as if they would like to be a larger FBS program and have yet failed to do ANYTHING which would allow for additional revenue generation to support those moves. What exactly is the point of a 68 million dollar stadium? How do you pay for that facility? Do you believe that the advocates for its creation pointed to "enhanced student experience" alone as justification? How much "additional revenue" was anticipated through luxury box sales, catering, team shop sales, tickets, etc? If the Doug Snyder vision were uniformly applied the team would be FCS or smaller, it would play in a stadium seating 10K and would just be a nice little adjunct to Fall weekends. Come to think of it, that would actually be a gigantic improvement over where the program is right now, but still, that's not what UA appeared to be going for when the whole Infocision thing started. Now that the facilities are built and as long as UA is FBS, they must generate revenue. You wish it weren't so, but someone has to pay, and "revenue generators" sure as hell aren't lining up right now are they?

The 68M for the Info was paid for by donations...not student fees. Also...a big reason WAS student experience. The Rubber Bowl was to far away to add anything to student experience. Also...the cost of maintaining the Rubber Bowl was cost prohibitive. If we wanted to stay in the MAC and have football, a new stadium had to be built. The real decision was how big and how much. But part of that 68M went to build a facility that would house more than just football. I am more than OK with private money being donated to improve facilities....but students should never be asked to foot the bill. They spend $1,200 per year (assuming just 2 semesters) in student fees to subsidize athletics. I don't believe that is money well spent and I certainly don't think they should spend more.

I have an accounting and finance degree…so I guess you can count me as one who considers the cost of things and who pays.

[K92]

I am still laughing about the Blutarsky/Day comparison. Classic stuff, CK!

[bobbyake]

Got this text yesterday...

so where do we tailgate now that AKRON IS DEAD TO ME?

sent from iPod

We started a tailgating tradition for Akron soccer games. We usually get 20-30 people per game.

[Zipmeister]

+1. These past two years have been neither competitive nor entertaining. It's not about the money. It's about the time I've wasted, not enjoying myself, dragging myself to games we rarely were given chances to compete, much less win. My family and I don't need this and are not buying this horrible product in 2012 if no change is made

I have been privileged to attend many games in a friend's suite since the stadium opened. They feel that it has been a complete waste of money. Food and drink only go so far. When going to a game--in a luxury suite--is a dreaded weekly burden, something needs to change. My friends and I cannot and will not tolerate another game of Ianello-ball. So, personally speaking, I know of tens of thousands of dollars that the coach is ALREADY costing UA. Not to mention the empty stands and many other suite owners whose renewal notices will go unreturned. College football is a big business. UA better realize that and get in the game....or get out altogether. They're putting a coach and product on the field that's like milquetoaste compared to Cardinal Mooney, Chagrin Falls, Mentor, St. V. It's pathetic, Luis.

College is about EDUCATION. If football is all about big business then it should be left to those willing to take financial risk for financial reward.

You seem to be OK with others footing the bill in all things. The university to provide your entertainment and your friends to provide access that entertainment. Your attitude is exactly what is wrong with society today. "Give me", "Provide it for me", "I/we deserve it"

Ridiculous post. You missed the entire point. How much revenue is UA going to lose holding onto The Grim Reaper as head coach? College may be about education, but college football has nothing to do with education and everything to do with entertainment and revenue generation. I simply don't understand how UA puts ANY butts in the seats other than parents/family anymore. You talk about financial risk. How about the financial risk of building a 68 million dollar football stadium without the ability to sell any tickets to events held there? You're OK with that? You're OK with suite/box subscribers walking away?

Football in the MAC generates REVENUE but not INCOME. YES...I am OK suite/box subscribers walking away rather than asking students to subsidize their entertainment. College football is just not that important. Colleges should NOT be in business to provide entertainment. Sorry...you just don't get it. Sports are intended to enhance the student experience. But not at any cost. Mount Union, Xavier, Dayton and other schools have great student experience and don’t ask its students to subsidize football for the entertainment of a few fans.

