Conference Re-Alignment -- Not over, and has Football here

[RoyalShock]

One thing that WSU does, that not all schools do, is they make their athletic department pay for the scholarships their athletes use.

instead they could just let the student athletes play for free, and have no one pay for tuition, since school classes will not be greatly impacted by having more students.

How sure are you about this? I can't imagine the NCAA allowing unfunded athletic "scholarships".

[vbird53]

One thing that WSU does, that not all schools do, is they make their athletic department pay for the scholarships their athletes use.

instead they could just let the student athletes play for free, and have no one pay for tuition, since school classes will not be greatly impacted by having more students.

How sure are you about this? I can't imagine the NCAA allowing unfunded athletic "scholarships".

I was going to ask the same thing.

[Aargh]

Maggie asks:

How do you make a football program profitable at WSU

I ran the numbers on a D1A football program at WSU a couple of years ago. My numbers were set up to be competitive with low to mid-range BCS budgets in order to compete for those types of coaching staffs and recruits.

I'm confident of my numbers to within plus or minus 10 percent.

Average attendance of 50,000 per game at $40 per ticket.
To get that attendance level requires membership in a BCS conference. You've got to have "name" schools in your stadium every game to pull those kinds of numbers.

There's a lot more required, but the attendance and BCS membership obstacles pretty much end any discussion of a self-supporting football program.

That's not including anything for a stadium. Those figures are derived based on no-cost availability of a 60,000 seat stadium with parking for 20,000 vehicles.

The attendance figure is alarming. If your goal is to go D1A (the upper level - BCS or one notch below that - I can never remember what FBS and FCS stand for), you have to spend at those levels to build to the point where you can draw that type of attendance.

If attendance is only 25,000 per game at $20 per ticket during the growing years, then you're short $12 mill a year. 25,000 per game through some years of bad startup football is very optimistic. Five years at the lowest level and then 5 more years to get into a good conference would be absolutely the fastest it could happen. That's 10 years. That's a $120 million shortfall.

If you want my background, credentials, qualifications, and assumptions for preparing my analysis, send me a PM. I'm qualified.

[vbird53]

Maggie asks:

How do you make a football program profitable at WSU

I ran the numbers on a D1A football program at WSU a couple of years ago. My numbers were set up to be competitive with low to mid-range BCS budgets in order to compete for those types of coaching staffs and recruits.

I'm confident of my numbers to within plus or minus 10 percent.

Average attendance of 50,000 per game at $40 per ticket.
To get that attendance level requires membership in a BCS conference. You've got to have "name" schools in your stadium every game to pull those kinds of numbers.

There's a lot more required, but the attendance and BCS membership obstacles pretty much end any discussion of a self-supporting football program.

That's not including anything for a stadium. Those figures are derived based on no-cost availability of a 60,000 seat stadium with parking for 20,000 vehicles.

The attendance figure is alarming. If your goal is to go D1A (the upper level - BCS or one notch below that - I can never remember what FBS and FCS stand for), you have to spend at those levels to build to the point where you can draw that type of attendance.

If attendance is only 25,000 per game at $20 per ticket during the growing years, then you're short $12 mill a year. 25,000 per game through some years of bad startup football is very optimistic. Five years at the lowest level and then 5 more years to get into a good conference would be absolutely the fastest it could happen. That's 10 years. That's a $120 million shortfall.

If you want my background, credentials, qualifications, and assumptions for preparing my analysis, send me a PM. I'm qualified.

I'm guessing you're only talking about the gate. What about television package, advertising, marketing, concessions, contributions, merchandise, not to mention buy-games? There're many more opportunities to increase revenue than just ticket sales.

I'm not suggesting your analysis is off, just putting it out there that ticket sales is only a % of the revenue from a program.

[Aargh]

I did not include TV, bowl games, or marketing (signage, naming rights, in-stadium ads, etc.). I did include merchandising, was very generous with concesions, and included buy games.

I was more interested in the growth stages than in the mature state of an established BCS-type program. TV and bowl games in the growth years are negligible.

One of my basic assumptions was that WSU would require BCS-type spending on coaching staffs, facilities, and recruiting. Without a TV contract and with no guarantee of a bowl game, what would be required to accomplish that.

My conclusion was that to get to BCS-type status in football would cost about $100 million. There are other ways ot go. You could spend less and aim lower, but would the community support a schedule filled with names like Youngstown State and Northern Illinois? I think Wichita football fans would rather drive to Manhattan, Lawrence, Stillwater, OKC, or Lincoln to see a game than to go see WSU play a team they've never heard of.

