What other programs are on the chopping block?

[Shockerman]

My true condolences to Northeastern and Hofstra. It is a terrible feeling to hear that your alma mater is going to cut the football program. Prepare to lose traditional students to in state rivals while watching your overall traditional student base decline.

Anyways, I was curious what other colleges we may be looking at in the future. URI and Georgetown got to be up there somewhere.

[Green Cookie Monster]

Hofstra said they want to expand internationally. How many asians, arabs and europeans will fill the stadium for american football? I don't think Hofstra really cares if a NY student chooses another in-state school because it has football.

[argh!]

idaho state?

[CFBfan]

My true condolences to Northeastern and Hofstra. It is a terrible feeling to hear that your alma mater is going to cut the football program. Prepare to lose traditional students to in state rivals while watching your overall traditional student base decline.

Anyways, I was curious what other colleges we may be looking at in the future. URI and Georgetown got to be up there somewhere.

why would URI and GU "got to be" up there?? are you specualting just because of their records?? Losing records don't cause the eliminaton of programs, or are you aware of other factors in those 2 programs??

[Eight Legger]

Georgetown has a terrible facility and no fans. There are two reasons for you.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

why would URI and GU "got to be" up there?? are you specualting just because of their records?? Losing records don't cause the eliminaton of programs, or are you aware of other factors in those 2 programs??

The alarming thing about Georgetown is they're doing nothing to fix their situation. They haven't fired their coach and they've made no progress in updating their facilities. The fact that the coach has remained is the most curious of all imo. The program has hit rock bottom, shows no signs of life yet the course looks to continue. What's the point?

[Ronbo]

idaho state?

And NAU.

[CFBfan]

My true condolences to Northeastern and Hofstra. It is a terrible feeling to hear that your alma mater is going to cut the football program. Prepare to lose traditional students to in state rivals while watching your overall traditional student base decline.

Anyways, I was curious what other colleges we may be looking at in the future. URI and Georgetown got to be up there somewhere.

why would URI and GU "got to be" up there?? are you specualting just because of their records?? Losing records don't cause the eliminaton of programs, or are you aware of other factors in those 2 programs??

[kdinva]

The alarming thing about Georgetown is they're doing nothing to fix their situation......they've made no progress in updating their facilities.

didn't they just increase their seating from 2,800 to 3,400?

[art vandelay]

URI isnt going anywhere. they just built up their stadium and their president has comitted to getting the program top notch. really the maine reason they were so bad this year probly had to do with the sudden coaching change. If you look at their roster they are on the rite track.

[CFBfan]

Georgetown has a terrible facility and no fans. There are two reasons for you.

and what about URI??

[CFBfan]

The alarming thing about Georgetown is they're doing nothing to fix their situation. They haven't fired their coach and they've made no progress in updating their facilities. The fact that the coach has remained is the most curious of all imo. The program has hit rock bottom, shows no signs of life yet the course looks to continue. What's the point?

I agree with you 100% especialy not firing the entire staff....a real head scratcher. I was just wondering if URI and GU were thrown out here simply based on record and perception or does some one know something??

[Shockerman]

I am no insider at Georgetown. It just seems from an outsider's perspective that the program could someday be in trouble. It has nothing to do with W/L but with institutional support. Believe me, I am no fan of schools dropping Football. I also wish there was a way Georgetown could go FBS as I would hate to see them get left out of a new big East if the split ever does happen.

I know URI just dumped money into the stadium but that hasn't seemed to stop schools from dropping Football. Cal State Fullerton opened up a brand new stadium and dropped the program one year later.

I forgot about NAU and I really feel for them as they are in a situation much like WSU since they are "percieved" as a sort of the third wheel in the state. I think the only way to save NAU football is to go FBS and get into the WAC.

Idaho State is one that seems to be a major problem. Why can't they build stadiums in Idaho outside of Boise. Two of the worst football stadiums in all of Division I are in that state.

Missouri State is one that scares me as well as they have had some calling for their program to be disbanded. It would be an awful idea and would cement MOSU as a second tier school in that state forever!

[Jackman]

Is Eastern Washington now in the clear after those rumors from earlier in the season?

[hebmskebm]

What about some of the weaker schools in the NEC? I imagine after the CAA/Yankee/PL shakeout one or more NEC teams will be poached into other conferences, and I'm sure schools like St. Francis, Sacred Heart, and RMU won't be among them. Do they continue on with limited schollies, or drop them and go the route of Marist in the Pioneer?

I can't imagine these schools investing much more into FCS ball if much larger private schools like Hofstra are ending their programs, without more community and student body support.

[Tim James]

Portland State. They are turning their stadium into a soccer stadium thus they will have no place to play.

URI needs to dump MORE money into their stadium because the main stand is sub standard and they only re did the other side.

The stadium isnt the main problem for Idaho State its lack of support/interest due to what Boise State has become.

[Model Citizen]

I hear Wichita State might lose theirs, like forever.

[caribbeanhen]

Del St.. how can they afford it?

[doolittledog]

Portland State. They are turning their stadium into a soccer stadium thus they will have no place to play.

URI needs to dump MORE money into their stadium because the main stand is sub standard and they only re did the other side.

The stadium isnt the main problem for Idaho State its lack of support/interest due to what Boise State has become.

The triple-A baseball team that was playing at PGE Park will be the team that has no place to play. Portland St. football and the Portland Timbers MLS team will share the remodeled stadium.

[slostang]

Portland State. They are turning their stadium into a soccer stadium thus they will have no place to play.

They are updating the stadium and increasing the capacity. That is a good thing. Replacing Glanville is also a good thing.

[UAalum72]

What about some of the weaker schools in the NEC? I imagine after the CAA/Yankee/PL shakeout one or more NEC teams will be poached into other conferences, and I'm sure schools like St. Francis, Sacred Heart, and RMU won't be among them. Do they continue on with limited schollies, or drop them and go the route of Marist in the Pioneer?

I can't imagine these schools investing much more into FCS ball if much larger private schools like Hofstra are ending their programs, without more community and student body support.
St. Francis has a tough job with Penn State just up the road.

I don't know where Heart gets the money, they've got 4,000 students and sponsor about 33 sports.

Even if all of Albany, CCSU and Monmouth leave, and that's no guarantee, there are still six teams left with five all-sport members of the NEC as a core who could presumably move to control costs as a group - even to reducing limits again as a last resort? That's a lot of teams to join the PFL at once if they wanted that route.

[seantaylor]

Chatty

[HoyaMetanoia]

didn't they just increase their seating from 2,800 to 3,400?

No. Nor do we need to. Despite our doctored attendance figures, there's plenty of room at pretty much every Georgetown game, save homecoming (although this year the ACTUAL crowd at Homecoming probably never surpassed 1200 people at any point in the game).

[UTCCS]

Chatty

ummm....NO!

What an ignorant statement.

