Trouble in Oxford

[ZachTheZip]

http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20100...d-changes-at-MU

Reducing the dependence of intercollegiate sports on the operating budget, saving $2.7 million a year.

"If revenue growth of this level is not possible and a 15 percent operating budget cut is required, then we recommend that the university seriously consider our participating in the MAC," the report said.

Miami is not one of the schools I expected to be on the "move down" side of the MAC. I always thought their pride in their tradition would be enough to carry them through and make moving down an unthinkable proposition.

Akron is quickly being isolated in the MAC as a school with a desire to improve athletics. Still, I think if the MAC dropped some weight then things would look better for the schools that stayed.

[Hilltopper]

Those exact same discussions are taking place a UA right now. Believe me, there are a large # of those who run UA who would love to see all sports programs disappear.

[72 Roo]

These kind of issues will always plague the MAC because there is not a commitment to raise the quality of play. BG is preparing to open the Stroth Center on campus. It is a brand new beautiful replacement for Anderson Fieldhouse. The only problem is the seating capacity is 5,000. That speaks volumes about where their administration wants to be with athletics. Nothing like setting the bar low and thinking small. Also OU had a directive this year in which they had to cut $600,000 from their athletics budget. They also wanted a varsity fieldhouse for teams to practice in, especially football. Their solution: put an inflatable dome over a track. I don't know if it got built, but it points out the trouble they are in.

The MAC will evolve or die. There can be no in between. I look for Akron to work more closely with the schools who want to improve like CMU, UT, Buffalo, Temple and NIU. They all have similar interests and most want a new or better league.

[Zipsrifle]

Those exact same discussions are taking place a UA right now. Believe me, there are a large # of those who run UA who would love to see all sports programs disappear.

Makes it a lot harder to walk away from something when you just put 60+ million into two new stadiums. They should have thought about this 4 years ago. Too late, end of discusion.

[zipsbandman]

Football just needs to get better, and we can avoid this discussion Miami is having. I've seen some big crowds, but our team always lays an egg before we can really generate excitement. Football is the cash cow and needs to be able to sustain itself better.

[MDZip]

Money issues ought to also quell any talk about a Conference USA move. The travel budget would skyrocket for a only a slight conference upgrade.

[GP1]

http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20100...d-changes-at-MU

Reducing the dependence of intercollegiate sports on the operating budget, saving $2.7 million a year.

"If revenue growth of this level is not possible and a 15 percent operating budget cut is required, then we recommend that the university seriously consider our participating in the MAC," the report said.

Miami is not one of the schools I expected to be on the "move down" side of the MAC. I always thought their pride in their tradition would be enough to carry them through and make moving down an unthinkable proposition.

Akron is quickly being isolated in the MAC as a school with a desire to improve athletics. Still, I think if the MAC dropped some weight then things would look better for the schools that stayed.

I don't really disagree with your post.

Since the 1970s, Miami has had spurts of being good with long stretches of being really bad being the norm. I believe Miami has made a decision to basically have a football team because they have to. What Miami really has is a nationally ranked hockey team and I believe that is going to be the focus of their AD. UofA could do the same thing with the soccer program.

I've been saying for a long time on this board and I get crucified every time I say it, but it appears as if it is going to come true faster than I even thought it would. The MAC needs to drop down to I-AA before the BCS schools and the NCAA do it for them. If we do it on our terms, I will be the best scenario. If we do it on their terms, it will be a shitty deal. The league is a I-AA league right now that just calls itself D-1A.

The party is over. MAC schools and our society in general don't have the money to sustain the costs it takes for everyone to constantly be in a "building process". What has been built in the MAC in terms of facilities is still small time in comparison to what BCS schools have. If you have any doubts, take a drive down to Columbus and drive around the basketball arena and look at their sports complex. Ours doesn't even come close to that. That statement is neither pro, nor con, tOSU.....It's just a fact. Us being behind is never going to change because the party is over and there is no more money to throw at sports teams. What we do have are really good facilities compared to the I-AA schools. The MAC would be the best I-AA conference and the champion would stand a good shot at winning the National Championship each year.

Sorry guys...the party is over. I don't say that to be an a-hole or anything else. Just take a look around at our society. Is there anyone out there who believes there is money sitting around for UofA to become a BCS level school? We're freaking broke for crying out loud. It was fun to debate these issues the past few years, but the reality of our society in the past two years has changed everything. There is NO FREAKING MONEY. No money = no "building".