Not only does Xavier not ask its students to subsidize football, neither does Wright State, Cleveland State, Detroit Mercy, Marquette, Cuyahoga Community College, and many other fine institutions of higher learning.

[ZipRoo]

+1. These past two years have been neither competitive nor entertaining. It's not about the money. It's about the time I've wasted, not enjoying myself, dragging myself to games we rarely were given chances to compete, much less win. My family and I don't need this and are not buying this horrible product in 2012 if no change is made

I have been privileged to attend many games in a friend's suite since the stadium opened. They feel that it has been a complete waste of money. Food and drink only go so far. When going to a game--in a luxury suite--is a dreaded weekly burden, something needs to change. My friends and I cannot and will not tolerate another game of Ianello-ball. So, personally speaking, I know of tens of thousands of dollars that the coach is ALREADY costing UA. Not to mention the empty stands and many other suite owners whose renewal notices will go unreturned. College football is a big business. UA better realize that and get in the game....or get out altogether. They're putting a coach and product on the field that's like milquetoaste compared to Cardinal Mooney, Chagrin Falls, Mentor, St. V. It's pathetic, Luis.

College is about EDUCATION. If football is all about big business then it should be left to those willing to take financial risk for financial reward.

You seem to be OK with others footing the bill in all things. The university to provide your entertainment and your friends to provide access that entertainment. Your attitude is exactly what is wrong with society today. "Give me", "Provide it for me", "I/we deserve it"

Ridiculous post. You missed the entire point. How much revenue is UA going to lose holding onto The Grim Reaper as head coach? College may be about education, but college football has nothing to do with education and everything to do with entertainment and revenue generation. I simply don't understand how UA puts ANY butts in the seats other than parents/family anymore. You talk about financial risk. How about the financial risk of building a 68 million dollar football stadium without the ability to sell any tickets to events held there? You're OK with that? You're OK with suite/box subscribers walking away?

Football in the MAC generates REVENUE but not INCOME. YES...I am OK suite/box subscribers walking away rather than asking students to subsidize their entertainment. College football is just not that important. Colleges should NOT be in business to provide entertainment. Sorry...you just don't get it. Sports are intended to enhance the student experience. But not at any cost. Mount Union, Xavier, Dayton and other schools have great student experience and don’t ask its students to subsidize football for the entertainment of a few fans.

Not only does Xavier not ask its students to subsidize football, neither does Wright State, Cleveland State, Detroit Mercy, Marquette, Cuyahoga Community College, and many other fine institutions of higher learning.

Yeah, I knew that one would bring a backlash. Truth hurts.

[you am i]

+1. These past two years have been neither competitive nor entertaining. It's not about the money. It's about the time I've wasted, not enjoying myself, dragging myself to games we rarely were given chances to compete, much less win. My family and I don't need this and are not buying this horrible product in 2012 if no change is made

I have been privileged to attend many games in a friend's suite since the stadium opened. They feel that it has been a complete waste of money. Food and drink only go so far. When going to a game--in a luxury suite--is a dreaded weekly burden, something needs to change. My friends and I cannot and will not tolerate another game of Ianello-ball. So, personally speaking, I know of tens of thousands of dollars that the coach is ALREADY costing UA. Not to mention the empty stands and many other suite owners whose renewal notices will go unreturned. College football is a big business. UA better realize that and get in the game....or get out altogether. They're putting a coach and product on the field that's like milquetoaste compared to Cardinal Mooney, Chagrin Falls, Mentor, St. V. It's pathetic, Luis.

College is about EDUCATION. If football is all about big business then it should be left to those willing to take financial risk for financial reward.

You seem to be OK with others footing the bill in all things. The university to provide your entertainment and your friends to provide access that entertainment. Your attitude is exactly what is wrong with society today. "Give me", "Provide it for me", "I/we deserve it"

Ridiculous post. You missed the entire point. How much revenue is UA going to lose holding onto The Grim Reaper as head coach? College may be about education, but college football has nothing to do with education and everything to do with entertainment and revenue generation. I simply don't understand how UA puts ANY butts in the seats other than parents/family anymore. You talk about financial risk. How about the financial risk of building a 68 million dollar football stadium without the ability to sell any tickets to events held there? You're OK with that? You're OK with suite/box subscribers walking away?