[Dawg2Rhody]

URI--bad facilities, low morale, horrible coach. Something has to change!

[Pards Rule]

We dodged a bullet exactly 10 years ago. Thanks to 3 alumni stepping up and kicking in serious money for a $25 million stadium renovation/football field house construction. Of course, the way it was handled by BOT and President was horrible - announcing the study group at the height of recruiting in January 1999. It made the headline in the Philadelphia Inquirer. Even though we came out the other side of the tunnel it took five years before our program's ship was righted as we lost a lot of talent for a few years around the turn of the century.

[DFW HOYA]

No. Nor do we need to. Despite our doctored attendance figures, there's plenty of room at pretty much every Georgetown game, save homecoming (although this year the ACTUAL crowd at Homecoming probably never surpassed 1200 people at any point in the game).

We can agree to disagree on that one--the September games are full, and the combinations of getting thumped every week and the grim surroundings eventually wear out the students.

The expected turnout from Howard in its game with GU was embarassing. No band, no fans, maybe parents and friends. There could not have been more than 100 that "traveled" the 30 blocks for the game.

If you build 5000 good seats you can sell 5000 seats. Selling the temporary MSF is one of the toughest propositions in I-AA. And now that Parsons has met its demise, MSF and the Butler Bowl are at the bottom of the list.

[Brad82]

Rhody-don't be surprised if there are some more improvements to facilities/FB infrastructure.
Stay tuned.

[carney2]

If you raise your eyes toward the horizon a little and take a view that extends beyond...oh, I don't know...tomorrow afternoon, this list of potentially troubled FCS football programs gets depressingly long and includes, in my opinion, some folks who appear quite healthy today. What do you think of things 10 years or more down the road now that the precedent has been set and the first eggs have been broken? What do you think might happen once friends, neighbors and traditional foes begin to disappear? What will be the impact of students continuing to stay away in droves as is currently the case in much of the northeast? Things could start to snowball somewhere out there in the mist.

[carney2]

Take a look at the "the State of UMaine Football" thread, http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/showthread.php?t=67227

When the university president comes out and says “It is my expectation that football will continue as a component of the University of Maine, as it has been for more than a century,” there is definitely an underlying problem. That is not a positive development.

[WestCoastAggie]

There quite a few HBCU's holding on to their programs by a thread. Most of those programs are at private HBCU's and are not playing D-1 ball.

[paward]

The economy is the greatest factor when discussing programs that are in trouble. It is a business and to survive in that world you would have to be profitable. Ticket sales does not substain a problem. Fan support and endowments do. If the things do not get better on the financial side of the ball we will see more programs opt out of this sink hole.

To be honest we have created a monster in all college sports. To be successful you have resources. The competition on the field is nothing like the one in budget office on each capus.

[ccd494]

Take a look at the "the State of UMaine Football" thread, http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/showthread.php?t=67227

When the university president comes out and says “It is my expectation that football will continue as a component of the University of Maine, as it has been for more than a century,” there is definitely an underlying problem. That is not a positive development.

Disagree. I'm presuming for that article he was asked point blank "Are you considering cutting football." To which that statement is a perfectly valid answer.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

Disagree. I'm presuming for that article he was asked point blank "Are you considering cutting football." To which that statement is a perfectly valid answer.

I hope you're right.

[CFBfan]

We can agree to disagree on that one--the September games are full, and the combinations of getting thumped every week and the grim surroundings eventually wear out the students.

The expected turnout from Howard in its game with GU was embarassing. No band, no fans, maybe parents and friends. There could not have been more than 100 that "traveled" the 30 blocks for the game.

If you build 5000 good seats you can sell 5000 seats. Selling the temporary MSF is one of the toughest propositions in I-AA. And now that Parsons has met its demise, MSF and the Butler Bowl are at the bottom of the list.

i attended most home games and the "crowd" was decent, especialy when you consider the lack of facility and wins. I agree that if you actualy have a stadium with say 5,000 seats you would fill most of them, jmo though

[carney2]

Disagree. I'm presuming for that article he was asked point blank "Are you considering cutting football." To which that statement is a perfectly valid answer.

If the question's being asked, the subject is out there. As I said, not a good sign.

[SandMountainDemon]

I keep hearing rumors that Jackson State, Missisippi Valley State, and Alcorn State are all in some type of financial troubles and could be consolidated under the Jackson State flag, no word on the football programs though. Also, with the educational budget in turmoil in the state of Louisiana, rumblings are that Nicholls and Southeastern Louisiana could either wind up folding their football programs all together or dropping to D-III (like Centenary did) in all sports. Northwestern State is also facing serious budget cuts, but no word on how it would effect the football program.

[Big Al]

To be honest we have created a monster in all college sports. To be successful you have resources. The competition on the field is nothing like the one in budget office on each capus.

Quoted for truth.

[carney2]

The economy is the greatest factor when discussing programs that are in trouble.

I respectfully disagree. As much as LFN has railed against Hofstra's president, Stuart Rabinowitz, calling him disingenuous (but using much stronger language), the Hofstra president has, I think, for better or for worse, defined some of the key issues moving forward. I mention a few to get the pot boiling:

1. If students do not attend the games and show no outward signs of interest in the football program, are we, the institution, justified in committing significant resources to it?

2. Rabinowitz does not claim economic hardship, but rests part of his argument on the allocation of resources; getting more bang for those scarce bucks.

This is where we're headed, folks. If you are of the oft expressed opinion on this board that "Football is not about making money. It's part of the total educational experience." you need to stop impersonating an ostrich and pop your head out of the ground and look around. It's about the money. It's always about the money. Football is the cash devouring monster in the athletic department. It needs to at least give the appearance of pulling its own considerable weight. The expenditure of 3, 4, 5 million tends to get the attention of a lot of folks.

[MplsBison]

I respectfully disagree. As much as LFN has railed against Hofstra's president, Stuart Rabinowitz, calling him disingenuous (but using much stronger language), the Hofstra president has, I think, for better or for worse, defined some of the key issues moving forward. I mention a few to get the pot boiling:

1. If students do not attend the games and show no outward signs of interest in the football program, are we, the institution, justified in committing significant resources to it?

2. Rabinowitz does not claim economic hardship, but rests part of his argument on the allocation of resources; getting more bang for those scarce bucks.

This is where we're headed, folks. If you are of the oft expressed opinion on this board that "Football is not about making money. It's part of the total educational experience." you need to stop impersonating an ostrich and pop your head out of the ground and look around. It's about the money. It's always about the money. Football is the cash devouring monster in the athletic department. It needs to at least give the appearance of pulling its own considerable weight. The expenditure of 3, 4, 5 million tends to get the attention of a lot of folks.

That's fine for a private school, especially a small one.


But public flagship universities should be filling the mission of providing opportunities for the high school students in that state.

IMO, that should include having a football team for high school players in the state to potentially play on.

