-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cx500d
Comparing charter flight cost to commercial flight cost is apples to oranges. Charter flights are typically priced by distance (or flight hours) and capacity of the aircraft required; commercial is based on other factors in addition to distance such as competition with other airlines, ass’ in seats, seasons, special events, etc. also, hotel costs in the bigger cities tend to be a lot more expensive than those in say, Normal or Youngstown.
So if your distance doubles, your price may double for a charter (not really because their are some sunk costs that would be the similar). Additionally hotel costs would probably increase significantly going to higher cost cities, as well as the food costs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think you missed my point. My point was that you can’t take an extra HOUR of air travel time and then DOUBLE our entire $5,500,000 gameday expense and travel budget lol. We currently fly charter to Eastern Washington, Baltimore, Salt Lake City, all for non conference games just fine with no problem. Why would it be all of the sudden more cost prohibitive to do it 4 times a year in a conference that is paying us millions more to do so?
If someone thinks we can’t make FBS work because we can’t afford an extra hour of charter flight or because the Chick Fil A in Denver costs more than the one in Springfield, there’s no use arguing. Again, the really only important thing about travel is if the current schools would be okay with sending their people here. Look what they do to Hawaii.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
yea. the travel issue $$ is total strawman
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
daddy daycare
What you don't know is if those checkbooks support it or not either. Perhaps the NDSU admin does know that.
I do know several...
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
I think you missed my point. My point was that you can’t take an extra HOUR of air travel time and then DOUBLE our entire $5,500,000 gameday expense and travel budget lol. We currently fly charter to Eastern Washington, Baltimore, Salt Lake City, all for non conference games just fine with no problem. Why would it be all of the sudden more cost prohibitive to do it 4 times a year in a conference that is paying us millions more to do so?
If someone thinks we can’t make FBS work because we can’t afford an extra hour of charter flight or because the Chick Fil A in Denver costs more than the one in Springfield, there’s no use arguing. Again, the really only important thing about travel is if the current schools would be okay with sending their people here. Look what they do to Hawaii.
its the last FCS Forever crowd argument, and its not at all going to hold up.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tjbison
its the last FCS Forever crowd argument, and its not at all going to hold up.
You might think it's the last argument from the FCS Forever crowd but they'll just keep moving goal posts and coming up with something new. It's been their tactic from day one.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
daddy daycare
There no guarantee of playoffs expanding to 12. Or a G5 playoff. Topics that have been around about as long as the NDSU argument of FCS or FBS.
The playoff will expand to 12 in the next round. What you saw this last time was the B1G and PAC12 showing some 'muscle' to Sankey and the SEC, but they’re actually hurting themselves, since the SEC benefits much more from a '4 team playoff'. They are doing so to make some kind of point, apparently, under the guise of waiting for a new TV deal. There’s too much $$ on the table, everyone knows it, and the 4-team deal is losing a little luster with each season.
I also feel comfortable saying that the P5 will never break off – see hoops and NCAA tournament. They would damage themselves more than they are now, which is saying a lot. We already have pro football, and every attempt at a second league has bombed. P5 needs to stick with the (ever-so-compliant) NCAA and they know it. Much more likely that CUSA folds IMO.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tjbison
its the last FCS Forever crowd argument, and its not at all going to hold up.
Like I said, Matt Larsen himself has said that the money actually works out pretty well for us at FBS. The money is not the issue. The travel (at least for NDSU) is not the issue.
It's getting a conference on board with us. That's it, open and shut, last item to check off on the list. And from what I hear they already have that or are making significant progress towards it.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
Like I said, Matt Larsen himself has said that the money actually works out pretty well for us at FBS. The money is not the issue. The travel (at least for NDSU) is not the issue.
It's getting a conference on board with us. That's it, open and shut, last item to check off on the list. And from what I hear they already have that or are making significant progress towards it.
The money issue greatly depends on which conference you're looking at. We're already pretty close to the MAC average and old CUSA would be manageable. Larsen was probably talking about those, and those were the 2 most realistic options if any conference was going to invite us. MWC is a different story, we'd have to double our budget, and the media deal wouldn't even remotely come close to filling that gap. Wanting to know where you'll find an extra $15-30M annually before jumping doesn't make me part of this fictional FCS forever cabal.
