Hell No to Status Quo

[ShockTalk]

How bad was it?

It was so bad...

...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 a lot like the Cohen years. Glad we kept baskeball.

;-)

[The Mad Hatter]

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.

If you are going to bring up Tulsa you have to keep in mind that they dropped their baseball program (which had gone to several CWS).

[shox1989]

Baseball was a title 9 casualty for Tulsa. They dropped baseball and added womens soccer if I remember right.

[The Mad Hatter]

Baseball was a title 9 casualty for Tulsa. They dropped baseball and added womens soccer if I remember right.

Yes, and football is the biggest contributor to Title IX difficulties at schools because it takes up so many men's scholarships. Having football is the easiest way to guarantee that other men's programs will be a risk of being cut for Title IX considerations.

[tw805]

Who wouldn't sacrifice mens golf, cross country, and a couple of others for Division I football? I haven't seen boosters coming in from far and wide to watch a golf match. And if this is all about support, funding, and the bottom line, why are Fort Hays and Washburn able to pull football off? They're giving scholarships too.

[ShockTalk]

Who wouldn't sacrifice mens golf, cross country, and a couple of others for Division I football? I haven't seen boosters coming in from far and wide to watch a golf match. And if this is all about support, funding, and the bottom line, why are Fort Hays and Washburn able to pull football off? They're giving scholarships too.

My guess is the scholarships become a much smaller part of the whole cost when you start talking about the size, level, and quality of the program, not to mention the start-up costs of that size of program.

[tw805]

Who wouldn't sacrifice mens golf, cross country, and a couple of others for Division I football? I haven't seen boosters coming in from far and wide to watch a golf match. And if this is all about support, funding, and the bottom line, why are Fort Hays and Washburn able to pull football off? They're giving scholarships too.

My guess is the scholarships become a much smaller part of the whole cost when you start talking about the size, level, and quality of the program, not to mention the start-up costs of that size of program.

Perhaps I am incredibly obtuse. What are the differences in cost for a D-II vs. I-A football program? (Presuming that the facilities are already in place.)

[The Mad Hatter]

Who wouldn't sacrifice mens golf, cross country, and a couple of others for Division I football? I haven't seen boosters coming in from far and wide to watch a golf match. And if this is all about support, funding, and the bottom line, why are Fort Hays and Washburn able to pull football off? They're giving scholarships too.

My guess is the scholarships become a much smaller part of the whole cost when you start talking about the size, level, and quality of the program, not to mention the start-up costs of that size of program.

Perhaps I am incredibly obtuse. What are the differences in cost for a D-II vs. I-A football program? (Presuming that the facilities are already in place.)

Looking at the most-recent expense reports available from the NCAA -- from 2006 -- it costs $7.2 million less annually to run a Division II program with a football team than to run a Division I Football Championship Subdivision program (formerly Division I-AA). Division I programs are required to sponsor more sports than Division II programs, and are required to give out more scholarship money. As a result, Division I programs generally do not make up this difference in expense with increased revenue and must look to other sources to fill the gap -- such as increased students fees or institutional appropriations. Though both Division II and Division I FCS programs both typically have negative net revenue each year, Division II’s loss is $4.7 million less, at $3.4 million.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/01/29/divisionii

[tw805]

So I was obtuse. Good info.

[SpanglerFan316]

How much does nonscholarship D1 football (e.g. http://www.pioneer-football.org/) cost?

[Awesome Sauce Malone]

How much does nonscholarship D1 football (e.g. http://www.pioneer-football.org/) cost?

[The Mad Hatter]

How much does nonscholarship D1 football (e.g. http://www.pioneer-football.org/) cost?

This is the league Drake plays football in, so I think the only thing it costs is your dignity.

[Aargh]

Though both Division II and Division I FCS programs both typically have negative net revenue each year, Division II’s loss is $4.7 million less, at $3.4 million.

Some quick math and that pretty much says the typical loss for a D1 FCS football program is $8.1 mill per year. That's money that has to be made up from either the students or from donations.

I don't think there's $8 mill in annual donations that would become available to the athletic department if FB were added. The students certainly aren't going to vote themselves an increase in fees. That means that football would cause budget reductions in all other sports.

WSU would have a start-up FB program, be taking budget hits in every sport, would be unable to attract basketball coaches at the level we're used to. In other words, WSU would have bad football (barring a miracle) and other sports would be average at best for non-BCS schools. And you want to market that package to which conference?

[60Shock]

If we don't start marketing ourselves soon, just what level of schools do you believe we are going to be competing against in 10 - 15 years in the downward spiraling MVC?

And perhaps more important, do you really want to pay for season tickets to play against a lower level of competition than we are playing against now?

[Veritas]

If we don't start marketing ourselves soon, just what level of schools do you believe we are going to be competing against in 10 - 15 years in the downward spiraling MVC?

And perhaps more important, do you really want to pay for season tickets to play against a lower level of competition than we are playing against now?

That's the crux of the issue. If you want quality and play against quality, you need to pay for quality.
Options:
1. ADES gets WSU into either a new or existing power/prestigious basketball conference
2. ADES brings back football and thus building towards the future and a spot in a more powerful/solid conference
3. Remain status quo and watch the MoVal become weaker and weaker with the likes of SIU, ISU(blue), UE, and Drakes of the world. Imagine MSU replaced by UMKC, or IlSU replaced with a Dakota school. Ugh!

I suppose there is a 4th option, and that involves Elgin replacing some of the weaker programs with stronger programs. I can't see that happening- unfortunately.