[zipsbandman]

I really like what our soccer team has done but I sure hope it is not our "focus". I won't watch 1-AA football let alone soccer.

[Zipgrad01]

http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20100...d-changes-at-MU

Reducing the dependence of intercollegiate sports on the operating budget, saving $2.7 million a year.

"If revenue growth of this level is not possible and a 15 percent operating budget cut is required, then we recommend that the university seriously consider our participating in the MAC," the report said.

Miami is not one of the schools I expected to be on the "move down" side of the MAC. I always thought their pride in their tradition would be enough to carry them through and make moving down an unthinkable proposition.

Akron is quickly being isolated in the MAC as a school with a desire to improve athletics. Still, I think if the MAC dropped some weight then things would look better for the schools that stayed.

I don't really disagree with your post.

Since the 1970s, Miami has had spurts of being good with long stretches of being really bad being the norm. I believe Miami has made a decision to basically have a football team because they have to. What Miami really has is a nationally ranked hockey team and I believe that is going to be the focus of their AD. UofA could do the same thing with the soccer program.

I've been saying for a long time on this board and I get crucified every time I say it, but it appears as if it is going to come true faster than I even thought it would. The MAC needs to drop down to I-AA before the BCS schools and the NCAA do it for them. If we do it on our terms, I will be the best scenario. If we do it on their terms, it will be a shitty deal. The league is a I-AA league right now that just calls itself D-1A.

The party is over. MAC schools and our society in general don't have the money to sustain the costs it takes for everyone to constantly be in a "building process". What has been built in the MAC in terms of facilities is still small time in comparison to what BCS schools have. If you have any doubts, take a drive down to Columbus and drive around the basketball arena and look at their sports complex. Ours doesn't even come close to that. That statement is neither pro, nor con, tOSU.....It's just a fact. Us being behind is never going to change because the party is over and there is no more money to throw at sports teams. What we do have are really good facilities compared to the I-AA schools. The MAC would be the best I-AA conference and the champion would stand a good shot at winning the National Championship each year.

Sorry guys...the party is over. I don't say that to be an a-hole or anything else. Just take a look around at our society. Is there anyone out there who believes there is money sitting around for UofA to become a BCS level school? We're freaking broke for crying out loud. It was fun to debate these issues the past few years, but the reality of our society in the past two years has changed everything. There is NO FREAKING MONEY. No money = no "building".

I hope they tear down the stadium and get rid of the football program before they drop to I-AA. I have zero interest in I-AA ball.

[K92]

Sorry guys...the party is over. I don't say that to be an a-hole or anything else. Just take a look around at our society.

You are 100% correct. The party is over. But it's not just over for the MAC. There are only a handful of institutions whose athletic departments make money. Like less than 10.

Nice article from College Sports Lose Money reports:

"Let’s take as an example the 2008-9 Florida Gators. Led by Heisman Trophy finalist Tim Tebow, the Gator football team won their division in the SEC, beat the undefeated and #1-ranked Alabama in the conference title game, and then, with 26.8 million people tuning in on Fox, won the BCS title game over Oklahoma. The men’s basketball team, two seasons removed from back-to-back national titles, made the NIT, while the women’s team made the NCAA tournament only to lose to eventual champion UConn.

Yet, despite all this on-field success, and after including $2.5 million in student fees, $40.7 million in alumni contributions, $1.8 million in direct state support, and millions more in television fees, tournament revenues, royalties, licensing, parking, and concessions, the University of Florida lost $5.4 million on their athletics programs in 2008-9. This was arguably the most successful college sports program in the country!"

Unfortunately, the arms race in collegiate sports has completely wreaked havoc on almost every school's athletic balance sheet. I think the story of Cincinnati Bearcats athletics is a very sobering one. For all of the success they have been able to achieve in men's basketball and football, they haven't exactly translated it into fans in the seats. Nippert Stadium has 35,000 seats. One would think a team that won the Big East two years in a row thereby earning a 2 trips to a BCS games would be able to sell out a small stadium with no problem. You could imagine a waiting list for season tickets and SRO admissions sold. This has not been the case. They averaged 33, 957 for their 6 home games last year, which is a really nice almost full stadium, don't get me wrong. But Cincinnati is definitely not a town gone crazy with the Bearcats. Their recent performance certainly warrants a town gone crazy.

Contrast Cincinnati numbers with Penn State who was the 3rd best team in the Big Ten last year behind Ohio State and Iowa. They have the second largest stadium at 107,282. They averaged 107,008 for their 8 home games last year. Ohio Stadium is 3rd largest at 102,329 capacity. They averaged 105,261 for their 7 home games last year.