BTW, NDSU and SDSU as a pair to the MAC is something I could get behind. Just don't see it happening in the near future for several reasons.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
Define "lost money" lol. Do you count donations? How about merchandise? Licensing? TV deal? There is so much "general revenue" (and general expenses) across every AD, it's probably impossible to quantify apples to apples.
That's why I asked if it was real. It just seemed squishy.
A $41k deficit sounds like a ten-day southern road trip for softball for most northern schools.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
Wanting to know where you'll find an extra $15-30M annually before jumping doesn't make me part of this fictional FCS forever cabal.
BTW, NDSU and SDSU as a pair to the MAC is something I could get behind. Just don't see it happening in the near future for several reasons.
I thought the number tossed about a few years back was $4-6M annual increase in total athletics budget for a top 1/3 FCS to go FBS.
SDSU's admin is at best cool to the subject. (You think Bismarck is stodgy on budget? Y'ain't been ta Pierre.)
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
The money issue greatly depends on which conference you're looking at. We're already pretty close to the MAC average and old CUSA would be manageable. Larsen was probably talking about those, and those were the 2 most realistic options if any conference was going to invite us. MWC is a different story, we'd have to double our budget, and the media deal wouldn't even remotely come close to filling that gap. Wanting to know where you'll find an extra $15-30M annually before jumping doesn't make me part of this fictional FCS forever cabal.
BTW, NDSU and SDSU as a pair to the MAC is something I could get behind. Just don't see it happening in the near future for several reasons.
Why do we need an additional $15M-30M annually to be in the Mountain West? $15M would put us above the median of the conference and $30M would put us just below Air Force which is the largest due to their federal institution status and probably isn't a good comparison. The also have 27 sports teams and over 300 more athletes than NDSU does.
https://cafidatabase.knightcommissio...re_the_money-1
You can use the above site to compare us to many of the other FBS schools. Just from comparing us with some of the middle schools in the Mountain West, there's about $4M to $5M we'd likely receive FBS game guarantees and additional media rights. We'd still be slightly behind the median, but I'd say not bad for just stepping right into FBS. Again, money is not the issue.
The interesting piece from a budget standpoint is that what separates us from the biggest MW athletic departments is the difference in funding from student fees (~$5M difference) and institutional support (~$10M). Not saying NDSU can just pull a naked money grab, but those are really the only two funding sources in which NDSU is in complete control...
For instance if NDSU matched UND's student fees and institutional support, we'd find another $8 million right there. Add that to the $4-$5 million from media and FBS moneys and...
Profit.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Sicatoka
I thought the number tossed about a few years back was $4-6M annual increase in total athletics budget for a top 1/3 FCS to go FBS.
SDSU's admin is at best cool to the subject. (You think Bismarck is stodgy on budget? Y'ain't been ta Pierre.)
It still is, $15M would be for us to be a high-level MW budget on Day 1 of joining. It would put us at the top of the MAC.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
another transfer because we aren't FBS.
great
Cox, Cofield, Hayes, Florentino, Cox... the list goes on
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
For instance if NDSU matched UND's student fees and institutional support, we'd find another $8 million right there.
Which NDSU budget line item would that come from and how would that be impacted? Taking say $4M from somewhere could shut down a program or even department.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Sicatoka
Which NDSU budget line item would that come from and how would that be impacted? Taking say $4M from somewhere could shut down a program or even department.
Re: In our Hands Campaign
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El_Chapo
another transfer because we aren't FBS.
great
Cox, Cofield, Hayes, Florentino, Cox... the list goes on
Had NDSU been MAC they wouldn't have stepped on campus. Next man up.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Sicatoka
I thought the number tossed about a few years back was $4-6M annual increase in total athletics budget for a top 1/3 FCS to go FBS.
SDSU's admin is at best cool to the subject. (You think Bismarck is stodgy on budget? Y'ain't been ta Pierre.)
Again, $4-6M to the MAC or CUSA is realistic and manageable. MWC is a lot more. As for SDSU, despite having a pretty good FB team they're not a FB school. I have to wonder if the MAC is a big enough step up in basketball to entice them though. That's how I would sell it to them. Still think it's a pretty low chance of happening.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
Why do we need an additional $15M-30M annually to be in the Mountain West? $15M would put us above the median of the conference and $30M would put us just below Air Force which is the largest due to their federal institution status and probably isn't a good comparison. The also have 27 sports teams and over 300 more athletes than NDSU does.
https://cafidatabase.knightcommissio...re_the_money-1
You can use the above site to compare us to many of the other FBS schools. Just from comparing us with some of the middle schools in the Mountain West, there's about $4M to $5M we'd likely receive FBS game guarantees and additional media rights. We'd still be slightly behind the median, but I'd say not bad for just stepping right into FBS. Again, money is not the issue.
