Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DannyHoke

Back when cutting sports seemed like the abyss...

Recommended Posts

Reminder: Groce finished tied for last in the MAC his first year, didn’t do much better his second year, and was picked to finish 5th of 6th in the East this year although they were thankfully able to break through.

 

Rebuilding takes patience and I really struggle to value anyone’s opinion who is writing him off after a season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, NWAkron said:

Arth has a lot of potential, and I have faith the new president will sort all of this out.  Right now Miller has to reorganize academics and get kids back on campus.  Williams did what he was told to do for now.  Williams and company could certainly be on borrowed time, but I'm willing to keep buying my season tickets and keep donating and keep being a huge Zips fan.

The problem is We financially cannot afford "Potential"

We cannot afford the risk. 

As a result now, if he continues to fail we may no longer have D1 Football 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, dre22era said:

The problem is We financially cannot afford "Potential"

We cannot afford the risk. 

As a result now, if he continues to fail we may no longer have D1 Football 

That may be.  I wish I had the solution or could provide the cure.  In the meantime, I will play the hand I'm dealt as a fan.  I won't run down the University.  Just not how I am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, dre22era said:

via GIPHY

 

 

What am I looking at here? Nothing in your post provides evidence stating what I said to be false. Frankly I feel dumber for reading it. Fact is each buy game generates 1.3 million in revenue. The MAC tv deal generates 833k and the reason they get that is because of football. From there add in college football playoff pool money, ticket sales, concession, parking, sponsorship, and donations.

 

Edit: I stated football by far and away generates the most revenue for the athletic department, which is true. The athletic department as a whole operates at a large deficit. That isn't ground breaking news.

Edited by kreed5120

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

What am I looking at here? Nothing in your post provides evidence stating what I said to be false. Frankly I feel dumber for reading it. Fact is each buy game generates 1.3 million in revenue. The MAC tv deal generates 833k and the reason they get that is because of football. From there add in college football playoff pool money, ticket sales, concession, parking, sponsorship, and donations.

 

Edit: I stated football by far and away generates the most revenue for the athletic department, which is true. The athletic department as a whole operates at a large deficit. That isn't ground breaking news.

How about you provide receipts to back up those alleged facts 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, dre22era said:

How about you provide receipts to back up those alleged facts 

Speak and though shall receive.

 

Quote

According to the game contract, USC will pay $1.3 million, along with 2,000 tickets valued at a total of $100,000

https://www.thestate.com/sports/college/university-of-south-carolina/usc-football/article221772820.html

 

I've heard from other sources this deal was back loaded as it was a 10 year extension on a deal that had 3 years remaining, but feel free to use $670k instead of the previous $833k that I previously quoted 

Quote

The Mid-American Conference and ESPN yesterday announced "a 13-year television and digital media contract," with sources saying that it is worth more than $100M and "will pay each of the 12 member universities about $670,000 per school year"

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2014/08/20/Media/MAC-ESPN.aspx

 

For 2019 MAC schools split ~16 million 12 ways. That works out to $1.33 million per team

Quote

Group of 5

$90 million collective pool

The “Group of 5” (the American Athletic Conference, Conference USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West Conference and Sun Belt Conference) divide their collective pool pursuant to an agreement and formula devised by those conferences. Although that formula has not been formally disclosed to the public, reports have the majority shared equally, with a small portion set aside to be distributed based on performance.

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2019/12/28/college-football-playoff-payouts-for-2019/

 

2 buy games at 1.3 million + 633k for tv + 1.33 million for CFP money =  $4.59 million. That's not getting into ticket sales, concessions, parking, sponsorship, and donations. The article you posted showed athletics costing 35 million while only producing ~10 million in revenue. I'll hang up the phone now and wait to hear your response on how soccer or men's basketball generates more revenue than football....

 

 

Edited by kreed5120
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

Speak and though shall receive.

 

https://www.thestate.com/sports/college/university-of-south-carolina/usc-football/article221772820.html

 

I've heard from other sources this deal was back loaded as it was a 10 year extension on a deal that had 3 years remaining, but feel free to use $670k instead of the previous $833k that I previously quoted 

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2014/08/20/Media/MAC-ESPN.aspx

 

For 2019 MAC schools split ~16 million 12 ways. That works out to $1.33 million per team

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2019/12/28/college-football-playoff-payouts-for-2019/

 

2 buy games at 1.3 million + 633k for tv + 1.33 million for CFP money =  $4.59 million. That's not getting into ticket sales, concessions, parking, sponsorship, and donations. The article you posted showed athletics costing 35 million while only producing ~10 million in revenue. I'll hang up the phone now and wait to hear your response on how soccer or men's basketball generates more revenue than football....