It appears that the schools at the top of the pecking order are going to stay there and those striving to make it there are never going to. The only exception I can ever see to this is if you play in the same conference as the big dog in your state and you can begin to consistently beat them. That is the only way to step up. OSU fans still see the success of a team like Cincinnati as small potatoes.

When it comes to entertainment, I love college football more than anything. I have loved the game since I was a child. And I especially love the Akron Zips and want them to do as well as they possibly can. I am afraid that (like it has for almost everything else) money ruins everything.

Would MAC schools make money at the FCS level, or would it just slow the rate of loss?

I just realized how depressing my post has become. But even worse. If you consider how upside down the NCAA athletic budgets are, they pale in comparison to the fiscal emergencies local, state and federal governments are facing.

[zen]

http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20100...d-changes-at-MU

Reducing the dependence of intercollegiate sports on the operating budget, saving $2.7 million a year.

"If revenue growth of this level is not possible and a 15 percent operating budget cut is required, then we recommend that the university seriously consider our participating in the MAC," the report said.

Miami is not one of the schools I expected to be on the "move down" side of the MAC. I always thought their pride in their tradition would be enough to carry them through and make moving down an unthinkable proposition.

Akron is quickly being isolated in the MAC as a school with a desire to improve athletics. Still, I think if the MAC dropped some weight then things would look better for the schools that stayed.

I don't really disagree with your post.

Since the 1970s, Miami has had spurts of being good with long stretches of being really bad being the norm. I believe Miami has made a decision to basically have a football team because they have to. What Miami really has is a nationally ranked hockey team and I believe that is going to be the focus of their AD. UofA could do the same thing with the soccer program.

I've been saying for a long time on this board and I get crucified every time I say it, but it appears as if it is going to come true faster than I even thought it would. The MAC needs to drop down to I-AA before the BCS schools and the NCAA do it for them. If we do it on our terms, I will be the best scenario. If we do it on their terms, it will be a shitty deal. The league is a I-AA league right now that just calls itself D-1A.

The party is over. MAC schools and our society in general don't have the money to sustain the costs it takes for everyone to constantly be in a "building process". What has been built in the MAC in terms of facilities is still small time in comparison to what BCS schools have. If you have any doubts, take a drive down to Columbus and drive around the basketball arena and look at their sports complex. Ours doesn't even come close to that. That statement is neither pro, nor con, tOSU.....It's just a fact. Us being behind is never going to change because the party is over and there is no more money to throw at sports teams. What we do have are really good facilities compared to the I-AA schools. The MAC would be the best I-AA conference and the champion would stand a good shot at winning the National Championship each year.

Sorry guys...the party is over. I don't say that to be an a-hole or anything else. Just take a look around at our society. Is there anyone out there who believes there is money sitting around for UofA to become a BCS level school? We're freaking broke for crying out loud. It was fun to debate these issues the past few years, but the reality of our society in the past two years has changed everything. There is NO FREAKING MONEY. No money = no "building".

I hope they tear down the stadium and get rid of the football program before they drop to I-AA. I have zero interest in I-AA ball.

+1

[Quickzips]

University athletic departments at any school do NOT make money. Never have, never will. Any of you out there who think that this is just a MAC problem or a small school problem are dilluting yourselves. Most years you can count the number of athletic departments nationwide that operate in the black on one hand. These are well documented facts. The success of an athletic department is not measured on a balance sheet, it is measured in the impact that athletics has on the University as a whole (enrollment, endowments, publicity, student morale, community support, etc., etc., etc.). Unfortunatly all fans ever hear about is this new multi-million dollar television contract or that new donor who dropped off a big fat check, or this line of revenue or that line of revenue. Nobody realizes that these departments are running in the red every year.