Right now, only Vermont and Alaska are deficient in that regard. If Maine gets rid of football, that would be a shame as well.

I'm hopefully that both Vermont and Alaska can one day have teams at the public flagship school, though.

[Bogus Megapardus]

It's about the money. It's always about the money. Football is the cash devouring monster in the athletic department. It needs to at least give the appearance of pulling its own considerable weight. The expenditure of 3, 4, 5 million tends to get the attention of a lot of folks.

Which is why consistency and an even keel are critical. Whether you're at the mercy of a board of trustees or a state treasury department, a keen eye and a history of balance while meeting stated goals and long term objectives goes a long way to proving one's worth and pulling your weight. At Hofstra, maybe the jump to Division 1 did not meet stated goals. At Northeastern, it seems to have been support of CAA football but then losing the facilities aspect of the CAA arms race. These were big changes, the success of which were likely measured against stated objectives.

The PL has been playing more or less the same schedule for more than a hundred years. True, HC no longer plays BC and Syracuse, and Lafayette no longer plays Rutgers and Gettysburg. But football has been remarkably stable amongst the PL institutions for a very long time. Is some allowance for scholarships in order? Certainly, just to be able to regain equipoise. But we do not have to try to toe the line with Appalachian State or Montana in every respect. Sure, they're great teams. But who's to say their way is better for our schools in the long run?

Why not let the other conferences escalate the arms race while trying to match the CAA? I like the way the PL does it, and has been doing it, with considerable success over an extended period of time.

[carney2]

equipoise

Equipoise = an equal distribution of weight; even balance; equilibrium

There ya have it, folks - the value of a Patriot League education. If you had to look it up, you obviously attended one of those "lesser" institutions, or, like me, you spent four years worrying where your next can of suds was coming from. xnodx xlolx :D :) xrotatehx

[ccd494]

If the question's being asked, the subject is out there. As I said, not a good sign.

The question was asked because two of Maine's traditional rivals dropped football. Just like Marty Scarano was asked at UNH, just like they were asked at URI.

[JALMOND]

During the Portland State coaching search, it was brought out that seven of the nine Big Sky football teams operated at a deficit last year. While it was not made clear what two teams did not, my guess is that they are the two big state schools of which the conference shares its name with that state's nickname. All the other Big Sky school have bigger FBS schools to fight for money within the states.

[Bogus Megapardus]

Equipoise = an equal distribution of weight; even balance; equilibrium. There ya have it, folks - the value of a Patriot League education.

June Schlueter taught me how to write, for better or for worse. You can blame her, carney. :o


spent four years worrying where your next can of suds was coming from. xnodx xlolx :D :) xrotatehx

You drank from a can?

[holycrossC]

why would URI and GU "got to be" up there?? are you specualting just because of their records?? Losing records don't cause the eliminaton of programs, or are you aware of other factors in those 2 programs??

URI will be in the NEC next year.

[DFW HOYA]

The PL has been playing more or less the same schedule for more than a hundred years. True, HC no longer plays BC and Syracuse, and Lafayette no longer plays Rutgers and Gettysburg. But football has been remarkably stable amongst the PL institutions for a very long time.

Huh? Unless Fordham and Georgetown do not count in your claim, their competitive levels and scheduling philosophies have varied considerably over the years.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

URI will be in the NEC next year.

Based on what?

[Tim James]

Wouldnt surprise me at all if URI jumped to the NEC. They arent a full time CAA member after all.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

Wouldnt surprise me at all if URI jumped to the NEC. They arent a full time CAA member after all.

Next season?

[Tim James]

They cant keep up in the facilties race with the other CAA teams so it makes sense to "downgrade" and thats better than cutting the program.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

We'll all learn something later this month

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=302083&ac=PHspt

[Seawolf97]

Equipoise = an equal distribution of weight; even balance; equilibrium

There ya have it, folks - the value of a Patriot League education. If you had to look it up, you obviously attended one of those "lesser" institutions, or, like me, you spent four years worrying where your next can of suds was coming from. xnodx xlolx :D :) xrotatehx

Thanks! I thought that was something woman got after40. But I went to state schoolxlolx

[Bogus Megapardus]

We'll all learn something later this month

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=302083&ac=PHspt

Ummm . . . . I believe strongly that you're right! As a UNH fan with an amazing team, what you you like to see happen?

[Seawolf97]

Seriously I think Hofstras loss will be felt in the fall when their 13k stadium sits idle save a few soccer games. They may not see a decent crowd until high school play offs begin in November. It is a shame. I was their last September on Labor Day weekend when we played them. Attendance was about 7100 add to that two bands and two mascots it was fun. September of 2010 it will be silent .

[holycrossC]

Based on what?

I have very good connections here in Rhody, I can not give names or my sources will tell me nothing else.

[aceinthehole]

I have very good connections here in Rhody, I can not give names or my sources will tell me nothing else.

I agree that according to the public statements coming from Kingston, it seems they'd like to be part of a regional FB conference with smaller budgets. The obvious assumption is URI to the NEC.

Here's the problem. They NEC currently has 7 members that play football +2 affilates (Albany & Duquense). That's 9 members and an even 8-game home/home conference schedule.

URI is not going to be addmitted to the NEC, unless we lose a team. There is no way that Bryant, Wagner, SHU, and RMU would agree to let URI come in and have a very good chance to win our newly earned AQ. Not going to happen, mark it down!!!

[Bogus Megapardus]

They NEC currently has 7 members that play football +2 affilates (Albany & Duquense).

No one here seems to mention Duquesne football. How are they doing?

[ncbears]

And NAU.

Think so?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I respectfully disagree. As much as LFN has railed against Hofstra's president, Stuart Rabinowitz, calling him disingenuous (but using much stronger language), the Hofstra president has, I think, for better or for worse, defined some of the key issues moving forward. I mention a few to get the pot boiling:

1. If students do not attend the games and show no outward signs of interest in the football program, are we, the institution, justified in committing significant resources to it?

2. Rabinowitz does not claim economic hardship, but rests part of his argument on the allocation of resources; getting more bang for those scarce bucks.

This is where we're headed, folks. If you are of the oft expressed opinion on this board that "Football is not about making money. It's part of the total educational experience." you need to stop impersonating an ostrich and pop your head out of the ground and look around. It's about the money. It's always about the money. Football is the cash devouring monster in the athletic department. It needs to at least give the appearance of pulling its own considerable weight. The expenditure of 3, 4, 5 million tends to get the attention of a lot of folks.

Two points here.

1) Making the specious claim that "kids don't go to the games" and actually having hard data that support that claim are two different things. Just saying that "in my top-secret report, it was said kids don't go to games" is one thing; quite another to say, "We surveyed the students, and they said that we are quite happy to play PS3 and get rid of the football team." It is awful easy to unsubstantiated "facts" out there. Where's the real data to back this up?