 

 

70 percent of Akron’s sports budget comes from student tuition fees  Akron’s total enrollment, the $24.3 million subsidy amounted to $1,359 per student.

So you are really sitting here defending less than 30% of $$$ coming from conference and tv contracts. 

And FYI you can thank football for this (NCAA Finances)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, dre22era said:

70 percent of Akron’s sports budget comes from student tuition fees  Akron’s total enrollment, the $24.3 million subsidy amounted to $1,359 per student.

So you are really sitting here defending less than 30% of $$$ coming from conference and tv contracts. 

And FYI you can thank football for this (NCAA Finances)

 

What I stated was football generates more revenue than soccer and men's basketball combined, which is true. I provided the detail to support it. Larry Williams is on record stating football costs 6.5-7 million to operate. Don't believe me you can go look through the forum as it was just posted a day or two ago. Football pretty much pays for itself. Any money Akron loses on football is from Infocision, which is a sunk cost. Cutting football makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It's really the only sport that's capable of turning an operating profit. The 12-13 non-revenue sports is why our athletic deficit is so large as we're paying for coaches, travel, and scholarships, but getting pretty much $0 revenue from them

Edited by kreed5120
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

What I stated was football generates more revenue than soccer and men's basketball combined, which is true. I provided the detail to support it. Larry Williams is on record stating football costs 6.5-7 million to operate. Don't believe me you can go look through the forum as it was just posted a day or two ago. Football pretty much pays for itself. Any money Akron loses on football is from Infocision, which is a sunk cost. Cutting football makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It's really the only sport that's capable of turning an operating profit. The 12-13 non-revenue sports is why our athletic deficit is so large as we're paying for coaches, travel, and scholarships, but getting pretty much $0 revenue from them

 

I appreciate that analysis but the other factor I hear being brought up a lot is the amount of non revenue women's sports scholarships and expenses that are required due to football that would probably go away without it. Irony 1 is that women's sports fans should therefore also be big supporters of the men's sports especially football. Irony 2 is that those who want football scaled back would be the same ones bitching when women's sports get scaled back accordingly.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ZippyRulz said:

 

I appreciate that analysis but the other factor I hear being brought up a lot is the amount of non revenue women's sports scholarships and expenses that are required due to football that would probably go away without it. Irony 1 is that women's sports fans should therefore also be big supporters of the men's sports especially football. Irony 2 is that those who want football scaled back would be the same ones bitching when women's sports get scaled back accordingly.

Good analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading all of this, I have come to one simple conclusion.  That conclusion is not that football is too much of a financial drain or is financially unfeasible.  Rather, it's that $6.5 to $7 million dollars is a lot of money for awful football.  It's the product that needs improved.

 

I heard Urban Meyer on a radio show this week and in discussing assistant coaches stated that college football really all comes down to recruiting.  It's all about talent on the field.  Get kids that are better than PCCC's, OU's, Toledo's....and you will finally see a return on the investment.  It's the administration's job to find the leaders that can accomplish that task

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, clarkwgriswold said:

Reading all of this, I have come to one simple conclusion.  That conclusion is not that football is too much of a financial drain or is financially unfeasible.  Rather, it's that $6.5 to $7 million dollars is a lot of money for awful football.  It's the product that needs improved.

 

I heard Urban Meyer on a radio show this week and in discussing assistant coaches stated that college football really all comes down to recruiting.  It's all about talent on the field.  Get kids that are better than PCCC's, OU's, Toledo's....and you will finally see a return on the investment.  It's the administration's job to find the leaders that can accomplish that task

 

Nice thing about basketball is that there are more players out there to recruit for way fewer spots 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, clarkwgriswold said:

Reading all of this, I have come to one simple conclusion.  That conclusion is not that football is too much of a financial drain or is financially unfeasible.  Rather, it's that $6.5 to $7 million dollars is a lot of money for awful football.  It's the product that needs improved.

 

I heard Urban Meyer on a radio show this week and in discussing assistant coaches stated that college football really all comes down to recruiting.  It's all about talent on the field.  Get kids that are better than PCCC's, OU's, Toledo's....and you will finally see a return on the investment.  It's the administration's job to find the leaders that can accomplish that task

 

Nice post. I agree the product needs improved. Not just on the field, but the experience the MAC football consumers are purchasing.

 

Meyer is correct. On field coaching is the most overrated thing in sports. It isn't irrelevant, but it is wildly overrated.  You don't win with X's and O's. You win with Jimmies and Joes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, LoyalZIP said:

 

Sure, this is making everything boil over. But the department bleeding money isn't a new thing, shitty attendance despite basketball being as good as it has ever been isn't a new thing. It's just pathetic, there's no visible effort to change things. 

Sure, but it's not just us. It's boiling over all around us at many, many schools like Akron. Pathetic indeed.....

