Hell No to Status Quo

[SpanglerFan316]

I keep coming back to the fact that had community in and around Wichita supported football in the first place there would still be football. What make any of you think it would be supported a second time around?

I think the area has changed in a lot of ways since 1986, most notably its size, first and foremost.

Again, you have people that hate the Valley and want to get out. And then you have these same groups of people that look down to football. It's not a two-way street. You can't hold both of these thoughts and not look like an idiot.

If you're a forward thinker with the "future" set on your mind, then most would realize how far we really could advance this university with football. I think the reward outweighs the risk. There is a whole generation of fans (me included) that has never experienced a WSU football game before and would probably like to see it.

1. Does anyone talk about "advance this university" by not starving academic departments? (Anyone counted the number of (academic or athletic) administrators? President, provost, associate provosts, assistant provost(s), AD, asociate AD(s), etc.)

2. I've seen WSU football games. Often they were record breaking.
(http://www.pioneer-football.org/news/default/13/219/ MOREHEAD STATE PASSES COME-FROM-BEHIND TEST: Morehead State matched the largest comeback in school history during its 56-55 victory at Missouri-Rolla, Nov. 5. The Eagles trailed the Miners 35-3 with 13:25 remaining in the first quarter. In 1986, MSU trailed Wichita State 35-6 at halftime before winning, 36-35.)

This is an athletic message board so I was talking about advancing athletically. I don't think we would be compromised in any way academically.

I'm not sure what your second point means or where you fall in the issue.

My second point does send a mixed message. Let's just say that if WSU football comes back and performs as poorly as it did on occasion before, then football will die again. (I would probably be a WSU football season ticket holder if football came back and they were not terrible.)

If one wishes to improve WSU, this goal is not limited to athletics. Limiting interest to athletics, I agree with your desire for football if the necessary elements (especially $$) are in place.

[rjl]

Here's an semi-related question I've often wondered. Maybe someone knows the answer.

How much does a full ride scholarship actually cost the University?

Does the scholarship pay the same amount that anyone off the street would pay, or is it more like Spangles giving a way a free burger (the receiver sees it as Spangles giving away $3.99 of food, but Spangles' cost is really only $1.50)?

As for the sales tax, I would vote for that in a heartbeat. I would even be for keeping in indefinitely to help academic programs after football is paid for, but that would be a tough sell on many Wichitans.

[tw805]

Leaving the house is a tough sell to Wichitans.

I shouldn't have a say in this because I don't live in the area, but Wichita does have some room to give on sales tax. In Johnson County, most areas have sales tax around 8%, property levies that would make you puke, and there isn't much to show for it. If the state hadn't screwed things up with a one cent increase, there would be even more room to give. A half cent tax for the general benefit of the local university available to everyone wouldn't kill anyone.

[Aargh]

The athletic department pays the University the same tuition rates for scholarship athletes as any student pays. It's an actual movement of funds between two separate entities. The athletic department pays the Registrar.

Obviously, in-state scholarships are less expensive than out-of state.

[Snapshot9]

I would like to see someone give 3 examples of successful Football programs under the following conditions:

1) The city should be comparable in size to Wichita metropolis.
2) The conference should be comparable to the Valley.
3) The university should be pretty comparable.

questions:
1) How do they fund the program?
2) How do the football teams do in their conference?
3) Any subsidized funding by city or county or state?
4) Profit margin?
5) How's recruiting for the program(s)?
6) What do the head coaches make?

If football ensures WSU survival and growth in athletics, I don't want to talk about it forever, I want to do something to make it happen.

[DUShock]

No one has asked where the "savings" from closer went. A birdie tells me salaries for the top and not academics.

HUH?

I apologize, either my mind or my fingers were not working when I typed the post ala "closer" rather than "closure". Dofo & others, let this be a lesson to proof read before pressing submit.

"I am surprised no one has ever inquired as to the whereabouts of the operational savings created from the closure of the football program and statistically significant increases in expenditures within other areas of operation. A birdie has told me the spending increases were not in the academic cost centers."

Go Shocks!

[pogo]

DU, thats a good question because I know it was well into the Tom Shupe era before the deficit was fully erased. I guess sweet lew couldn't erase the deficit quite as easily as he could a football program.

[Aargh]

1. Couple of million in debt was paid off.
2. Some baseball facilities were built.
3. Road BB trips became charters.
4. BB recruiting budget was increased.
5. BB coaching salary went sky high.
6. Henry Levitt became Koch.

