Posted: November 5th, 2012, 4:33 pmPosted: November 5th, 2012, 4:37 pmvalleychamp wrote:For many schools, football even at a mid-major level, means every bit as much as a strong basketball program when it comes to advertising, contributions, pride, and overall identity and profile of the university.
Posted: November 5th, 2012, 4:40 pmshoxrox wrote:valleychamp wrote:For many schools, football even at a mid-major level, means every bit as much as a strong basketball program when it comes to advertising, contributions, pride, and overall identity and profile of the university.
You are a riot.
Posted: November 5th, 2012, 4:42 pmvalleychamp wrote:For many schools, football even at a mid-major level, means every bit as much as a strong basketball program when it comes to advertising, contributions, pride, and overall identity and profile of the university.
Posted: November 5th, 2012, 4:43 pmDoubleJayAlum wrote:valleychamp wrote:For many schools, football even at a mid-major level, means every bit as much as a strong basketball program when it comes to advertising, contributions, pride, and overall identity and profile of the university.
Maybe, but the difference is that basketball generates revenue while FCS football consumes it.
Posted: November 5th, 2012, 4:46 pmWufan wrote:DoubleJayAlum wrote:valleychamp wrote:For many schools, football even at a mid-major level, means every bit as much as a strong basketball program when it comes to advertising, contributions, pride, and overall identity and profile of the university.
Maybe, but the difference is that basketball generates revenue while FCS football consumes it.
Correction: successful basketball generates money.
Posted: November 5th, 2012, 4:47 pmDoubleJayAlum wrote:valleychamp wrote:For many schools, football even at a mid-major level, means every bit as much as a strong basketball program when it comes to advertising, contributions, pride, and overall identity and profile of the university.
Maybe, but the difference is that basketball generates revenue while FCS football consumes it.
Posted: November 9th, 2012, 11:45 amI didn't realize Omaha's TV market was #4 in the MoVal. I always thought they were right behind the Wichita market.
Posted: November 9th, 2012, 11:56 amjaybydna wrote:CaseyGarrisonforPrez wrote:Some schools are simply fiscally irresponsible.
To pay a guy in the neighborhood of a million dollars a year to coach the game of college basketball is almost tragic. With so little public money being available for higher education anymore, it is laughable to spend that kind of $ on basketball. I love the game but there are more important things in this world.
And I get that WSU has to give lots of cash to keep Marshall in the middle of the state of Kansas but for the life of me I don't get the McD money. Who is banging down the door to get him? No major BCS schools I can assure you of that. He is at best an average coach once his son is in the NBA, NBDL or Europe. CU could have payed him half of that and use the rest either in athletics to improve things or elsewhere at the university.
Mr. Garrison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Posted: November 9th, 2012, 11:58 amDoubleJayAlum wrote:CaseyGarrisonforPrez wrote:Some schools are simply fiscally irresponsible.
To pay a guy in the neighborhood of a million dollars a year to coach the game of college basketball is almost tragic. With so little public money being available for higher education anymore, it is laughable to spend that kind of $ on basketball. I love the game but there are more important things in this world.
And I get that WSU has to give lots of cash to keep Marshall in the middle of the state of Kansas but for the life of me I don't get the McD money. Who is banging down the door to get him? No major BCS schools I can assure you of that. He is at best an average coach once his son is in the NBA, NBDL or Europe. CU could have payed him half of that and use the rest either in athletics to improve things or elsewhere at the university.
I'd argue that basketball success has a marketing benefit which is not ascertainable. I know that most MVC schools would not be able to afford the same amount of advertising. The corresponding increase in alumni pride and contributions is also extremely valuable.
As the article clearly points out, Creighton and WSU aren't hemorrhaging cash by investing in FCS football like your own MSu and other MVC schools. To me, that is much more "fiscally irresponsible", to coin your phrase, then spending the money on basketball coaches that win and the money that funds the entire operations of an entire athletic department.
I guess what it comes down to is what is more important to your school's fanbase -- a winning basketball program that earns the revenue to finance an athletic department or fielding a FCS football program and using up the valuable resources that could be used to build up your basketball program.