2) Saying that even a part of this is "allocation of resources" seems to have truly spooked every athletic program at Hofstra. That Hofstra's AD had to go to the NYT to basically further distance he and Rabinowitz from the "resources argument" supports that fact.

carney, I wouldn't focus on the arguments so much as focus on the presidents themselves. I honestly believe these arguments will, in time, be proven to be worth nothing. But presidents who are determined to destroy football will try to use these blunt weapons.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

No one here seems to mention Duquesne football. How are they doing?

I am just an outsider, but I think Duquesne has to be pretty happy with the new arrangement. They have two local league rivals (St. Francis, RMU), one every-year OOC rival (Bucknell) and a middle road of scholarships to offer. Their league games are all bus trips, and there's a decent number of FCS (or even FBS) programs to play potentially.

[aceinthehole]

I am just an outsider, but I think Duquesne has to be pretty happy with the new arrangement. They have two local league rivals (St. Francis, RMU), one every-year OOC rival (Bucknell) and a middle road of scholarships to offer. Their league games are all bus trips, and there's a decent number of FCS (or even FBS) programs to play potentially.

Exactly, and they aren't near the NEC scholly limit yet. I still wonder why Marist passed on the offer to join the NEC.

The additions of Duquesne and Bryant have really given the NEC some stability. With the AQ, the NEC is in a very strong position moving forward, regrtdless of what happens in the PL or CAA.

[Bogus Megapardus]

I am just an outsider, but I think Duquesne has to be pretty happy with the new arrangement. They have two local league rivals (St. Francis, RMU), one every-year OOC rival (Bucknell) and a middle road of scholarships to offer. Their league games are all bus trips, and there's a decent number of FCS (or even FBS) programs to play potentially.

That's good. I like Duquesne U. I think it's a pretty good place. They have a great spot in downtown Pittsburgh, right across from the Mellon Center. Nice campus in the heart of the city.

[rcny46]

If you raise your eyes toward the horizon a little and take a view that extends beyond...oh, I don't know...tomorrow afternoon, this list of potentially troubled FCS football programs gets depressingly long and includes, in my opinion, some folks who appear quite healthy today. What do you think of things 10 years or more down the road now that the precedent has been set and the first eggs have been broken? What do you think might happen once friends, neighbors and traditional foes begin to disappear? What will be the impact of students continuing to stay away in droves as is currently the case in much of the northeast? Things could start to snowball somewhere out there in the mist.


The very possibility of that occurring is cause for depression,although I think you are on to something.

[Go...gate]

Huh? Unless Fordham and Georgetown do not count in your claim, their competitive levels and scheduling philosophies have varied considerably over the years.

In reality, they don't count. Fordham and Georgetown's shutting down of their programs at one point enabled them to avoid the de-emphasis which took place at the other programs after WW II.

[Go...gate]

I am just an outsider, but I think Duquesne has to be pretty happy with the new arrangement. They have two local league rivals (St. Francis, RMU), one every-year OOC rival (Bucknell) and a middle road of scholarships to offer. Their league games are all bus trips, and there's a decent number of FCS (or even FBS) programs to play potentially.

I think NEC football was a home run for Duquesne.

[carney2]

Two points here.

1) Making the specious claim that "kids don't go to the games" and actually having hard data that support that claim are two different things. Just saying that "in my top-secret report, it was said kids don't go to games" is one thing; quite another to say, "We surveyed the students, and they said that we are quite happy to play PS3 and get rid of the football team." It is awful easy to unsubstantiated "facts" out there. Where's the real data to back this up?

2) Saying that even a part of this is "allocation of resources" seems to have truly spooked every athletic program at Hofstra. That Hofstra's AD had to go to the NYT to basically further distance he and Rabinowitz from the "resources argument" supports that fact.

carney, I wouldn't focus on the arguments so much as focus on the presidents themselves. I honestly believe these arguments will, in time, be proven to be worth nothing. But presidents who are determined to destroy football will try to use these blunt weapons.

I'm standing by my comments.

1. I have no hard evidence regarding student attendance. I doubt if anyone has. It's a school by school thing. I attend all home games at Lafayette and there are virtually no students in attendance other than for the Lehigh game. I am not a regular at Lehigh, but will make the occasional game at Goodman - primarily in September or October when Lafayette has 6:00 starts. Same thing - very few students other than at the Lafayette game. I try to make one road trip per year and see very few students at Princeton, Bucknell, wherever. I believe, but cannot prove, that, other than at the large state universities with a football culture such as Delaware, student attendance is lagging throughout the northeast. Administrators will eventually ask why they should care if the students don't. On another thread - or perhaps on another board - someone asked what the magic attendance number is to save a football program. I don't know. I don't think anyone does. We do know however, that 4,000-5,000 did not get it done at Hofstra.

2. One more time: football is the 500 pound gorilla in the athletic department. It sucks up more resources than any other sport/activity, and perhaps as much as most of the others combined in some cases. It's a lot of money and a very easy target at belt tightening time. Any administrator worth his salt will ask himself the question "Is it worth it? Can we get more for our money elsewhere?"

Your point about the university presidents is well taken. They come primarily from an academic (translation: faculty) background, and are therefore probably predisposed to dislike athletics and the money that is spent on it, and especially football because of its numbers (bodies and $$) and relatively high profile. To state that Rabinowitz or any president is on a personal vendetta against football is to somehow invoke a group paranoia that plays well to your audience while avoiding the underlying issues. They may be predisposed to dislike football. but the arguments against the sport must hold some water before they can take action.

What are the arguments? Can we find data? It's called investigative journalism and must be pursued with some objectivity.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I have no hard evidence regarding student attendance. I doubt if anyone has. It's a school by school thing. I attend all home games at Lafayette and there are virtually no students in attendance other than for the Lehigh game. I am not a regular at Lehigh, but will make the occasional game at Goodman - primarily in September or October when Lafayette has 6:00 starts. Same thing - very few students other than at the Lafayette game. I try to make one road trip per year and see very few students at Princeton, Bucknell, wherever. I believe, but cannot prove, that, other than at the large state universities with a football culture such as Delaware, student attendance is lagging throughout the northeast. Administrators will eventually ask why they should care if the students don't. On another thread - or perhaps on another board - someone asked what the magic attendance number is to save a football program. I don't know. I don't think anyone does. We do know however, that 4,000-5,000 did not get it done at Hofstra.

But what's to stop a President/administrator/whatever from saying "20,000 is enough to break even on football?" Is that the goal - breaking even, or having the football team pay its own way? If so, then you might as well fold 95% of the football programs out there: all but a handful of FCS schools and 90% of FBS, too. But if you think football games are an important educational mission, that it's a useful rallying point for the school, etc. then all of a sudden the concept of "paying your own way" is stupid. Does the school orchestra pay its own way?