That's a lot of jack, Jack. Not enough to cover the operating losses of a football team for 25 years, but where would WSU be if that money hadn't been spent where it was spent instead of on a money pit football team.

If FB were still here (or back), we wouldn't have the BB coaching salary we pay now. That wouldn't matter much, because without the recruiting budget that makes recruiting trips easier and the charters to road games, we couldn't sniff a coach worth what we're paying now.

Springfield has a wealthy citizen who loves to see his name on things. Hammons probably has more ego than all the money guys iin Wichita combined. With FB (and without an endowment to cover operating losses), WSU would be in a remarkably similar situation as MSU. Even with Hammons money, the athletic department at MSU is strained and their programs operate with "barely enough" budgets.

[SubGod22]

1. Couple of million in debt was paid off.
2. Some baseball facilities were built.
3. Road BB trips became charters.
4. BB recruiting budget was increased.
5. BB coaching salary went sky high.
6. Henry Levitt became Koch.

That's a lot of jack, Jack. Not enough to cover the operating losses of a football team for 25 years, but where would WSU be if that money hadn't been spent where it was spent instead of on a money pit football team.

If FB were still here (or back), we wouldn't have the BB coaching salary we pay now. That wouldn't matter much, because without the recruiting budget that makes recruiting trips easier and the charters to road games, we couldn't sniff a coach worth what we're paying now.

Springfield has a wealthy citizen who loves to see his name on things. Hammons probably has more ego than all the money guys iin Wichita combined. With FB (and without an endowment to cover operating losses), WSU would be in a remarkably similar situation as MSU. Even with Hammons money, the athletic department at MSU is strained and their programs operate with "barely enough" budgets.

That's all assuming football never would have had any sort of success. Football has changed since it was dropped here and became a bigger deal. Who knows if we could have landed a coach who would have had success in building a decent/respectable program in the time it's been gone. It worked for basketball after a decade or so of horrific results. Had we kept it we may have been in the same boat as Tulsa and been able to leave for a better conference and gained more support and success. It's possible that had it never died we'd already be in CUSA or the MWC.

[tw805]

It just seems to me that college athletics hardly lends itself to a straight accross the board accounting relative to the overall university. Sure, you can reduce the athletic department to internal numbers, but if that was the only driving force in this issue you would have innumerable universities cut the athletic departments altogether. After all, they are hardly germane to the running of a university.

The athletic department instills pride in the alumni, returns them to campus, and in turn causes them to make donations - often to the university over the athletic department. Of the sports funded by university athletic departments, football is far and away the most popular. It makes Saturday on campus an event and a social gathering place. It's hard to generate the same feeling for basketball, and you're sure as hell not going to do it with a second-tier sport like baseball. I would buy season tickets to football and I don't even live in Wichita. I come to maybe one basketball game a year.

Yes, the football team was really, really bad in the 70s and 80s. So were a lot of teams. Past performance is no predictor of future results., as they say.

[Aargh]

Unfotunately, I remember just how bad WSU's program was except for a couple of years of Willie Jeffries coaching Prince McJunkins. Even a winning record and a couple of bowl games didn't get people into the stands.

I wouldn't be surprised if the average fan at WSU games spent more on whiskey for consumption at the game than they did on tickets.

How bad was it?

It was so bad...

...we had wide receivers admitting to running away from the ball because they were afraid the BALL was going to hurt them if they got in its way.

...we had a guy who barely made his small school HS teams who walked on at WSU as a Sr and became a starting DB.

...we had a coach who stacked all the black players at tailback and fullback even though they were outstanding at other positions. That caused WSU to lose a player as a So who was the #1 sprinter in the State while in HS and played with the Chiefs a couple of years.

...we had a coach who refused to give the Selmon Bros. scholarships after they showed up in Wichita, walked into the athletic offices, and ASKED to come to WSU because they had family here. Some of you may remember those guys dominating the B8 for years when they played at OU.

[Veritas]

1. Couple of million in debt was paid off.
2. Some baseball facilities were built.
3. Road BB trips became charters.
4. BB recruiting budget was increased.
5. BB coaching salary went sky high.
6. Henry Levitt became Koch.

That's a lot of jack, Jack. Not enough to cover the operating losses of a football team for 25 years, but where would WSU be if that money hadn't been spent where it was spent instead of on a money pit football team.

If FB were still here (or back), we wouldn't have the BB coaching salary we pay now. That wouldn't matter much, because without the recruiting budget that makes recruiting trips easier and the charters to road games, we couldn't sniff a coach worth what we're paying now.

