Sigh... this again?
Ok, I’m hearing that the Carr report that was sufficiently questioned that UAB has two different firms to present alternate views and both found flaws, is somehow back to being the standard by which UAB will make its decision.
For purely hypothetical reasons, let’s say everything else in Carr is true except for the assumption that UAB would be able to stay in CUSA if it cancels football. (This is a hypothetical – I am not saying I suddenyl agree with Carr). That specific CUSA point has been thoroughly debunked, but it formed the basis of the original report. As a resultm, the estimated levels of revenues without football are deflated (way more than a New England Patriots’ game ball) and the levels of expenses without football are inflated.
Revenues per school in MVC vary but average about $500,000. C-USA schools get over $3 million. Travel expenses for UAB in the MVC are likely to grow for the remaining sports by about $1 million.
Note also that Carr’s no-football scenario already includes the supposed cost of adding another women’s sport (swimming and diving). So this is not just the supposed costs of restoring FB, Bowling, and Rifle, but also for adding Swimming & Diving. So take that argument off the table.
Carr argued the program would be $5 million/year worse with football than without. Take out the $3.5 million swing from leaving C-USA and that gets you to $1.5 mm per year. The new donations pledged EASILY cover that by a long, long stretch.
There’s pretty much no way to point to Carr and say it proves football is a money loser unless you just pretend UAB gets to stay in CUSA. Or you ignore the fundraising campaign.
(And note, none of this is to abandon my other critiques of Carr – just to show that you don’t need to agree with me on very much, other than the CUSA issue, to show relying on Carr for this decision is a poor (and perhaps biased) choice).
What’s the local phrase? Bless their hearts?
Have a happy Memorial Weekend, everyone.