The interesting piece from a budget standpoint is that what separates us from the biggest MW athletic departments is the difference in funding from student fees (~$5M difference) and institutional support (~$10M). Not saying NDSU can just pull a naked money grab, but those are really the only two funding sources in which NDSU is in complete control...
For instance if NDSU matched UND's student fees and institutional support, we'd find another $8 million right there. Add that to the $4-$5 million from media and FBS moneys and...
Profit.
I've used that site plenty in the past and I think it's reasonably accurate. I gave the $15-30M range because it covers average to top of the MWC. I don't have a problem with someone picking any number in there, but that number is only going to go up in the future. I don't think NDSU should aim at conference average. Other than Wyoming we'd have about half the enrollment of the rest, which makes the student fee multiplier less effective. I wouldn't count on a lot of state support. The budget isn't impossible, but also far from easy. Remember that if we want 6 home games, that money we make for going to 2 FBS games is offset by having to bring in 2 teams. Just because we have the FBS label doesn't mean the Big 10 will be falling over themselves to schedule us. FBS=profit definitely isn't true, I don't think anybody in the G5 makes money from athletics. We're not going to be the outlier.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Sicatoka
That's why I asked if it was real. It just seemed squishy.
A $41k deficit sounds like a ten-day southern road trip for softball for most northern schools.
The source was a tiny Carbondale, IN newspaper that really didn't understand what they were talking about. If they looked at UND hockey using the same system, they would have said it showed a big loss.
The writer got some FOIA info and plugged it into a simple spreadsheet. But he didn't dig deep to find out what the info really meant.
For instance:
- NDSU football was allocated $1,512,287 out of the $5,434,465 in contributions. Most of that money comes from Team Makers seat fees. Do you really think that NDSU football only accounts for 28% of Team Maker donations? Of course not. It probably accounts for 85% or more. But the athletic accounting department distributes most of that money to sports that don't have other major income. It's just moving ink around.
- NDSU football was allocated zero dollars from the $497,999 in media rights.
- NDSU football was allocated zero dollars from the $2,568,080 in royalties, licensing, advertising & sponsorships.
- NDSU football was allocated zero dollars from the $997,114 in sports camp revenues.
Realistically, NDSU football makes the athletic department a profit of around $5M. I figure the football program is responsible for at least 75% of the revenue in those categories. That amounts to about $5.5M on top of what was already allocated to the football program. Then I would subtract the $515k in student fees.
Here's what was actually part of that so-called $41k deficit:
Code:
Revenue
Tickets 3,781,913
Student Fees 515,510
Contributions 1,512,287
In Kind 17,500
Programs 56,140
Endowments 120,539
Other 1,500
Total 6,007,389
Expenses
Student Aid 1,744,308
Guarantees 501,400
Head Coach 555,620
Asst. Coaches 1,334,418
Support Staff 229,050
Severence 68,795
Recruiting 167,831
Travel 645,711
Equipment 219,082
Game Expenses 263,186
Debt Service/Rent 24,981
Overhead/Admin 21,622
Membership/Dues 1,400
Student Meals 182,423
Other 88,901
Total 6,048,728
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
I've used that site plenty in the past and I think it's reasonably accurate. I gave the $15-30M range because it covers average to top of the MWC. I don't have a problem with someone picking any number in there, but that number is only going to go up in the future. I don't think NDSU should aim at conference average. Other than Wyoming we'd have about half the enrollment of the rest, which makes the student fee multiplier less effective. I wouldn't count on a lot of state support. The budget isn't impossible, but also far from easy. Remember that if we want 6 home games, that money we make for going to 2 FBS games is offset by having to bring in 2 teams. Just because we have the FBS label doesn't mean the Big 10 will be falling over themselves to schedule us. FBS=profit definitely isn't true, I don't think anybody in the G5 makes money from athletics. We're not going to be the outlier.