Springfield has a wealthy citizen who loves to see his name on things. Hammons probably has more ego than all the money guys iin Wichita combined. With FB (and without an endowment to cover operating losses), WSU would be in a remarkably similar situation as MSU. Even with Hammons money, the athletic department at MSU is strained and their programs operate with "barely enough" budgets.

A lot of that money would have been raised regardless...

-- We played in the NCAA tournament Elite 8 while we had a football team and way before that, a Final Four
-- We were building a NCAA CWS worthy baseball program while we had a football team
-- We had a dominate men's tennis team while we had a football team (and probably other non-revenue sports such as bowling and crew)

You are making assumptions as most of us do when debating whether to bring back football or not. Times have changed from the ealry 60s to the mid 80s, just as they have changed from the mid 80s to now. When done correctly, football not only adds to a college atmosphere, but is an attractive marketing tool not only for WSU but for Wichita as well. There are benefits that can't simply be measured in $$$.

The issue is that now, will football be necessary to position WSU into a better conference with the impending demise or watered-down version of the MoVal conference. Will you still be excited to see WSU play a UMKC team on a regular basis in the Summit League?

[Veritas]

Unfotunately, I remember just how bad WSU's program was except for a couple of years of Willie Jeffries coaching Prince McJunkins. Even a winning record and a couple of bowl games didn't get people into the stands.

I wouldn't be surprised if the average fan at WSU games spent more on whiskey for consumption at the game than they did on tickets.

How bad was it?

It was so bad...

...we had wide receivers admitting to running away from the ball because they were afraid the BALL was going to hurt them if they got in its way.

...we had a guy who barely made his small school HS teams who walked on at WSU as a Sr and became a starting DB.

...we had a coach who stacked all the black players at tailback and fullback even though they were outstanding at other positions. That caused WSU to lose a player as a So who was the #1 sprinter in the State while in HS and played with the Chiefs a couple of years.

...we had a coach who refused to give the Selmon Bros. scholarships after they showed up in Wichita, walked into the athletic offices, and ASKED to come to WSU because they had family here. Some of you may remember those guys dominating the B8 for years when they played at OU.

Sounds like a coaching issue though I was always appreciative of Jeffries.

WSU also nearly sold out against Oklahoma State with a 20-10 victory
WSU also beat KU at Lawrence which at the time was the largest attended football game at KU
There were some great successes, and also some challenging times. Competing in the MoVal was not very exciting once Louisville, Memphis, Cincinnati left and was replaced with ISU, SIU, etc... Being independent with Tulsa also hurt as WSU was forced to play directional schools from the south that most people hadn't heard of.
It was great though seeing WSU play Alabama, or ASU, and some other good programs.

[WuDrWu]

WSU also beat KU at Lawrence which at the time was the largest attended football game at KU.

I am very respectful as a visiting fan to any venue as I was that glorious September afternoon in 1983 as a youngster.

However, many a beaker who got out of line after the game were subjected to a young, brash Doc's spittle as I described in detail DD's heroic game deciding catch and run.

It was great though seeing WSU play Alabama, or ASU, and some other good programs.

South Carolina (73-0 ugh but at least it was against the eventual Heisman winner), Minnesota and Lou Holtz (were not we leading 14-0 at one point?) and Tennessee (Anthony Jones' phantom tackle that cost us that game late) also come to mind.

[shox1989]

WSU also beat KU at Lawrence which at the time was the largest attended football game at KU.

I am very respectful as a visiting fan to any venue as I was that glorious September afternoon in 1983 as a youngster.

However, many a beaker who got out of line after the game were subjected to a young, brash Doc's spittle as I described in detail DD's heroic game deciding catch and run.

It was great though seeing WSU play Alabama, or ASU, and some other good programs.

South Carolina (73-0 ugh but at least it was against the eventual Heisman winner), Minnesota and Lou Holtz (were not we leading 14-0 at one point?) and Tennessee (Anthony Jones' phantom tackle that cost us that game late) also come to mind.

Playing Kstate in Wichita in front of a packed Cessna stadium crowd in 1977 also comes to mind (a game we should have won, we outplayed them but some bad breaks) along with the 20-10 beating we put on Okie St in 1978 at home in front of another packed stadium.

It seems like even when we were bad in the late 70s and 80s we were able to come up with some pretty big crowds for "name" teams. Besides the ones I just mentioned, Memphis St and Tulsa games at home come to mind.