I think his time covering UH is on the clock.
1 Like
It is time, his bias came through obviously this time
51, i think the P5 would laugh out loud at the suggestion that losing cusa and the sun belt would do anything other than deprive them of scheduling a patsy or 2…Losing cusa and sun belt just helps UH schedule better non conference opponents more consistently…Next year likely difficult, but we will manage…and if we play those 6 road games with no fans, it actually HELPS, win loss wise, because our road schedule very tough next year…
As for UH, we could go a year doing it if we had to…UH and the American get WAY more from TV than those people do…
I don’t disagree that we are in a better position than the rest of the G5. But the economics are changing, I think (emphasize think) this article is just the beginning. Nike is having problems as well.
I found his article really odd. But at the same time, and this has been said before, he is a reporter not a public relations agent or publicist for the school. So I don’t know if it’s bias or if he was annoyed with the ‘responses’ he received.
That is a huge hit to UCLA. But honestly, with having a Under Armour contract like that, a P5 deal (although the worse of the P5s), how can they be so far in the hole prior to the pandemic and a great economy? Of course the pandemic is a killer for them and all NCAA ADs and this is just a pile on situation for them for there are no apparel company out there that is going to give them anything near that contract going forward.
But to be honest, Under Armour cut a ridiculous deal with UCLA. Lucky, they feel they have an out, they are in trouble with their dog fight battle against the Evil Empire (Nike) and now the pandemic has killed the market.
They are obviously cutting their losses after signing a bad deal when they viewed the world and the market very differently.
The real question is can they finish a season, they can all start, but once these kids are no longer in the view of the coaching staff, all bets are off.