[MaxZIP]

The University received a pretty significant chunk of the Info’s construction cost via corporate sponsorship and donations. I think it was a sound business decision to build the stadium. Hell if somebody offered to build about half of a brand new home or building for you and allowed you to get out of a costly older money pit...wouldn't you do it? The soccer stadium and other athletic facilities have had generous contributions from private donors as well. I contend that the university should make capital improvements whenever private companies are able to fund at least 1/3 of the cost. The increased revenue from ticket sales, concessions, and parking alone should cover much more of the deficit than another season at the Rubber Bowl. I remember an article late last year about how revenue is way up despite horrible performances on the football field. Long-term institutional financial decisions can't be approached from a personal finance mindset. It is a complex and calculated risk undertaken by professionals that will move the agenda of the entire University forward. Proenza has been spending money like crazy on the New Landscape for learning. Is the University worse off today than it was when he took the reins? We have seen remarkable improvement of academics, campus appearance, and athletics. I would say that isolating one area such as spending on athletics is not fair. The university is growing and getting stronger by the semester. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money. It is a classic debate about allocation of resources within an organization. All parties involved are fighting for a piece of the monetary pie. A strong leader must possess a vision and have the balls to push his agenda through all of the noise generated by sub sects of the organization. I believe Proenza is the man for Akron. Give him another five years and see where we are at. At this rate there will be over 30,000 students enrolled by next year. Spread the burden over more students. 1-2 million dollars is pretty cheap when you consider the operating budget of the entire University. Does Proenza perceive that the media exposure, alumni development opportunities, and positive impacts on campus life are great enough to warrant the spending on athletics? I would say that he obviously does. Athletics can't be viewed as just another expense on the balance sheet. It is tough to quantify the intangible benefits offered by the athletic department. It is easy to sit back and say that the money would be better spent elsewhere without knowing how the entire puzzle is supposed to come together.

[ZachTheZip]

University athletic departments at any school do NOT make money. Never have, never will. Any of you out there who think that this is just a MAC problem or a small school problem are dilluting yourselves. Most years you can count the number of athletic departments nationwide that operate in the black on one hand. These are well documented facts. The success of an athletic department is not measured on a balance sheet, it is measured in the impact that athletics has on the University as a whole (enrollment, endowments, publicity, student morale, community support, etc., etc., etc.). Unfortunatly all fans ever hear about is this new multi-million dollar television contract or that new donor who dropped off a big fat check, or this line of revenue or that line of revenue. Nobody realizes that these departments are running in the red every year.

They don't make money directly. They do, however spread around the name of your school, bring in donations, and increase enrollment. The effects can't be measured directly.

[InTheZone]

Here's what everyone forgets when having these "budget" discussions: The amount of national exposure a 1-A athletic program gives your school is priceless. Would any of us have ever heard of schools like Boise State or TCU or San Jose State for that matter if they didn't have a 1-A football team? Apparently the University of Chicago is a pretty good school. I didn't even know they existed until a few years ago. Every 15 year old kid who picks up a copy of NCAA '11 has at least heard of "Akron". I didn't grow up in Ohio, but when I started to get recruited and got a letter from "The University of Akron", I had already heard of the University from watching sportscenter and playing video games. You can't put a price tag on the national exposure big time athletics gives your school.

[Zipgrad01]

University athletic departments at any school do NOT make money. Never have, never will. Any of you out there who think that this is just a MAC problem or a small school problem are dilluting yourselves. Most years you can count the number of athletic departments nationwide that operate in the black on one hand. These are well documented facts. The success of an athletic department is not measured on a balance sheet, it is measured in the impact that athletics has on the University as a whole (enrollment, endowments, publicity, student morale, community support, etc., etc., etc.). Unfortunatly all fans ever hear about is this new multi-million dollar television contract or that new donor who dropped off a big fat check, or this line of revenue or that line of revenue. Nobody realizes that these departments are running in the red every year.

You are exactly right. Do you think all these kids want to go to Ohio State because it is the greatest school in the world? No. They want to go because of the sports teams. They grew up watching the football and basketball teams. It is the only reason that I visited the campus when I was looking at schools. I wanted to watch good sports! It is a huge part of the college experience and it is a huge pride factor.

[GP1]

http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20100...d-changes-at-MU

Reducing the dependence of intercollegiate sports on the operating budget, saving $2.7 million a year.

"If revenue growth of this level is not possible and a 15 percent operating budget cut is required, then we recommend that the university seriously consider our participating in the MAC," the report said.

Miami is not one of the schools I expected to be on the "move down" side of the MAC. I always thought their pride in their tradition would be enough to carry them through and make moving down an unthinkable proposition.

Akron is quickly being isolated in the MAC as a school with a desire to improve athletics. Still, I think if the MAC dropped some weight then things would look better for the schools that stayed.

I don't really disagree with your post.

Since the 1970s, Miami has had spurts of being good with long stretches of being really bad being the norm. I believe Miami has made a decision to basically have a football team because they have to. What Miami really has is a nationally ranked hockey team and I believe that is going to be the focus of their AD. UofA could do the same thing with the soccer program.

