I am optimistic that we will see hockey before 1 January. From what I've read, the virus has basically a 70-day cycle. If society can work together enough to end this cycle and prevent another one from exploding, we can hopefully get enough testing done that allows a return to the lifestyle we enjoy. If we hastily let our guard down in the quest for the almighty dollar, we will be screwed for a long time. The economy will come back. 41,000+ Americans (and 1500+ Canadians) will not come back.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Huh?If there is no fall sports there will be no Big Ten hockey next year. BC could be in trouble, any school with a div 1A football team.
Huh?
If the Big Ten doesn't play no one is gonna play.
Some schools right now are planning on no students on campus until 2nd semester. I have heard BU is potentially planning on that, I'm sure they are not alone. No students means no hockey.
Your missing my point, other schools don't count on football rev to fund there other sports. So if college hockey return on Jan 1, im wondering if the Big Ten schools will be able to fund the sport? if no football
Michigan, Ohio state, Notre Dame fund there entire athletic budget from football. If there is no football, there is no money. The Millions$ that these schools bring in will make it impossible to fund all of there remaining sports.
Hockey is not on the teat like underwater basket weaving. Football is number one, basketball number two. Hockey or baseball do just fine as stand alone enterprises depending on where you're at.
Please define "do just fine". How can baseball be a self-sustaining sport? What is the source of the revenue?
I am optimistic that we will see hockey before 1 January. From what I've read, the virus has basically a 70-day cycle. If society can work together enough to end this cycle and prevent another one from exploding, we can hopefully get enough testing done that allows a return to the lifestyle we enjoy. If we hastily let our guard down in the quest for the almighty dollar, we will be screwed for a long time. The economy will come back. 41,000+ Americans (and 1500+ Canadians) will not come back.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
It was an article written by a scientist in Tel Aviv. The premise was that it doesnt matter if you have Stay at Home orders like most US states, or less strict guidelines as in Sweden. I personally think we need the social distancing measures most are taking until testing at a greater rate is available.What is your source on the 70 day cycle? Yours is the first reference to it, I've seen. Can you provide more detail, or point me to a source?
It was an article written by a scientist in Tel Aviv. The premise was that it doesnt matter if you have Stay at Home orders like most US states, or less strict guidelines as in Sweden. I personally think we need the social distancing measures most are taking until testing at a greater rate is available.
The article basically said either way the cycle lasts about 70 days. The problem I see is that without the Stay at Home orders, the cases skyrocket during those 70 days.
I'll post a link if I can find it.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
If I remember correctly, he just stated that it's about a 70 day cycle that peaks at about 40 days. This link is not the original article I saw but you'll get the idea. Like I stated earlier, I don't agree with his assertion that shutting things down doesn't help enough to warrant economic effects. In my opinion, the economy will come back but it's a fact 41,000+ Americans won't come back.Thanks. I'll look forward to it.
Can you describe the 70 day cycle, however briefly?
If I remember correctly, he just stated that it's about a 70 day cycle that peaks at about 40 days. This link is not the original article I saw but you'll get the idea. Like I stated earlier, I don't agree with his assertion that shutting things down doesn't help enough to warrant economic effects. In my opinion, the economy will come back but it's a fact 41,000+ Americans won't come back.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/top-i...ts-show-virus-plays-itself-out-after-70-days/
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
That's my point. Without strict adherence to CDC guidelines we are having multiple 70-day cycles. I think he was more saying that whether you flatten the curve or not, it's a 70-day curve. That's ok when everyone that will get infected is on the same curve. The problem with his assertion that it will run its course in 70 days is that a lot of people are still contracting the virus well into the cycle and starting it over again.Interesting, but haven't we passed the 70 day window already?
I guess in that case the B1G schools will just have to defect spend on athletics like almost every other college athletic department does.Your missing my point, other schools don't count on football rev to fund there other sports. So if college hockey return on Jan 1, im wondering if the Big Ten schools will be able to fund the sport? if no football
Not really, as most lose money on hockey. Only 4 had earned profits while 25 had earned losses. And while I didn't breakdown baseball for the hockey schools, looking at Texas Tech's 2018 NCAA financial report the school reported losing $2.6 million on baseball, while Arkansas reported losing $621 thousand on baseball on its 2018 financial report.Hockey is not on the teat like underwater basket weaving. Football is number one, basketball number two. Hockey or baseball do just fine as stand alone enterprises depending on where you're at.
Athletic departments generally don't make money, but lose it. Ohio State, one of the few that usually does turn a profit (but not last year), some of the profit is returned to the school and some goes into an athletic reserve fund. However, the OSU reserve fund only had $8.9 million in it as of mid-February. With an overall budget of over $210 million that won't go far next year. You can read more about the OSU athletic budget in this USA Today article.How can they not make money on Basketball and Hockey?
And with all the money they have made over the years on football, how can they be in a situation where they don't have reserve cash? It's not like they have to pay their players.
My NCAA Hockey Financials spreadsheet breaks down publicly available information for public (using NCAA financial reports) and private (using EADA reports) schools that have DI hockey programs. I breakout all the information for both the hockey programs and the overall athletic departments. If you look at the Yearly Overall tab you can see how much each school's athletic department reported in revenue and expenses and their overall and earned profit and losses. I have compiled the numbers for 2010 through 2018 and I'm just starting to work on the 2019 numbers (I don't have the latest OSU report from which numbers are reported in the above mentioned USA Today article). In general college athletics are large money drains.Please define "do just fine". How can baseball be a self-sustaining sport? What is the source of the revenue?