Football in the MAC generates REVENUE but not INCOME. YES...I am OK suite/box subscribers walking away rather than asking students to subsidize their entertainment. College football is just not that important. Colleges should NOT be in business to provide entertainment. Sorry...you just don't get it. Sports are intended to enhance the student experience. But not at any cost. Mount Union, Xavier, Dayton and other schools have great student experience and don’t ask its students to subsidize football for the entertainment of a few fans.

The ship you wish for sailed long ago. FBS college football is almost entirely about revenue generation. While I would agree that maybe it shouldn't be so, this is a FBS program operating in a FBS league. You can advocate that UA should perhaps go small-time in football (aren't we there already?) but UA obviously hasn't figured out what it wants to be. They have spent money on facilities as if they would like to be a larger FBS program and have yet failed to do ANYTHING which would allow for additional revenue generation to support those moves. What exactly is the point of a 68 million dollar stadium? How do you pay for that facility? Do you believe that the advocates for its creation pointed to "enhanced student experience" alone as justification? How much "additional revenue" was anticipated through luxury box sales, catering, team shop sales, tickets, etc? If the Doug Snyder vision were uniformly applied the team would be FCS or smaller, it would play in a stadium seating 10K and would just be a nice little adjunct to Fall weekends. Come to think of it, that would actually be a gigantic improvement over where the program is right now, but still, that's not what UA appeared to be going for when the whole Infocision thing started. Now that the facilities are built and as long as UA is FBS, they must generate revenue. You wish it weren't so, but someone has to pay, and "revenue generators" sure as hell aren't lining up right now are they?

The 68M for the Info was paid for by donations...not student fees. Also...a big reason WAS student experience. The Rubber Bowl was to far away to add anything to student experience. Also...the cost of maintaining the Rubber Bowl was cost prohibitive. If we wanted to stay in the MAC and have football, a new stadium had to be built. The real decision was how big and how much. But part of that 68M went to build a facility that would house more than just football. I am more than OK with private money being donated to improve facilities....but students should never be asked to foot the bill. They spend $1,200 per year (assuming just 2 semesters) in student fees to subsidize athletics. I don't believe that is money well spent and I certainly don't think they should spend more.

I have an accounting and finance degree…so I guess you can count me as one who considers the cost of things and who pays.

UA is making annual payments of $3.15 million toward the Infocision construction debt. I promise you they were expecting bigger crowds to help toward that payment. They are not. The money is coming elsewhere from the budget. This is not how the plan was supposed to work.

[Captain Kangaroo]

Ridiculous post. You missed the entire point.

+1

[GP1]

The ship you wish for sailed long ago. FBS college football is almost entirely about revenue generation. While I would agree that maybe it shouldn't be so, this is a FBS program operating in a FBS league. You can advocate that UA should perhaps go small-time in football (aren't we there already?) but UA obviously hasn't figured out what it wants to be. They have spent money on facilities as if they would like to be a larger FBS program and have yet failed to do ANYTHING which would allow for additional revenue generation to support those moves. What exactly is the point of a 68 million dollar stadium? How do you pay for that facility? Do you believe that the advocates for its creation pointed to "enhanced student experience" alone as justification? How much "additional revenue" was anticipated through luxury box sales, catering, team shop sales, tickets, etc? If the Doug Snyder vision were uniformly applied the team would be FCS or smaller, it would play in a stadium seating 10K and would just be a nice little adjunct to Fall weekends. Come to think of it, that would actually be a gigantic improvement over where the program is right now, but still, that's not what UA appeared to be going for when the whole Infocision thing started. Now that the facilities are built and as long as UA is FBS, they must generate revenue. You wish it weren't so, but someone has to pay, and "revenue generators" sure as hell aren't lining up right now are they?

Best post in a long time. Interesting how some people want things to be one way, but they are in reality another.