Do you think we need to be top half of the conference in budget in year 1? Is that typical for any FCS to FBS move? I don’t want to be the bottom of the conference long term, but some things like media and NCAA money will change overnight, and with modest changes elsewhere (student fees, institutional support), we’re already talking about being in the median of the conference before we start looking at tickets, corporate sponsorships, additional fundraising.
Hell, take our 13,173 students and charge them the same for athletic student fees as UND. That’s a little over $3M right there.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
For instance if NDSU matched UND's student fees and institutional support, we'd find another $8 million right there. Add that to the $4-$5 million from media and FBS moneys and...
There's a lot more to that number, particularly with the difference in relationships each University has with facilities. As some one previously mentioned, how those numbers are made up are one gigantic shell game.
UND was able to get the student body to support the move to D1 with an increase in student fees. Would NDSU be able to leverage the same with a move to FBS? They failed at the increase last time and instead the students traded some of their seats to help boost athletic department revenue, which is basically an indirect increase in student fees.
I'd also be curious what NDSU would have to do to address any Title IX issues. They currently are able to get by (as of 2020 reports) offering 62% of financial aid and 66% of upduplicated participation to men's athletics while only having 55% of the student body as male. Financial aid would end up north of a 2:1 discrepancy without adding an additional woman's sport and that doesn't take into account the increased discrepancy overall spending by gender.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
NDSU survey sent out today to teammakers. comment at end. FBS or bust. enough of this BS
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
daddy daycare
Had NDSU been MAC they wouldn't have stepped on campus. Next man up.
mountain west dude. no one talking MAC
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
Do you think we need to be top half of the conference in budget in year 1? Is that typical for any FCS to FBS move? I don’t want to be the bottom of the conference long term, but some things like media and NCAA money will change overnight, and with modest changes elsewhere (student fees, institutional support), we’re already talking about being in the median of the conference before we start looking at tickets, corporate sponsorships, additional fundraising.
Hell, take our 13,173 students and charge them the same for athletic student fees as UND. That’s a little over $3M right there.
Year 1, of course not. But there needs to be a plan to get there. Not impossible, but jumping in hoping for the best is a recipe for disaster. MAC would be vastly easier to budget than MWC.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
There's a lot more to that number, particularly with the difference in relationships each University has with facilities. As some one previously mentioned, how those numbers are made up are one gigantic shell game.
UND was able to get the student body to support the move to D1 with an increase in student fees. Would NDSU be able to leverage the same with a move to FBS? They failed at the increase last time and instead the students traded some of their seats to help boost athletic department revenue, which is basically an indirect increase in student fees.
I'd also be curious what NDSU would have to do to address any Title IX issues. They currently are able to get by (as of 2020 reports) offering 62% of financial aid and 66% of upduplicated participation to men's athletics while only having 55% of the student body as male. Financial aid would end up north of a 2:1 discrepancy without adding an additional woman's sport and that doesn't take into account the increased discrepancy overall spending by gender.
Title IX shouldn't be an issue. Adding women's tennis would be easy and should take care of everything. Remember that NDSU is one of the few schools that uses the 3rd prong of Title IX, which basically means we give both men's and women's sports the support they need rather than checking an equal funding box. Ironically, other than football our women's programs are arguably more successful than the men's, so if anything we're leaning towards the need to increase men's funding.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El_Chapo
NDSU survey sent out today to teammakers. comment at end. FBS or bust. enough of this BS
HMM, when did this go out? Email? Snail Mail? maybe i'm not "BIG TIME" enough to get one... DAMN IT!!
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
Title IX shouldn't be an issue. Adding women's tennis would be easy and should take care of everything. Remember that NDSU is one of the few schools that uses the 3rd prong of Title IX, which basically means we give both men's and women's sports the support they need rather than checking an equal funding box. Ironically, other than football our women's programs are arguably more successful than the men's, so if anything we're leaning towards the need to increase men's funding.
Correct, but there is a reason a lot of schools have moved away from the 3rd prong.
