rootube said:
Proposition Joe said:
There's $1 BILLION+ in TV revenue among the major conferences.
I don't think people understand everything else in sports - ticket sales, brand licensing, etc... is all a drop in the bucket compared to TV broadcast revenues.
IF, and it's a big IF, the NCAA feels that the participants can play safely without fans then the schools will find a way to make it work.
This literally makes no sense. It's either safe to host the game or not. How many people do you think are required to host a big-time college football event? How on earth could you tell people you are going to go for it because there is too much money on the line but it's far too dangerous for fans to show up.
Which is why I said IF the NCAA feels the participants can play safely.
College basketball was initially set to go fan-less. NBA is talking about going fan-less when they return.
We're not talking about trying to pull it off this weekend, the idea would be 5 months from being able to safely and quickly test a group of people and put them in a closed environment where the event can take place.
You may be able to make the case at that point fans can attend, but maybe you still aren't likely the liability of 100,000 people who you don't know if they've been tested packing in a stadium shoulder to shoulder.
Again, I'm not saying it's likely to happen - I personally don't find it likely the season gets played at all - but IF by then they feel it can safely be done without the fans in attendance they aren't going to refrain from doing it because "it's all about the fans" or "it wouldn't be the same". That TV contract pays a lot of bills (including most head high profile head coaches).