I've been saying for a long time on this board and I get crucified every time I say it, but it appears as if it is going to come true faster than I even thought it would. The MAC needs to drop down to I-AA before the BCS schools and the NCAA do it for them. If we do it on our terms, I will be the best scenario. If we do it on their terms, it will be a shitty deal. The league is a I-AA league right now that just calls itself D-1A.

The party is over. MAC schools and our society in general don't have the money to sustain the costs it takes for everyone to constantly be in a "building process". What has been built in the MAC in terms of facilities is still small time in comparison to what BCS schools have. If you have any doubts, take a drive down to Columbus and drive around the basketball arena and look at their sports complex. Ours doesn't even come close to that. That statement is neither pro, nor con, tOSU.....It's just a fact. Us being behind is never going to change because the party is over and there is no more money to throw at sports teams. What we do have are really good facilities compared to the I-AA schools. The MAC would be the best I-AA conference and the champion would stand a good shot at winning the National Championship each year.

Sorry guys...the party is over. I don't say that to be an a-hole or anything else. Just take a look around at our society. Is there anyone out there who believes there is money sitting around for UofA to become a BCS level school? We're freaking broke for crying out loud. It was fun to debate these issues the past few years, but the reality of our society in the past two years has changed everything. There is NO FREAKING MONEY. No money = no "building".

I hope they tear down the stadium and get rid of the football program before they drop to I-AA. I have zero interest in I-AA ball.

Be careful of what you wish for....

The MAC is already I-AA.

[Captain Kangaroo]

After seeing the 398th post from GP1 calling for the Zips to drop to 1-AA, I got to thinking... has The Great One quantified exactly how much money the Zips Athletics Department would save by dropping it's football program to 1-AA?

Let's begin with 22 scholarships. At a value of $20k/scholarship? That's $440,000.

For Game Day -- Let's fly to the campuses of SE Missouri State, Illinois State, Southern Illinois, Murray State, James Madison etc instead of taking bus trips to Oxford, Toledo, Bowling Green, K.e.n.t., etc. I'm guessing we'd lose about $100k on that deal?

That's puts the savings at roughly $340,000.

At at lower division, we'll save on coach's and Athletic Department salaries...maybe that tacks the $100k back on?

I think you can go back and forth all you want...at best you save $500k if you drop to 1-AA. Being an "equivalent" to a directional Michigan school ain't the sexiest thing in the world... but it beats being Morehead State Junior.

Dropping to 1-AA is not worth saving a measly $500,000 ($20/student).

[g-mann17]

Those exact same discussions are taking place a UA right now. Believe me, there are a large # of those who run UA who would love to see all sports programs disappear.

I would love to know who this "large number" is.

I've talked to several trustees and they all support the idea of athletic growth as a driving factor for investment at the University.

[skip-zip]

Bottom line is, we'd save on expenses, but would bring in less revenue. What the difference would be at that point is anyone's guess.

I was on this campus in the early 80s when we made the move to 1-A. If we take a step backwards now, after everything we have invested over the last 25 or so years, I'd be absolutely sick.

[Captain Kangaroo]

Bottom line is, we'd save on expenses, but would bring in less revenue. What the difference would be at that point is anyone's guess.

I was on this campus in the early 80s when we made the move to 1-A. If we take a step backwards now, after everything we have invested over the last 25 or so years, I'd be absolutely sick.

It would be an interesting debate - "Which is more short-sighted?"

The Zips knee-jerk, ill-conceived, unbelievably poorly-planned jump to 1-A back in 1986

or

A Zips poorly planned, number-massaged, wasteful drop to 1-AA

If we play our cards right....we could hold the record for the two dumbest moves in D1/D-1-AA history. Wouldn't that be cool?

[Blue & Gold]

University athletic departments at any school do NOT make money. Never have, never will. Any of you out there who think that this is just a MAC problem or a small school problem are dilluting yourselves. Most years you can count the number of athletic departments nationwide that operate in the black on one hand. These are well documented facts. The success of an athletic department is not measured on a balance sheet, it is measured in the impact that athletics has on the University as a whole (enrollment, endowments, publicity, student morale, community support, etc., etc., etc.). Unfortunatly all fans ever hear about is this new multi-million dollar television contract or that new donor who dropped off a big fat check, or this line of revenue or that line of revenue. Nobody realizes that these departments are running in the red every year.