There's a lot of competition in the area and KSU and KU tickets are almost always easily available. That should send a huge warning to proponents of football at WSU.

KU appears to have a more loyal alumni base than WSU, has a long history of association with one of the premier leagues, has many very wealthy alumni (doctors and lawyers make some bucks). With all that going for them, they are still dependent on income from the marketing of schools in Texas to keep their football program out of debt.

I don't see anything to indicate football would be more successful at WSU than at KU or KSU and WSU would not have the league revenues those schools rely on to stay solvent. Wichita is the largest population base in the state, but KU and KSU have a fan base across the entire state. WSU does not. From looking at branded clothing on the streets, KU and KSU have a larger following in Wichita than WSU has.

While WSU's athletic future without football may be bleak, I believe WSU's athletic future with football is even worse. There's a very real possibility that bringing back football could bankrupt the athletic department and cause the end of all sports at WSU. I'm not willing to take that risk.

[hoopsnut]

I did not include TV, bowl games, or marketing (signage, naming rights, in-stadium ads, etc.). I did include merchandising, was very generous with concesions, and included buy games.

I was more interested in the growth stages than in the mature state of an established BCS-type program. TV and bowl games in the growth years are negligible.

One of my basic assumptions was that WSU would require BCS-type spending on coaching staffs, facilities, and recruiting. Without a TV contract and with no guarantee of a bowl game, what would be required to accomplish that.

My conclusion was that to get to BCS-type status in football would cost about $100 million. There are other ways ot go. You could spend less and aim lower, but would the community support a schedule filled with names like Youngstown State and Northern Illinois? I think Wichita football fans would rather drive to Manhattan, Lawrence, Stillwater, OKC, or Lincoln to see a game than to go see WSU play a team they've never heard of.

There's a lot of competition in the area and KSU and KU tickets are almost always easily available. That should send a huge warning to proponents of football at WSU.

KU appears to have a more loyal alumni base than WSU, has a long history of association with one of the premier leagues, has many very wealthy alumni (doctors and lawyers make some bucks). With all that going for them, they are still dependent on income from the marketing of schools in Texas to keep their football program out of debt.

I don't see anything to indicate football would be more successful at WSU than at KU or KSU and WSU would not have the league revenues those schools rely on to stay solvent. Wichita is the largest population base in the state, but KU and KSU have a fan base across the entire state. WSU does not. From looking at branded clothing on the streets, KU and KSU have a larger following in Wichita than WSU has.

While WSU's athletic future without football may be bleak, I believe WSU's athletic future with football is even worse. There's a very real possibility that bringing back football could bankrupt the athletic department and cause the end of all sports at WSU. I'm not willing to take that risk.

:yes:

[jocoshock]

I did not include TV, bowl games, or marketing (signage, naming rights, in-stadium ads, etc.). I did include merchandising, was very generous with concesions, and included buy games.

I was more interested in the growth stages than in the mature state of an established BCS-type program. TV and bowl games in the growth years are negligible.

One of my basic assumptions was that WSU would require BCS-type spending on coaching staffs, facilities, and recruiting. Without a TV contract and with no guarantee of a bowl game, what would be required to accomplish that.

My conclusion was that to get to BCS-type status in football would cost about $100 million. There are other ways ot go. You could spend less and aim lower, but would the community support a schedule filled with names like Youngstown State and Northern Illinois? I think Wichita football fans would rather drive to Manhattan, Lawrence, Stillwater, OKC, or Lincoln to see a game than to go see WSU play a team they've never heard of.

There's a lot of competition in the area and KSU and KU tickets are almost always easily available. That should send a huge warning to proponents of football at WSU.

KU appears to have a more loyal alumni base than WSU, has a long history of association with one of the premier leagues, has many very wealthy alumni (doctors and lawyers make some bucks). With all that going for them, they are still dependent on income from the marketing of schools in Texas to keep their football program out of debt.

I don't see anything to indicate football would be more successful at WSU than at KU or KSU and WSU would not have the league revenues those schools rely on to stay solvent. Wichita is the largest population base in the state, but KU and KSU have a fan base across the entire state. WSU does not. From looking at branded clothing on the streets, KU and KSU have a larger following in Wichita than WSU has.

While WSU's athletic future without football may be bleak, I believe WSU's athletic future with football is even worse. There's a very real possibility that bringing back football could bankrupt the athletic department and cause the end of all sports at WSU. I'm not willing to take that risk.

Correct Analysis...