And if today it's 20,000 fans, what's to stop tomorrow it being 25,000? 50,000? 100,000? The point is it's just a number plucked out of the air. While budget numbers are guarded as well as the national oil reserve, attendance numbers are public domain.

That's what I'm talking about. I understand that "investigative journalism" is required - believe me, I know. But if someone is asking what the magic attendance number is, the answer is that the magic number will always increase, because it's the wrong question to be asking. IMO.

[rfeng]

URI is not going to be addmitted to the NEC, unless we lose a team. There is no way that Bryant, Wagner, SHU, and RMU would agree to let URI come in and have a very good chance to win our newly earned AQ. Not going to happen, mark it down!!!Are there any teams in the NEC would would like to join the CAA? Perhaps do a college swap?

[CollegeSportsInfo]

And NAU.

sad that NAU isn't doing better. Such a great location for college football, whether it's in an FCs conference like the Big Sky or FBS like the WAC or MWC.

A nice, new outdoor stadium would be great...but the fans would need to show up.

[Torgo]

No one here seems to mention Duquesne football. How are they doing?

Dirt cheap travel schedule and enough people of influence to keep the program afloat. The attendance is lousy but I can say with good confidence they're in no danger. Same goes to Robert Morris.

The fact most of the Pittsburgh Steelers ownership and front office went to one of the two schools helps.

[aceinthehole]

Are there any teams in the NEC would would like to join the CAA? Perhaps do a college swap?

Of course, Albany would switch out in a second. CCSU would love to play in the CAA. But neither of those things are going to happen.

The CAA has no incentive or reason to swap out URI for another Northern team. If URI can't compete in the CAA, the rest of the conference will get along without them.

The CAA isn't going to add Fordham/SBU/UA/CCSU/HC/etc just to appease the New England schools. They have to buck up and spend more $$ on travel or its tough *****.

[Bogus Megapardus]

Dirt cheap travel schedule and enough people of influence to keep the program afloat. The attendance is lousy but I can say with good confidence they're in no danger. Same goes to Robert Morris.

The fact most of the Pittsburgh Steelers ownership and front office went to one of the two schools helps.

I forgot - Art Rooney is a Duquesne guy, isn't he?

[aceinthehole]

I forgot - Art Rooney is a Duquesne guy, isn't he?


Yep, see Rooney Field.

http://www.goduquesne.com/facilities/duqu-facil-rooney-field.html

[Dane96]

Of course, Albany would switch out in a second. CCSU would love to play in the CAA. But neither of those things are going to happen.

The CAA has no incentive or reason to swap out URI for another Northern team. If URI can't compete in the CAA, the rest of the conference will get along without them.

The CAA isn't going to add Fordham/SBU/UA/CCSU/HC/etc just to appease the New England schools. They have to buck up and spend more $$ on travel or its tough *****.

I wouldnt be so sure about this.

[DG Cowboy]

I keep hearing rumors that Jackson State, Missisippi Valley State, and Alcorn State are all in some type of financial troubles and could be consolidated under the Jackson State flag, no word on the football programs though. Also, with the educational budget in turmoil in the state of Louisiana, rumblings are that Nicholls and Southeastern Louisiana could either wind up folding their football programs all together or dropping to D-III (like Centenary did) in all sports. Northwestern State is also facing serious budget cuts, but no word on how it would effect the football program.

The "Bayou Conference" should logically consist of all football playing colleges that do not make a profit. Potentially that is LaTech, Grambling, ULM, NW, McNeese, ULL, Nicholls, Southern, SLU. That would cut taxpayer costs. However, the USA consists of 49 states and one banana republic, in the words of a former state senator in guess which state. xsmiley_wix

Then again, we might as well waste money on football. Reduces the amount available for corruption.

[techstate]

I know this is a FBS team But SDSU, that is San Diego State University. With a losing record for over a decade, there has been a lot of talk about throwing in the towel all together. Unless Hoke can turn it around within 5 years the program is gone.

[jmufan999]

i think URI just got a new coach, so i would doubt they would cut the program. but i could be wrong about either of those (that they got a new coach or that they would/wouldn't cut the program)

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I know this is a FBS team But SDSU, that is San Diego State University. With a losing record for over a decade, there has been a lot of talk about throwing in the towel all together. Unless Hoke can turn it around within 5 years the program is gone.

OT, but I love your sig.

Slightly less off topic, what about San Jose State? That's the one I hear is in real trouble.

On topic. what about the Cali FCS teams in general? I worry about them, considering the huge state crisis.

[JackFan]

I am no insider at Georgetown. It just seems from an outsider's perspective that the program could someday be in trouble. It has nothing to do with W/L but with institutional support. Believe me, I am no fan of schools dropping Football. I also wish there was a way Georgetown could go FBS as I would hate to see them get left out of a new big East if the split ever does happen.

I know URI just dumped money into the stadium but that hasn't seemed to stop schools from dropping Football. Cal State Fullerton opened up a brand new stadium and dropped the program one year later.

I forgot about NAU and I really feel for them as they are in a situation much like WSU since they are "percieved" as a sort of the third wheel in the state. I think the only way to save NAU football is to go FBS and get into the WAC.

Idaho State is one that seems to be a major problem. Why can't they build stadiums in Idaho outside of Boise. Two of the worst football stadiums in all of Division I are in that state.

Missouri State is one that scares me as well as they have had some calling for their program to be disbanded. It would be an awful idea and would cement MOSU as a second tier school in that state forever!

Wow the way some of you guys are talking the NAU football program is on life support. There were a few whispers around about maybe dropping the football program this past summer, but that had to do with a lot of the budget mess that was plaguing the entire states education system. Those whispers were last case scenarios, incase the proper cuts could not be made to maintain proper function of the university. As a new alum (graduated a week ago) ive been on campus, read the student newspaper, read the flagstaff newspaper, and watched the local news stations, there has been no further talk of this, in fact there was an article outlining things to look forward to next year as far as returning players and such. Again I feel the only way NAU drops its football program would be to keep up the proper academic function of the university, and that would obviously be last case scenario. NAU was ranked 41(or around there) out of more then 100 fcs teams in attendance for this past season so fan support is not the problem.

One last thing to add to this is that a few days ago I was getting a hair cut and saw the pres of the U walk in wearing an Arizona Cardinals cap, a clear sign that he is a sports fan which is always good to know then your football program is in question.

[Green Laser]

OT, but I love your sig.

Slightly less off topic, what about San Jose State? That's the one I hear is in real trouble.

On topic. what about the Cali FCS teams in general? I worry about them, considering the huge state crisis.

The three California public FCS are well supported and with the help of the yearly "money" games should be ok.