All it would take is a group of female athletes to show that there is interest in a sport not being offered at NDSU and their compliance becomes in jeopardy. With the growth of women's hockey and women's wrestling in the state and region, the possibility of those is definitely greater than zero. And then you are no longer controlling what was yours to control.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
I've used that site plenty in the past and I think it's reasonably accurate. I gave the $15-30M range because it covers average to top of the MWC. I don't have a problem with someone picking any number in there, but that number is only going to go up in the future. I don't think NDSU should aim at conference average. Other than Wyoming we'd have about half the enrollment of the rest, which makes the student fee multiplier less effective. I wouldn't count on a lot of state support. The budget isn't impossible, but also far from easy. Remember that if we want 6 home games, that money we make for going to 2 FBS games is offset by having to bring in 2 teams. Just because we have the FBS label doesn't mean the Big 10 will be falling over themselves to schedule us. FBS=profit definitely isn't true, I don't think anybody in the G5 makes money from athletics. We're not going to be the outlier.
These are viable points. If NDSU really really really wants to move up they will figure out a way to raise the budget and the revenue streams. However, there is no magic elixir available in G5. It is a full on scramble for all mid majors. There is also a dwindling supply of open spots in P5. The money doesn't flow downhill from the big boys..They aren't interested in sharing.
So, you just have to question what the potential upside would be for you and then decide if what it takes to get there is worth it.
The next question you might knock around here on this board is what is the upside for the MW or any conference to add you? CUSA would be a delighted to add you because it is a conference trying to survive.
However, what is the benefit to the MW? Does it help them to add more mouths to feed? Do they have to add if a couple schools leave?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
There's a lot more to that number, particularly with the difference in relationships each University has with facilities. As some one previously mentioned, how those numbers are made up are one gigantic shell game.
UND was able to get the student body to support the move to D1 with an increase in student fees. Would NDSU be able to leverage the same with a move to FBS? They failed at the increase last time and instead the students traded some of their seats to help boost athletic department revenue, which is basically an indirect increase in student fees.
I'd also be curious what NDSU would have to do to address any Title IX issues. They currently are able to get by (as of 2020 reports) offering 62% of financial aid and 66% of upduplicated participation to men's athletics while only having 55% of the student body as male. Financial aid would end up north of a 2:1 discrepancy without adding an additional woman's sport and that doesn't take into account the increased discrepancy overall spending by gender.
I don't know the answer but my question is now that athletes are employees, why does this matter?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
There's a lot more to that number, particularly with the difference in relationships each University has with facilities. As some one previously mentioned, how those numbers are made up are one gigantic shell game.
UND was able to get the student body to support the move to D1 with an increase in student fees. Would NDSU be able to leverage the same with a move to FBS? They failed at the increase last time and instead the students traded some of their seats to help boost athletic department revenue, which is basically an indirect increase in student fees.
I'd also be curious what NDSU would have to do to address any Title IX issues. They currently are able to get by (as of 2020 reports) offering 62% of financial aid and 66% of upduplicated participation to men's athletics while only having 55% of the student body as male. Financial aid would end up north of a 2:1 discrepancy without adding an additional woman's sport and that doesn't take into account the increased discrepancy overall spending by gender.
To your point, NDSU students shot down the student fees last time because the general thought was "why are we increasing student fees if we're not moving up in athletics?" A fair point that I agreed with when I was a student. If it ends up being a student fees issue, you can also raise the price of a credit by $20 per semester. $20 x 12 credits = $240 per full time student per semester.
Since the additional money would be for the AD as a whole, it would likely get dispersed throughout like taper says.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
These are viable points. If NDSU really really really wants to move up they will figure out a way to raise the budget and the revenue streams. However, there is no magic elixir available in G5. It is a full on scramble for all mid majors. There is also a dwindling supply of open spots in P5. The money doesn't flow downhill from the big boys..They aren't interested in sharing.
So, you just have to question what the potential upside would be for you and then decide if what it takes to get there is worth it.
The next question you might knock around here on this board is what is the upside for the MW or any conference to add you? CUSA would be a delighted to add you because it is a conference trying to survive.
However, what is the benefit to the MW? Does it help them to add more mouths to feed? Do they have to add if a couple schools leave?
This is the only question that is left, and I'm confident that we can convince the MW that the answer is yes. Definitely the MAC, and definitely the MW if Boise and SDSU leave. Just my 2 cents.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
Correct, but there is a reason a lot of schools have moved away from the 3rd prong.
All it would take is a group of female athletes to show that there is interest in a sport not being offered at NDSU and their compliance becomes in jeopardy. With the growth of women's hockey and women's wrestling in the state and region, the possibility of those is definitely greater than zero. And then you are no longer controlling what was yours to control.