In the years that I attended WSU football games (1975-1984) I can only remember a handfull of games where attendance was greater than 25,000 fans.

vs. KState
vs. Oklahoma State
vs. Memphis with the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders
- maybe Ball State
- possibly some games against Tulsa during the Willie Jeffries years.
- some assorted games with Concert in the Sky Fireworks shows, camel races, and auctions for the astroturf.

During that period, WSU had to average 18,000 per game to retain D1 status. They managed to do it, but averaging 25,000 or higher would be virtually impossible. How would you get BCS teams to come to Wichita. You wouldn't.

[pogo]

At one point in time like the "Alive in 95" there was talk about the requirements for the upper level and what the requirements were to attain that status. They were very similar to what they are now, however it was pointed out that these were requirements for football programs that were trying to attain the upper division status and not for a football program (WSU) that had been in the upper division and elected to stop its program while still a member of the upper division. I believe there has never been a program of similar circumstances re-start their program. The question was, would WSU be able to be grandfathered into the upper division because of its unique status. I'm just throwing this out because 15 years ago no one was sure about it then either.

[The Mad Hatter]

I did not include TV, bowl games, or marketing (signage, naming rights, in-stadium ads, etc.). I did include merchandising, was very generous with concesions, and included buy games.

I was more interested in the growth stages than in the mature state of an established BCS-type program. TV and bowl games in the growth years are negligible.

One of my basic assumptions was that WSU would require BCS-type spending on coaching staffs, facilities, and recruiting. Without a TV contract and with no guarantee of a bowl game, what would be required to accomplish that.

My conclusion was that to get to BCS-type status in football would cost about $100 million. There are other ways ot go. You could spend less and aim lower, but would the community support a schedule filled with names like Youngstown State and Northern Illinois? I think Wichita football fans would rather drive to Manhattan, Lawrence, Stillwater, OKC, or Lincoln to see a game than to go see WSU play a team they've never heard of.

There's a lot of competition in the area and KSU and KU tickets are almost always easily available. That should send a huge warning to proponents of football at WSU.

KU appears to have a more loyal alumni base than WSU, has a long history of association with one of the premier leagues, has many very wealthy alumni (doctors and lawyers make some bucks). With all that going for them, they are still dependent on income from the marketing of schools in Texas to keep their football program out of debt.

I don't see anything to indicate football would be more successful at WSU than at KU or KSU and WSU would not have the league revenues those schools rely on to stay solvent. Wichita is the largest population base in the state, but KU and KSU have a fan base across the entire state. WSU does not. From looking at branded clothing on the streets, KU and KSU have a larger following in Wichita than WSU has.

While WSU's athletic future without football may be bleak, I believe WSU's athletic future with football is even worse. There's a very real possibility that bringing back football could bankrupt the athletic department and cause the end of all sports at WSU. I'm not willing to take that risk.

Those I have heard in the athletic department have come to similar conclusions, plus have noted that the facilities and Title IX issues are complex enough to throw a wrench in plans even if the issues raised here could be resolved.

[shockall]

While WSU's athletic future without football may be bleak, I believe WSU's athletic future with football is even worse. There's a very real possibility that bringing back football could bankrupt the athletic department and cause the end of all sports at WSU. I'm not willing to take that risk.

I agree with this statement. Well said!

[ShockTalk]

Aargh - I'm the last one to challenge your numbers based on qualifications, but any talk of BCS level football is totally pointless. However, the FBS D-I non-BCS conferences would be our ultimate goal IF football were added. Of these conferences, at the top is the MWC which averaged over 33,000 per home game. You take BYU and Utah out of the equation and the rest of the teams average 27,000. Second was C-USA averaging 26,000 and the WAC 3rd under 23,000 and both conferences also had their figures skewed upwards by a team or two.

Therefore, a majority of teams in these conferences were averaging 20-25,000 or less. Also the Sun Belt averaged just over 16,000 and the Mid-American over 15,000. So are all these teams losing the kind of money you're talking about and/or is it that we just take a back seat to them as to the quality of our fandom and resources? Please keep in mind, I'm not for or against having football at WSU (but I'd support it if they did). I'm just trying to understand how all these other schools do it. Shoot, Akron averaged only 17,000, has a so-so program and they're building a new (and very nice) stadium.

As far as bankrupting the athletic department, WSU will not have football if the start up costs aren't covered. The annual budget should be compared to FCS schools, not FBS/BCS schools. The FCS level is where we would start off at and moving up to FBS wouldn't happen without success (financial and on the field) unless we were offered a spot in a conference that would better us overall and was a financially sound move.

[shocker3]

Royal hit the nail on the head. We either need to add football (the sooner the better) or be destined to a future of playing at the division 2 level.