Attendence figures out of 128 FCS teams;

Sacramento State is 32nd

U.C. Davis 33rd

Cal Poly 37th

The one that I am concerned about is the University of San Diego at 111th

[nms1987]

The one that I am concerned about is the University of San Diego at 111th

Not only is the U of SD private (unlike SDSU and UCSD) and thus not affected by the current CA budget crises but they have been non-scholarship for some time, thus since it doesn't cost that much to field a team I doubt they are in much jeopardy

[Green Laser]

The one that I am concerned about is the University of San Diego at 111th

Not only is the U of SD private (unlike SDSU and UCSD) and thus not affected by the current CA budget crises but they have been non-scholarship for some time, thus since it doesn't cost that much to field a team I doubt they are in much jeopardy

USD may be private and also non-scholarship but they are also in a league that spans from coast to coast. they drew an ave. of 2,368 at home and the closest league team is 1,500+ miles away. That don't sound like a formula for success to me, at least two similar Northern California schools St. Marys and Santa Clara couldn't make it work long term. I would hate to see any school drop football but I don't see how the figures add up at San Diego long term.

The California public FCS programs are not primarily funded from the State, but from student body fees, gate, FBS money games etc.

All three are in the top 25% of attendance. Even though none where in the playoff hunt this year, they out drew many of the playoff teams. I think that shows support and potential to draw more as the teams improve.xcoffeex

[MplsBison]

I would think the CSU system will have to take a look at some of these programs.

DI CSU system teams:

Fresno State
San Jose State
San Diego State
Sacramento State
Cal Poly


Fresno probably has too much critical mass...but not sure about any of the rest.

[MplsBison]

USD may be private and also non-scholarship but they are also in a league that spans from coast to coast. they drew an ave. of 2,368 at home and the closest league team is 1,500+ miles away. That don't sound like a formula for success to me, at least two similar Northern California schools St. Marys and Santa Clara couldn't make it work long term. I would hate to see any school drop football but I don't see how the figures add up at San Diego long term.

The California public FCS programs are not primarily funded from the State, but from student body fees, gate, FBS money games etc.

All three are in the top 25% of attendance. Even though none where in the playoff hunt this year, they out drew many of the playoff teams. I think that shows support and potential to draw more as the teams improve.xcoffeex

I'd be fine with USD folding their varsity program and going the club team route.

If you're going to be a DI school and have a varsity football team, you should be giving scholarships and lots of them. xrulesx

[Green Laser]

I would think the CSU system will have to take a look at some of these programs.

DI CSU system teams:

Fresno State
San Jose State
San Diego State
Sacramento State
Cal Poly


Fresno probably has too much critical mass...but not sure about any of the rest.

The CSU system does not have the power to decide weather or not to have football programs at the campuses. Each campus decides what sports to field and much of that depends on the president and administration . At Sacramento State for example we have a very supportive president . Last year the students were asked to raise their contribution to athletics which they rejected . President Gonzalez overruled them and raised the fees.

[CollegeSportsInfo]

I would think the CSU system will have to take a look at some of these programs.

DI CSU system teams:

Fresno State
San Jose State
San Diego State
Sacramento State
Cal Poly


Fresno probably has too much critical mass...but not sure about any of the rest.
What's amazing about California, is that football would still be at some previous schools and the existing ones would be in better shape if they were ALL on the same level. Rivalries would actually exist.

You could have a solid Big West with
* = football member

* Fresno State
* San Jose State
* Sacramento State
* Cal Poly
* UC-Davis
*~Fullerton St.
*~Northridge
*~Long Beach St.
*~Pacific
Irvine
Riverside
Santa Barbara

[MplsBison]

The CSU system does not have the power to decide weather or not to have football programs at the campuses. Each campus decides what sports to field and much of that depends on the president and administration . At Sacramento State for example we have a very supportive president . Last year the students were asked to raise their contribution to athletics which they rejected . President Gonzalez overruled them and raised the fees.

I didn't mean the actual CSU system admin should be doing anything.

The schools each have less money to work with. They will each have to figure out what will work for themselves.

[carney2]

But what's to stop a President/administrator/whatever from saying "20,000 is enough to break even on football?" Is that the goal - breaking even, or having the football team pay its own way? If so, then you might as well fold 95% of the football programs out there: all but a handful of FCS schools and 90% of FBS, too. But if you think football games are an important educational mission, that it's a useful rallying point for the school, etc. then all of a sudden the concept of "paying your own way" is stupid. Does the school orchestra pay its own way?

And if today it's 20,000 fans, what's to stop tomorrow it being 25,000? 50,000? 100,000? The point is it's just a number plucked out of the air. While budget numbers are guarded as well as the national oil reserve, attendance numbers are public domain.

That's what I'm talking about. I understand that "investigative journalism" is required - believe me, I know. But if someone is asking what the magic attendance number is, the answer is that the magic number will always increase, because it's the wrong question to be asking. IMO.

I think that you and I are saying the same thing here - that the Iona/LaSalle/Northeastern/Hofstra situations may actually be the tip of an iceberg - one that could scuttle FCS ships slowly and consistently over the next decade or two. The devil, as they say, is in the details, however, and that is where we part company.

Where I see realistic and rational concerns being expressed by the administrators who make the decisions to drop football, you see deceit supported by specious arguments.

Where you see administrators with an agenda and a predetermined attitude about athletics in general and football in particular, I see people who are primarily honest and have the best interests of their institutions in mind.

You say, "...if you think football games are an important educational mission, that it's a useful rallying point for the school, etc. then all of a sudden the concept of "paying your own way" is stupid," and, frankly, I agree. Football is part of the overall educational experience. It is a rallying point for alumni and students at most institutions. I simply add a 3 word caveat: at what cost? Football at the FCS level is one of the most expensive non-academic activities at most schools. It must constantly be justifying those expenditures to justify its continued presence on campus. That does not mean that it must "break even." It does, however, mean that it must truly be that rallying point. It must truly be adding to that overall educational experience. Unfortunately, things need to be quantified. That is the way of the world in the 21st century. Fannies in the seats may not be the only quantification tool available, but it is one of the more important ones. If there are consistently very few students at the home games, can we say that football is truly adding to the educational experience? If overall attendance is generally low, or at least perceptively lower than at similar institutions, is football really a rallying point?

[hebmskebm]

It probably goes without saying, but it seems all of these schools that are dropping football seem to value having a Division I athletics program much, much more than simply just having a football team. If football was really that important for the Northeasterns and Hofstras of the world, and the only thing stopping them from continuing on was the sheer costs of the program at the FCS level, then they would have just moved their entire athletics program down to the DII or DIII level and kept football. Those schools stayed DI for a reason. Having a football team may have been pleasant and comforting for tradition's sake, but they weren't going to sacrifice DI status in these economic times to save such a money and scholarship vacuum that Division I football is.

