Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thebigund
With our current structure, yes, screwed without hockey. Ideally, for me, we would get the other portions of our AD to basically be independent from hockey. That would mean all other sports have the support they need to succeed. Really we can’t compare our AD to peers because we have none. The area FCS schools don’t have hockey and the area hockey schools aren’t FCS.
Yes, your points are valid (edit, see Bison Bison below; solid point). No, you should be concerned as you are subsidizing your athletics heavily on the back of the state and students relative to NDSU. You have a similar enrollment (insert online jokes here), and both are the premier universities in the state. That is a problem for you; subsidization % should be similar to NDSU. As you state, you pull hockey out, and my God it would be a disaster. You guys need to trim more from the non-hockey sports. Like drop football! (Yes, I do know you won't, but it would actually help!)
Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
Yes you do.
New Hampshire and Maine are very good ones.
The difference is that aren't apesh#t for hockey.
Until UND hockey fans become UND athletics fans everything but hockey is screwed.
Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
Quote:
Originally Posted by
westnodak93bison
Then why is the move up to FBS so dependent on a new stadium?
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Because the average expenses for Mountain West schools is $14.5M higher than what the NDSU athletic department's expenses were last year. And it's not like TV contracts or something are going to make up that difference because current Mountain West schools averaged almost $20M each in subsidies last year ($12M more than NDSU). If you think it's possible to convince the students and the school/state to more than double their contributions then the Fargodome is fine for an FBS athletic budget.
Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THEsocalledfan
Yes, your points are valid (edit, see Bison Bison below; solid point). No, you should be concerned as you are subsidizing your athletics heavily on the back of the state and students relative to NDSU. You have a similar enrollment (insert online jokes here), and both are the premier universities in the state. That is a problem for you; subsidization % should be similar to NDSU. As you state, you pull hockey out, and my God it would be a disaster. You guys need to trim more from the non-hockey sports. Like drop football! (Yes, I do know you won't, but it would actually help!)
UND is where NDSU was before their unprecedented football run which is still ahead of most of other schools at the FCS level and in the top 1/3 for least allocated funds across D1 and that's before the women's hockey anchor was unhooked. To their credit, NDSU's run has allowed ticket revenue to skyrocket (basically tripled since before the run) and put them in the enviable position they are currently in.
I'd also argue you just can't "pull" hockey out and think things would be the same across the board, even though that's the easy thing to do. Regardless, it is a pointless hypothetical.
Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
Quote:
Originally Posted by
abc123
UND is where NDSU was before their unprecedented football run which is still ahead of most of other schools at the FCS level and in the top 1/3 for least allocated funds across D1 and that's before the women's hockey anchor was unhooked. To their credit, NDSU's run has allowed ticket revenue to skyrocket (basically tripled since before the run) and put them in the enviable position they are currently in.
I'd also argue you just can't "pull" hockey out and think things would be the same across the board, even though that's the easy thing to do. Regardless, it is a pointless hypothetical.
Women's hockey still in this number?
Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
Quote:
Originally Posted by
westnodak93bison
Then why is the move up to FBS so dependent on a new stadium?
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
We would need 5-10 million more to move up
Funding options
1) state :rofl:
2) student fees - possibly
3) Slight increase in big money donor seats in the dome (club/skybox would have to be built)
4) raise ticket prices- maybe a little but there comes a point where it becomes unaffordable and were already charging a ton
5) Basketball and other sports but problem is we need to spend more on basketball if we want to take it to the next level.
6) Tailgating revenue
7) Sports Gambling proceeds
Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THEsocalledfan
Women's hockey still in this number?
Yes, 2016-2017 was their last season and the numbers on the report are as of the academic year ending 6/30/17. Next year's numbers will be the first without women's hockey (and M&W S&D) though I'm sure there are still some smaller expenses that will be washed out over the next few years with contracts and scholarships that were honored, however they will be a drop in the bucket compared to what was being lost.
Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THEsocalledfan
Bingo; we have a winner. Not to mention, you kind of should "look the part."
Bingo? Did you look at the numbers?
Best case scenario, Boise State, brings in just $1.7M more in ticket revenue than NDSU. Where are you coming up with the other $10.3M to make NDSU average? Look at what Colorado State's fancy new $220M stadium is getting them...$1.4M less revenue than NDSU.
Of course I am making some assumptions since we don't have a breakout by venue, but in any case ticket revenue (i.e. stadium) is in no way an obstacle to going FBS, rather it's the primary argument to go FBS.
Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HerdBot
We would need 5-10 million more to move up
Funding options
2) student fees - possibly
I can't imagine this will be a viable source of increased revenue anytime in the near future.
Re: USA Today NCAA Finances Updated
If NDSU could add Fargodome seating from from 19000 to 22000, with 1000 being added premium seating, that would accomplish a lot.