We need to be figuring out HOW to make it happen rather than arguing about whether it is possible or not for a middle sized urban unviversity to support a football team. :wsu_posters:

[Aargh]

Everything I did was based on the assumption that Wichita would not support a mediocre team in a mediocre league with no-name teams coming into town.

Wichita has proven that assumption to be accurate already with WSU football and confirmed it with the lack of support for many failed athletic endeavors.

Wichita fans consistently support winners, but are quick to send losers into bankruptcy court. The support for WSU basketball through some lean years is an anomaly and hasn't been demonstrated in support of any other athletic endeavor.

I think WSU could sell 50,000 to 60,000 tickets to see UN, KSU, KU, OSU, OU, etc.

I think WSU could sell 6,000 tickets to see Youngstown State. I think it would be a tough sell to get 25,000 for a game against BYU or Utah State.

That leads to two problems that have to be solved.
1) How do you get the teams on the schedule that can fill a big stadium?
2) How do you compete with those teams to keep the fans coming back?

My conclusion was that you have to spend the money to compete with the teams you have to bring in to make it work. If WSU has a budget and team that can bring in and compete with MVC-type teams, then 12K at $20 a ticket is a good attendance goal.

That's 1/4 mill for 6 home games, which is $1.5 mill in ticket sales. 70 scholarships at $30K each is $2.1 mill. Throw in Title IX and you're at $4 mill just in scholarship costs.

How do other schools do it? SIU's athletic department is several mill in debt. They're so broke they can't afford to fire a basketball coach who's taken them from a perennial NCAA team to a bottom-tier MVC team.

MSU was looking to get rid of Hinsen for at least two years before his contract finally expired. MSU couldn't afford the buyout. That left Hinsen with 2 years of lame duck recruiting where he was limited in his ability to sign the players he wanted. MSU went from a perennial top-3 team in the Valley to a bottom-dweller.

I hate to keep bringing up Youngstown State, but they are probably a more typical example than UNI or Butler. What is Youngstown State doing in basketball? Ever heard of them in basketball?

Supporting football teams is taking a major toll on Valley teams and is a huge obstacle to establishing the Valley as the premier basketball conference in the nation after the BCS leagues. The Valley is (or was) so close to establishing that identity. Then the football costs began affecting basketball coaching decisions and the Valley started moving down the pecking order.

The Valley is in a solid position to negotiate some basketball TV contracts. WSU, Bradley, SIU, UNI have all had recent success and are known giant-killers. That's marketable and can be exploited. Valley football has no hope of revenue other than ticket sales.

So, the Valley comes out with a plan to expand football. If you look up "EPIC FAIL" (in all caps) in the dictionary, the definition is the MVC choosing to emphasize football.

[Maggie]

Well, Aargh, you have put a lot of thought into this issue. I fear your assumption about lack of fan support is well founded. The support the basketball program enjoys is indeed unique and based, in part, on the loyalty that was engendered by highly successful teams 30 plus years ago. And even during the 90’s – the average attendance (I am not going to look it up) was only around 7K – a fraction of what would be needed to support a football program. And even this number is slightly skewed because at least WSU was able to play some opponents with name recognition – during some conference games and against poor non-con opponents actual attendance was probably 5K or less (I was there). As an aside, didn’t the arena fail to sell out (or at least people didn’t show up) for games last year against weak opponents (people complain about playing “cupcakes” all the time).

I guess I have a couple questions for you: You have done a great job running the numbers and it only confirms what daunting task (and possibly suicidal) adding football would be (and I am not going to dispute the numbers – I think it is fairly obvious, no matter how painful it might be, that you are close to the mark). However, if it becomes clear (and I tend to side with Royal on this one) that the lack of a football program at WSU will eventually relegate the other athletic programs at the University to essentially D-2 status are you okay with that situation? If not, or even if so, is there a feasible way, in your judgment, to add football while minimizing, as much as possible, the short term risks (there will always be risks) and keep WSU in the running to retain D-1 status?

You have demonstrated the darkside; be the man with the plan. ;-) Oh, and I don't care about the rest of the MVC. All I care about is WSU.

[SB Shock]

Royal hit the nail on the head. We either need to add football (the sooner the better) or be destined to a future of playing at the division 2 level.

We need to be figuring out HOW to make it happen rather than arguing about whether it is possible or not for a middle sized urban unviversity to support a football team. :wsu_posters:

Seems to me the football proponents either need to step forward with the financial supporters they say that is there to show it is viable or propose some type of sales tax increase $0.01?, $0.02? or $0.05? Otherwise they are only beating dead horses.