[hebmskebm]

Continuing on, much has been said about the lack of student attendance at games. I've attended both DIII and FCS schools in my life (both in the northeast) and honestly, the reaction from most of the student bodies at the games I've attended were about the same. And it's this; at this smaller level, football is just football. The average college student doesn't differentiate between FCS ball and DIII ball; it's all simply seen as "not big time college football." A close friend of mine, somebody who attends NFL games religiously and follows the FBS with interest, was pretty blase about our own college's team. The problem in the northeast isn't a lack of interest in the sport, it's just a lack of emotional interest in local teams. Most students who actually do go to the games like football, are knowledgeable about the game, but simply do not live and die with their teams the same way the App and Montana fans do. They're just looking to watch a good game, drink, then forget about it all the moment the game ends and find something else to do on Saturday.

[GrizBowl]

Continuing on, much has been said about the lack of student attendance at games. I've attended both DIII and FCS schools in my life (both in the northeast) and honestly, the reaction from most of the student bodies at the games I've attended were about the same. And it's this; at this smaller level, football is just football. The average college student doesn't differentiate between FCS ball and DIII ball; it's all simply seen as "not big time college football." A close friend of mine, somebody who attends NFL games religiously and follows the FBS with interest, was pretty blase about our own college's team. The problem in the northeast isn't a lack of interest in the sport, it's just a lack of emotional interest in local teams. Most students who actually do go to the games like football, are knowledgeable about the game, but simply do not live and die with their teams the same way the App and Montana fans do. They're just looking to watch a good game, drink, then forget about it all the moment the game ends and find something else to do on Saturday.

I think you make some good points and I think that the level of interest (and therefore support necessary to sustain and invest in the program) an FCS team can generate depends largely on perception. For fans of FCS Powers like Griz Nation, Appy St or CAA fans there is very little difference between the Championship Subdivision and the Bowl Subdivision in terms of talent. People in general like to associate with winners, and alumni will donate more to a school when its football team is known as among the best. On the other end, a struggling program has difficulty gaining attention and many potential fans may just as well assume that the FCS is no different from Div III.

While students will cling to winning football programs, they will distance themselves from losing teams both emotionally and in their willingness to support it.

[aceinthehole]

You say, "...if you think football games are an important educational mission, that it's a useful rallying point for the school, etc. then all of a sudden the concept of "paying your own way" is stupid," and, frankly, I agree. Football is part of the overall educational experience. It is a rallying point for alumni and students at most institutions. I simply add a 3 word caveat: at what cost? Football at the FCS level is one of the most expensive non-academic activities at most schools. It must constantly be justifying those expenditures to justify its continued presence on campus. That does not mean that it must "break even." It does, however, mean that it must truly be that rallying point. It must truly be adding to that overall educational experience. Unfortunately, things need to be quantified. That is the way of the world in the 21st century. Fannies in the seats may not be the only quantification tool available, but it is one of the more important ones. If there are consistently very few students at the home games, can we say that football is truly adding to the educational experience? If overall attendance is generally low, or at least perceptively lower than at similar institutions, is football really a rallying point?

GREAT POST!!!!!!

[Lehigh Football Nation]

You say, "...if you think football games are an important educational mission, that it's a useful rallying point for the school, etc. then all of a sudden the concept of "paying your own way" is stupid," and, frankly, I agree. Football is part of the overall educational experience. It is a rallying point for alumni and students at most institutions. I simply add a 3 word caveat: at what cost? Football at the FCS level is one of the most expensive non-academic activities at most schools. It must constantly be justifying those expenditures to justify its continued presence on campus. That does not mean that it must "break even." It does, however, mean that it must truly be that rallying point. It must truly be adding to that overall educational experience. Unfortunately, things need to be quantified. That is the way of the world in the 21st century. Fannies in the seats may not be the only quantification tool available, but it is one of the more important ones. If there are consistently very few students at the home games, can we say that football is truly adding to the educational experience? If overall attendance is generally low, or at least perceptively lower than at similar institutions, is football really a rallying point?


It probably goes without saying, but it seems all of these schools that are dropping football seem to value having a Division I athletics program much, much more than simply just having a football team. If football was really that important for the Northeasterns and Hofstras of the world, and the only thing stopping them from continuing on was the sheer costs of the program at the FCS level, then they would have just moved their entire athletics program down to the DII or DIII level and kept football. Those schools stayed DI for a reason. Having a football team may have been pleasant and comforting for tradition's sake, but they weren't going to sacrifice DI status in these economic times to save such a money and scholarship vacuum that Division I football is.

Here's the problem with both these arguments. Men's basketball has lower attendance and a lower probability of success. Yet schools never even dream of dropping them. Is men's basketball a rallying point for the university? Certainly not at Lehigh and Lafayette - and not even, really, at Hofstra.

Is there ever any thought of cancelling trips by the men's basketball team, to, say, Spain for "exhibition" games, or trips to the Great Alaska Shootout? I'm not an accountant, but I have to believe these trips cost a pretty good hunk of coin and can be quantified as "wasteful spending". Does it cost less than football? Yes, it does. Is it more Title IX friendly? Yes, it is. But the costs involved - especially per person - are pretty huge. Football is kicked around all the time. Why not men's basketball?

The answer is, of course, that men's basketball runs the show. Academic "exceptions" happen in men's basketball that wouldn't be dreamed of with most FCS football programs. Overseas trips; long seasons four (or sometimes even five) timezones. Expenses per student that make football seem cheap.

Those schools "stay D-I for a reason" - and that reason is, they all want a chance to be the next Gonzaga or Davidson. And you can't be that with a D-III program. Funny how the best option for "cutting academic costs" across all sports - dropping to D-III - never gets discussed, but cutting football is. Mr. Rabinowitz dropped Pride football one day while citing costs as one of the reasons, and the same day was lobbying for Hofstra to join the A-10. That should say everything that needs to be said about HIS thoughts about what really is important to him.

[holycrossC]

Portland State. They are turning their stadium into a soccer stadium thus they will have no place to play.

URI needs to dump MORE money into their stadium because the main stand is sub standard and they only re did the other side.

The stadium isnt the main problem for Idaho State its lack of support/interest due to what Boise State has become.

Actually the new west stands that tie into the Ryan center are pretty nice, If they do the right thing and join the NEC they should tear down the ugly, old east stands, and put up a new 5000 seat stand.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I think that you and I are saying the same thing here - that the Iona/LaSalle/Northeastern/Hofstra situations may actually be the tip of an iceberg - one that could scuttle FCS ships slowly and consistently over the next decade or two. The devil, as they say, is in the details, however, and that is where we part company.

Where I see realistic and rational concerns being expressed by the administrators who make the decisions to drop football, you see deceit supported by specious arguments.

Where you see administrators with an agenda and a predetermined attitude about athletics in general and football in particular, I see people who are primarily honest and have the best interests of their institutions in mind.

...

