K-State's AD put out these 7 B12 options for football ...
- Thread starter surly
- Start date
I think September would be the best time to begin play. If players and fans can't be safe then, I doubt it gets any better over the following month or two.
Assuming we're good to go in September, I say start then with the intention of playing the entire season. If the situation requires putting the season on hold, put it on hold and cancel the remaining schedule if necessary. We could consider resuming play in the spring, but if this virus follows the cyclical pattern of the flu, I doubt that's going to work. By the time the virus runs it's course, it could be summer.
Since we would likely be in the conference schedule, make arrangements for some revenue distribution among conference members based on the number of home games that a team lost out on.
That could be a public relations nightmare. I think maybe you let the top donors attend all games, but you need to find a way to get all donors into at least some games. You may need to restrict lower level donors to just two seats. Non-donors that are long time season ticket holders should also get in the rotation.
But the other issue would be how you restrict tailgating. It doesn't make much sense to restrict people in the stadium if you let everyone to congregate in the tailgate lots whether they have a ticket or not. That could get to be a logistical nightmare. You could issue parking passes in conjunction with game ticket distribution, but what if everyone loads up cars, vans and RVs with people that don't have tickets?
This is all just hopelessly complicated and even if you restrict the number in the stadum there's no way you can enforce any kind of distancing within the stadium so at that point its become pointless. It will be an all or nothing proposition as far as fans go, imo, and my guess is more towards 'nothing'.
What is the plan for a championship and bowl games? Don't see those happening under most of those plans.
What exactly are they trying to accomplish? Are they playing just to try and get some TV money or for a championship?
Setting aside player safety, if there are no fans in the stands, how does any of this make any financial sense and isn't more costly than just not playing the season? TV contracts won't be met so we won't get a full payout for that.
It's very likely a new outbreak shuts down any of these plans mid season.
So what are they trying to accomplish?
None of these scenarios could be managed by the ticket scanners. Some of these guys struggle to do their jobs now.
It will be interesting to see how many high rollers bail on the season because they are in the higher "at risk" categories.
I'm a Vikings fan and honestly totally forget they ever played at TCF until this post.
The only reason I can think of to delay the start from early Sep to Oct would be to allow time for schools to catch up in states that open later. I am with those that say it will be with all fans or none - too complex to try to do anything in between. I don't think the players are at risk - they are in the low risk category and will be monitored more closely than the majority of the population. We are still waiting to renew our season tickets in hope there will be more info.
Hoping for a full season even without fans - we can always tailgate with our friends in our driveway.
Hoping for a full season even without fans - we can always tailgate with our friends in our driveway.
9 games over 10 weeks from Oct. 3 through Dec. 5 (conference only or one non-con for the 8 conference game people like SEC). If you have to do no or limited fans, do it. Full bowl season after that - 5 wins to make a bowl, ending with the national title game on Jan. 4. Bowls are probably less likely to have fans but ESPN TV money is enough.
Perhaps a concern that is coming our way is a large amount of sporting options in a short time period, which places more competition for the same consumer dollar.
Example: PGA is moving some if it's majors into the late summer / fall time period. These events take away dollars from the traditional football season. Or Nascar will delay some races into the fall, which takes fans away from football on Saturdays. Or tennis moving some majors, etc.
I'm afraid even if we have a college football season, the smaller fan base due to virus concerns and competition from other sporting options will negatively effect revenues.
Jamie is going to have a very difficult job in the next few months...and title nine limits options available to him.
Example: PGA is moving some if it's majors into the late summer / fall time period. These events take away dollars from the traditional football season. Or Nascar will delay some races into the fall, which takes fans away from football on Saturdays. Or tennis moving some majors, etc.
I'm afraid even if we have a college football season, the smaller fan base due to virus concerns and competition from other sporting options will negatively effect revenues.
Jamie is going to have a very difficult job in the next few months...and title nine limits options available to him.
There are a few B12 AD concerns not mentioned in the opening post. Since it's dangerous to post everything, let me summarize what one of them said recently.
"The option that makes a little more sense if you're going to play in the Spring - from a weather perspective - is starting in March and ending in May. The problem with that one is the NFL Draft. The idea that I think is crazy is starting the season in January and playing until March"
"One AD did mention how can we stop schools in Texas or Oklahoma if they can play their first two games and schools in Kansas or Iowa can't for some reason, how can we deny them that opportunity? It's a fair question."
"Where we're going to start to see cracks is with the moratorium on schools using their athletic facilities before May 31. All of a sudden, if we've still (shutdown) and Oklahoma is wide open, then schools in Oklahoma are bringing their kids back to start working out in their facilities. That's where I think we won't be on the same page."
Have at it, boys.
"The option that makes a little more sense if you're going to play in the Spring - from a weather perspective - is starting in March and ending in May. The problem with that one is the NFL Draft. The idea that I think is crazy is starting the season in January and playing until March"
"One AD did mention how can we stop schools in Texas or Oklahoma if they can play their first two games and schools in Kansas or Iowa can't for some reason, how can we deny them that opportunity? It's a fair question."
"Where we're going to start to see cracks is with the moratorium on schools using their athletic facilities before May 31. All of a sudden, if we've still (shutdown) and Oklahoma is wide open, then schools in Oklahoma are bringing their kids back to start working out in their facilities. That's where I think we won't be on the same page."
Have at it, boys.
Last edited:
If starting in January was to be an option, the Big 12 could have the Texas schools play all their home games first, then KS/IA/WV schools would get all their home games at the end of the season in March.
The only major conference that would have an issue with that schedule is the B1G. Getting really creative here... Minnesota (Vikings), Michigan and MSU (Lions), Indiana and Purdue (Colts), and even Wisconsin (Brewers) could host early season games in domes, and the rest of the B1G could have their home games later.
The only major conference that would have an issue with that schedule is the B1G. Getting really creative here... Minnesota (Vikings), Michigan and MSU (Lions), Indiana and Purdue (Colts), and even Wisconsin (Brewers) could host early season games in domes, and the rest of the B1G could have their home games later.
