Conference Realignment hypothetical. Would you support football to stay in the AAC?

[Shockerman]

I think we all know that there is more conference realignment coming down the pipe with it being very likely that Cincinnati and UCONN eventually moving on. Currently, the ACC is at 14 all Sports members plus Notre Dame who has to play 5-6 ACC football games a season depending on the year. It makes sense for the ACC to eventually grab UCONN for a 16 team conference. The Big XII grant of rights ends in 2025 and they will either expand by then or maybe break up, or maybe do nothing. It's pretty obvious that nothing happens with Football here if things stay Status Quo. So, the question is, would you support adding football if it meant staying in the AAC? If realignment happens, they are going to need Football teams, especially since it is a football first conference.

At that point, it's either pony up, or try to land in another conference. The Big East isn't going to add a public school in Kansas and the MWC has said Football is a requirement. Of course, maybe other things change and the A10 expand west or something.

Thoughts?

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

Why would we need football to stay in the AAC? They're not going to kick us out.

[DUShock]

Why would we need football to stay in the AAC? They're not going to kick us out.

The only reason I can think of would some sort of realignment. Navy departs, a team or three heads to the BigXX, PAC XX, etc. then and only then could I see this coming up, and then it would likely depend on its impact on basketball or some abstract contract language in the Shocker's acceptance of the conference invitation.

Go Shocks!

[Topshock]

This thread is just another example of these delusional football people that have been told repeatedly that it isn't going to happen trying to word a poll so that the results will some how support their delusion. The other thread shows a solid 75% of people having little or no interest in football so they decided to try again. It really is just pathetic.

[Kel Varnsen]

If the market could sustain it, we would have a football program already.

Think about that. My biggest problem is the "If you get football, enrollment will increase to 20,000-25,000" argument. That's not the way it should work. With something like this, you can't take on an expense in the hopes that it raises enrollment. You have to have a number of other market factors that will support it. In order for that to work...

You must pour $50-75 million into facilities alone.
You must pour millions of dollars into scholarships for football and the additional women's sports.
You must get the aforementioned funds from a handful of donors, including a couple with the last name Koch, and hope they pull a JP Morgan (highly unlikely).
You must hire a good coach.
You must put a good team out there.
You must sell tickets to fans, many of whom currently attend games in Norman, Stillwater, Lawrence, Manhattan, Lincoln, and Columbia on Saturdays.
You must attract television viewers, many of whom currently watch the games above, along with nationally relevant games.
You must capitalize on the brand awareness by increasing enrollment.

And even then, there are no guarantees with conference realignment and sustainable success of a program. That's not to say in 15 years that the opportunity won't be there. If all of a sudden, Oklahoma State, K-State, and Iowa State end up in the American (my prediction), then you have an opportunity on your hands, assuming enrollment has grown a fair amount. But to add it now would be reckless.

[ShockerDropOut]

I love and would support football at WSU, but my pockets are not nearly deep enough to make it a sustainable success. @Kel Varsen is right, you don't build it and then hope to increase enrollment and find community support. Those things are just not there right now. Football must be a logical and economically viable entity before it is brought back, not the other way around. There is currently no realistic scenario in which this is the case.

Who knows what the future holds, but right now I see no way to bring back football. The economics are just too negative to overcome without a large donor or group stepping forward to bankroll the program. When that happens, it will be a time to revisit the discussion, until then it is just noise. Again, I would love football at WSU, but not at the expense of our other top flight athletic programs.

[Shockerman]

This thread is just another example of these delusional football people that have been told repeatedly that it isn't going to happen trying to word a poll so that the results will some how support their delusion. The other thread shows a solid 75% of people having little or no interest in football so they decided to try again. It really is just pathetic.

I resemble that remark :) Now with that said, perhaps you should wake up and look around. In the Sun Belt, the University of Arkansas Little Rock (UALR) and The University of Texas Arkington (UTA)both are looking into football. If they do, that would leave us as the only non football school to be in a conference that sponsors football. Do you really think our basketball is so elite that when realignment happens again we would be worth keeping around? News Flash. WSU basketball will fall into the abyss again. It happens and it has happened to us twice. Both the 70's and 90's were bad years for Shocker basketball as in Drake level bad basketball. We better be more than a one trick pony. I know the hate with the old timers runs deep on this board for football. All I am saying is we should be prepared do to whatever is necessary to stay in the upper tier of college athletic conferences.

[60Shock]

We have not even played a single sport in our new conference and yet we are projecting what may or may not happen several years out and what our options would be?

I have always believed in future planning, but my crystal ball is still fogged up from all the joy of just being out of our past poor situation and now being in the American Conference, and what it means to Wichita.

We need to plan for the future, but lets enjoy this tremendous moment and bathe in its present fulfillment while it is still in its infancy.

[1972Shocker]

The poll simply is very difficult to answer. I can't say I would always be for adding football to stay in the AAC. Nor can I say I would never be for adding football at Wichita State.

Both answers would depend on the facts and circumstances at the time such a decision would be made. If that is today than I am opposed to adding football. Why? Becasue of the very specific statements by ADDB and Dr. Bardo that as of today the interest in starting up football among DONORS, bootsters, and general fans is simply not there in sufficient numbers. And when they say numbers they mean dollars mostly.

[Shockerman]

I think 99.9% of Shox fans. Me included, have no interest in Football if it can't be done right. We are in a great spot right now, scratch that, an awesome spot, and it will definetly take all hands on deck to be successful in the AAC. I personally think football is a must if Bardo wants to push hard into Oklahoma and Texas for more traditional students. Traditional students means more dorms and active students on campus which I think is the same goal we all have. I could see a 20-25k stadium that is outfitted to the hilt with suites, loge boxes, etc going over well in Wichita. Most of our new conference mates have smaller stadiums like this.