 

I applaud many of the moves made by the MAC and other schools/conferences like ours. It is an unusual display of self-awareness.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dre22era said:

The problem is We financially cannot afford "Potential"

We cannot afford the risk. 

As a result now, if he continues to fail we may no longer have D1 Football 


I don’t see how “he” failed. He didn’t recruit the seniors, juniors, or sophomores. We’re not going to see his recruiting until maybe 2021. Knee jerk reactions to how Bowden’s third to last recruiting class played will only ensure we stay in last place.

 

The financial side has already been thoroughly covered.

 

 

Edited by Spin
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ZippyRulz said:

 

I appreciate that analysis but the other factor I hear being brought up a lot is the amount of non revenue women's sports scholarships and expenses that are required due to football that would probably go away without it. Irony 1 is that women's sports fans should therefore also be big supporters of the men's sports especially football. Irony 2 is that those who want football scaled back would be the same ones bitching when women's sports get scaled back accordingly.

 

I'd agree any real cost saving would be by us being able to eliminate other sports. That being said, D1 (non FBS) requires us fielding 14 sport teams. We're currently at 16 now so dropping football means we could cut 1 women's non revenue sport. Eliminating 1 women's sport may save us 600k-1 million depending what they cut. It really doesn't seem to be worth cutting football over that.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Spin said:


I don’t see how “he” failed. He didn’t recruit the seniors, juniors, or sophomores. We’re not going to see his recruiting until maybe 2021. Knee jerk reactions to how Bowden’s third to last recruiting class played will only ensure we stay in last place.

 

The financial side has already been thoroughly covered.

 

 

Producing the first winless FBS team since UTEP in 2017 is not a failure? 
Good lord i give up  

Edited by dre22era
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dre22era said:

Good lord i give up  

On behalf of the posters here, thank you

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

On behalf of the posters here, thank you

Hey this is exactly why this forum is dead most of the time like football attendance 

Yall rather be a bunch of yes men continuing to be blind to reality looking down on anyone who has an objective opinion. 

Enjoy 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

I'd agree any real cost saving would be by us being able to eliminate other sports. That being said, D1 (non FBS) requires us fielding 14 sport teams. We're currently at 16 now so dropping football means we could cut 1 women's non revenue sport. Eliminating 1 women's sport may save us 600k-1 million depending what they cut. It really doesn't seem to be worth cutting football over that.

 

Yeah, and then again we can look to the FCS schools to see what their average subsidy is, factoring in the lesser revenue, probably not much less. The big unknown is the value of the front porch and advertising effects of a G5 FBS program.

Edited by ZippyRulz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

What I stated was football generates more revenue than soccer and men's basketball combined, which is true. I provided the detail to support it. Larry Williams is on record stating football costs 6.5-7 million to operate. Don't believe me you can go look through the forum as it was just posted a day or two ago. Football pretty much pays for itself. Any money Akron loses on football is from Infocision, which is a sunk cost. Cutting football makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It's really the only sport that's capable of turning an operating profit. The 12-13 non-revenue sports is why our athletic deficit is so large as we're paying for coaches, travel, and scholarships, but getting pretty much $0 revenue from them

The non revenue sports are a drain because of football.. if you cut football or scale back considerably, it allows you some wiggle room on Title IX .. I allows you to defund  most non revenue sports.. if you cut 20 scholarships from football, it allows you to defund the some women's sports that are funded. The back asswords thinking on baseball was that it would be privately funded -- great, except that privately funded athletic scholarships need to be matched on the women's side... so unless the baseball scholarship funding ALSO included women's scholarships -- it is smoke an mirrors-- it's costing you $ on the women's side. You can't afford to leave the MAC?... you will go broke trying to stay in it.The UA makes bad decisions on bad decisions.. they should have cut their losses. They pay coaches based on what others pay - not what they can afford. If any of you  ran your house or business that way, your wife would divorce you and your company would be out of business. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dre22era said:

Hey this is exactly why this forum is dead most of the time 

It's dead because the Great GP1 has not been around to spread some whit and wisdom. With South Carolina opening up, it will slow down again because the great one will have more to do/bars and restaurants to drink and eat in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GP1 said:

It's dead because the Great GP1 has not been around to spread some whit and wisdom. With South Carolina opening up, it will slow down again because the great one will have more to do/bars and restaurants to drink and eat in.

Grate One. 🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, clarkwgriswold said:

Beacon Journal opinion piece by Dr. Miller about the challenges facing the school and it's place in the City-

 

https://www.beaconjournal.com/opinion/20200516/gary-l-miller-itrsquos-all-about-akron

He's impressive.  I like how he took care of the athletic situation quickly, hopefully calmed down the faculty Senate, and is now moving on to the bigger picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...