Thats a fair point, but I think womens’ wrestling could be added fairly cheaply.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
Year 1, of course not. But there needs to be a plan to get there. Not impossible, but jumping in hoping for the best is a recipe for disaster. MAC would be vastly easier to budget than MWC.
Completely agree
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gully
I don't know the answer but my question is now that athletes are employees, why does this matter?
Title IX applies to the whole educational institution, including graduate departments for example where it is not uncommon for students to to also be employees so I would think that it would continue to apply even if the employment status of athletes is acknowledged.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Ok, I admit I'm not well informed on this topic is the first thing I'll say.
I guess I thought the idea was to provide equal opportunities to students....even where their sports don't seem to have that much interest or make much money, because that is thought by some to be fair. But if they're essentially employees hired to be athletes, that seems different to me than students having "opportunities" to participate in a sport. It's not like the fb and bb teams are made up of regional kids who went to NDSU and just "decided to try out for the team". I'm probably not articulating my thoughts/question well though.
Do we have gender quotas on employees at universities? I honestly don't know.
What about gender quotas on students themselves? Is it wrong to have a gender imbalance in the general student body or just those that play sports? Is it wrong to have "too many" women or is it just "too many" men that is bad? With the trend of female students up and male down, I can see this coming back to haunt some people. Assuming a consistent standard anyway.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
This is the only question that is left, and I'm confident that we can convince the MW that the answer is yes. Definitely the MAC, and definitely the MW if Boise and SDSU leave. Just my 2 cents.
I am unconvinced any school is leaving the MW any time soon. It could happen but that would still leave 10 football schools. No need to add to that.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
To your point, NDSU students shot down the student fees last time because the general thought was "why are we increasing student fees if we're not moving up in athletics?" A fair point that I agreed with when I was a student. If it ends up being a student fees issue, you can also raise the price of a credit by $20 per semester. $20 x 12 credits = $240 per full time student per semester.
Since the additional money would be for the AD as a whole, it would likely get dispersed throughout like taper says.
Pretty sure it had more to do with the athletic department half-assing their presentation and thinking they were going to get a rubber stamp.
The athletics department was trying to keep its cash flow afloat due to increase in expenses (FCOA) and decrease in state funding (state budget cuts).
I'd be happy to change my opinion if you could provide something from 2016 that said anything about moving to FBS at that point in time was the reasoning behind the rejection but I don't recall a whole lot of ground-swell pushing it at that point in time. It is fair to say that they wanted something in return, but I don't think that an FBS move was what they were looking for.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
Pretty sure it had more to do with the athletic department half-assing their presentation and thinking they were going to get a rubber stamp.
The athletics department was trying to keep its cash flow afloat due to increase in expenses (FCOA) and decrease in state funding (state budget cuts).
I'd be happy to change my opinion if you could provide something from 2016 that said anything about moving to FBS at that point in time was the reasoning behind the rejection but I don't recall a whole lot of ground-swell pushing it at that point in time. It is fair to say that they wanted something in return, but I don't think that an FBS move was what they were looking for.
Yeah idk if they tried after I left. I know they floated it around quite a bit when I was in school through 2014. The resounding opinion amongst my friends and kids that went to games was essentially “why do they need more money? They’re already winning every year.” I’ve always assumed if us hardcore fans thought it, the rest of the students that didn’t care as much about sports would think the same thing.
So not necessarily a “not if you don’t go FBS” but more of a “you obviously don’t need it at FCS”
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
I am unconvinced any school is leaving the MW any time soon. It could happen but that would still leave 10 football schools. No need to add to that.
Certainly, the question is would they want to though?
Who knows
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
Pretty sure it had more to do with the athletic department half-assing their presentation and thinking they were going to get a rubber stamp.
The athletics department was trying to keep its cash flow afloat due to increase in expenses (FCOA) and decrease in state funding (state budget cuts).
I'd be happy to change my opinion if you could provide something from 2016 that said anything about moving to FBS at that point in time was the reasoning behind the rejection but I don't recall a whole lot of ground-swell pushing it at that point in time. It is fair to say that they wanted something in return, but I don't think that an FBS move was what they were looking for.
Who in the athletic department would half ass stuff?
Half ass Matt?