I think that Columbus State and Texas are the only two schools who actually make $ off their athletic programs (i.e., football). Every other school in the country loses $. But I'm supposing that every school in the nation, OSU & Texas as well, essentially consider athletics an advertising expense.

[Quickzips]

University athletic departments at any school do NOT make money. Never have, never will. Any of you out there who think that this is just a MAC problem or a small school problem are dilluting yourselves. Most years you can count the number of athletic departments nationwide that operate in the black on one hand. These are well documented facts. The success of an athletic department is not measured on a balance sheet, it is measured in the impact that athletics has on the University as a whole (enrollment, endowments, publicity, student morale, community support, etc., etc., etc.). Unfortunatly all fans ever hear about is this new multi-million dollar television contract or that new donor who dropped off a big fat check, or this line of revenue or that line of revenue. Nobody realizes that these departments are running in the red every year.

I think that Columbus State and Texas are the only two schools who actually make $ off their athletic programs (i.e., football). Every other school in the country loses $. But I'm supposing that every school in the nation, OSU & Texas as well, essentially consider athletics an advertising expense.

The last numbers I saw from about two years ago had only 6 athletic departments (not just football programs) operating in the black. I believe OSU was one of them, but its hard to remember right now. Not sure about Texas. I know Michigan at the time was operating pretty substantially in the red. In any event, when you consider how many schools are out there (over 300 alone in I-A basketball), the numbers are pretty staggering. This whole debate about operating costs and profits and losses for the athletic department is really pretty useless without factoring in the impact that athletics has on the University as a whole. I think the schools that most would define as having a "successful" athletics department have simply figured that out better than the schools (most of the MAC) who seem to be looking at the athletics department as its own seperate business that is simply run by the University and has no real effect on the school as a whole.

[Dr Z]

...Not sure about Texas...

Texas does pretty good for themselves.

[GP1]

After seeing the 398th post from GP1 calling for the Zips to drop to 1-AA, I got to thinking... has The Great One quantified exactly how much money the Zips Athletics Department would save by dropping it's football program to 1-AA?

Let's begin with 22 scholarships. At a value of $20k/scholarship? That's $440,000.

For Game Day -- Let's fly to the campuses of SE Missouri State, Illinois State, Southern Illinois, Murray State, James Madison etc instead of taking bus trips to Oxford, Toledo, Bowling Green, K.e.n.t., etc. I'm guessing we'd lose about $100k on that deal?

That's puts the savings at roughly $340,000.

At at lower division, we'll save on coach's and Athletic Department salaries...maybe that tacks the $100k back on?

I think you can go back and forth all you want...at best you save $500k if you drop to 1-AA. Being an "equivalent" to a directional Michigan school ain't the sexiest thing in the world... but it beats being Morehead State Junior.

Dropping to 1-AA is not worth saving a measly $500,000 ($20/student).

You need to think harder. My posts have been centered around much more than money. Level competition has always been at the center of my posts. Ideas such as fans not getting ripped off for having to purchase tickets for Miami (OH) vs. Florida have also been at the center of my posts.....Florida is stealing from their fans, and Miami is whoring the football program out....How is that good for college football?

If you do want to talk about money, we can do that. What are the expenses going to be to make the MAC and UofA a real D-1A school that can effectively compete with every other, and that means BCS schools out there? How much "building" can the Univeristy and taxpayers take?....We have a 25,000 seat stadium so how much woudl it be to tripple the size? Can they afford it? Can they support it if it is built.

My opinion has less to do with saving money and more to do with the existing landscape of college football and a desire to watch teams in college football compete at the same level. We are a D-1A school in name only. The MAC is a D-1A conference in name only. There are going to be even more changes in college football over the next five year. The BCS schools are going to dictate the terms of those changes. Nobody is going to ask the MAC leadership what they think about BCS level changes in terms of a playoff and the size, membership and direction of their conference. The MAC is already a non-factor in those discussions. If the MAC needs to make a move on its own, it needs to do so before the BCS schools make the move for them. If that is a separate level of college football somewhere between D-1 and I-AA, then fine. There area already four divisions, would another really hurt?

Would the walls of The Big Dialer really come crashing down if we played all of the same MAC schools and had a OOC schedule of Marshall, Florida Atlantic, Nevada and pick a I-AA school? That would be a Hell of a good schedule. Let the BCS schools play one another without their early season fodder and let the non-BCS schools play some games where they have a chance to win and a chance at a national championship. I-AA or another division could do that.