Football at the FCS level is one of the most expensive non-academic activities at most schools. It must constantly be justifying those expenditures to justify its continued presence on campus. That does not mean that it must "break even." It does, however, mean that it must truly be that rallying point. It must truly be adding to that overall educational experience. Unfortunately, things need to be quantified. That is the way of the world in the 21st century. Fannies in the seats may not be the only quantification tool available, but it is one of the more important ones. If there are consistently very few students at the home games, can we say that football is truly adding to the educational experience? If overall attendance is generally low, or at least perceptively lower than at similar institutions, is football really a rallying point?

I wanted to acknowledge that football is definitely a different sort of rallying point at Lehigh and Lafayette, thanks to the big rivalry. A guaranteed sellout every year - frequently before the season even starts - does speak an awful lot, and Hofstra and Northeastern definitely didn't have that rallying point in football. Such rivalries, though, need to be nurtured. In a far-flung CAA it was difficult to cultivate such rivalries - I mean, what sort of synergies does a Richmond/Hofstra football game generate? A William & Mary/Northeastern? - but on the flip side, that's something up to institutions to do, not conferences. Fordham/Columbia has blossomed into a decent rivalry simply because Fordham and Columbia have committed to it.

I think back to the time that Hofstra wanted to join the Patriot League, and the League declined. I wonder if it would have been as easy for their president to drop football had a nice rivalry with Fordham developed. Add to that the decreased expenses they would have spent on football, and... it's compelling to think about what might have happened.

[aceinthehole]

Does it cost less than football? Yes, it does. Is it more Title IX friendly? Yes, it is. But the costs involved - especially per person - are pretty huge. Football is kicked around all the time. Why not men's basketball?

The answer is, of course, that men's basketball runs the show. Academic "exceptions" happen in men's basketball that wouldn't be dreamed of with most FCS football programs. Overseas trips; long seasons four (or sometimes even five) timezones. Expenses per student that make football seem cheap.

Those schools "stay D-I for a reason" - and that reason is, they all want a chance to be the next Gonzaga or Davidson. And you can't be that with a D-III program. Funny how the best option for "cutting academic costs" across all sports - dropping to D-III - never gets discussed, but cutting football is. Mr. Rabinowitz dropped Pride football one day while citing costs as one of the reasons, and the same day was lobbying for Hofstra to join the A-10. That should say everything that needs to be said about HIS thoughts about what really is important to him.

1) You hit the answer right there, but are afrraid to admit it. Basketball is cheaper and more Title IX friendlty than football. Its an "easy" decsion for many schools to make.

2) And you don't have your facts straight on the other point. Dropping to D-II is not the most cost effective and arguably is the least fiscally sound model.

Schools like SHU, QU, and Bryant jumped to D-I from D-II because the expense were only SLIGHTLY higher, while revenue and public exposure was MANY TIMES greater. Travel cost are the same for D-I or D-II programs. And D-II offers just a few less schollys overall, so where is this saving?

Look at the budgets between the NEC and the NE-10. They aren't that much different. CCSU budget is less than $3m more than D-II Southern Conn ($8.5 m vs $6 m). For that cost, we get much more alumi donations, TV exposure, and regular media attention. Southern gets nothing.

Basketball gets more bang for the buck and everyone knows that. In the East, a first round win by UVM over Syracuse is much more "valuable" than a FCS playoff win by UMass. Hofstra looked at George Mason/VCU and said, I like that model over the ODU/JMU one. Its just that simple.

[DFW HOYA]

Hofstra is averaging 2,014 a game in basketball, a $1.8 million budget. Time to drop this as well?

[hebmskebm]

Hofstra is averaging 2,014 a game in basketball, a $1.8 million budget. Time to drop this as well?

Never going to happen. It's all about having the potential access to that money making machine known as March Madness. I think schools, especially private schools, see basketball as a more likely way to get a ROI than FCS football, even if the odds of it happening still aren't all that great. Basically, if you're gonna be DI, and you aren't an outlier program like Montana or Delaware that can pull 20,000 fans a game or have a long football tradition such as Lehigh and Lafayette, hoops is where you would invest. If you can afford football at the FCS level, that's great, but it simply (and unfortunately) isn't a deal breaker anymore.

[DFW HOYA]

Basically, if you're gonna be DI, and you aren't an outlier program like Montana or Delaware that can pull 20,000 fans a game or have a long football tradition such as Lehigh and Lafayette, hoops is where you would invest.

Tell that to Fordham...

[hebmskebm]

Tell that to Fordham...

1. Fordham invests and cares deeply about their basketball, they just have been getting terrible results for all their trouble.

2. Couldn't Fordham committing to football so strongly today be a sign that they see some sort of potential for a high level FB program somewhere (decades?) down the road?

[carney2]

Men's basketball has lower attendance and a lower probability of success. Yet schools never even dream of dropping them. Is men's basketball a rallying point for the university? Certainly not at Lehigh and Lafayette - and not even, really, at Hofstra.

Not adding anything to this, frankly, enlightening and educational discourse, but merely setting the record straight: men's basketball has been, and will be, a rallying point at Lafayette. Within the past decade we've seen sellouts, successful seasons and the Zoo Crew. At Lehigh, not so much - ever. But, at Lehigh the non-football rallying point has traditionally been wrestling. Before they moved it off campus (an absolutely bonehead move!) I remember packed houses at Grace Hall, with people being literally turned away at the door. There were times it was literally uncomfortable in there do to the crowds and noise levels. The two college constituencies that feed off of athletics and make them the rallying point - students and alumni - supported both of these activities without fail.

I don't follow wrestling, but I understand that at least some of the Lehigh meets have been moved back on campus. The current team is doing very well I understand, and you just have to believe that some of the old flames can be rekindled to the extent that it is needed.

At Lafayette they merely need to resurrect what is currently a moribund hoops program. The flames are sitting there waiting to be fanned. A competitive program would, in my opinion, put Lafayette student interest, alumni support, and overall excitement at the same levels we see at Bucknell and Holy Cross. Allowing this fall from grace to happen is as stupid for Lafayette (are ya listening, Uncle Artie?!!) as moving the wrestling program to the other side of South Mountain was at Lehigh.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

We'll all learn something later this month

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=302083&ac=PHspt

Has anyone heard anything that may have come from the Yeager/ADs of NE yesterday?

[Franks Tanks]

Not adding anything to this, frankly, enlightening and educational discourse, but merely setting the record straight: men's basketball has been, and will be, a rallying point at Lafayette. Within the past decade we've seen sellouts, successful seasons and the Zoo Crew. At Lehigh, not so much - ever. But, at Lehigh the non-football rallying point has traditionally been wrestling. Before they moved it off campus (an absolutely bonehead move!) I remember packed houses at Grace Hall, with people being literally turned away at the door. There were times it was literally uncomfortable in there do to the crowds and noise levels. The two college constituencies that feed off of athletics and make them the rallying point - students and alumni - supported both of these activities without fail.

I don't follow wrestling, but I understand that at least some of the Lehigh meets have been moved back on campus. The current team is doing very well I understand, and you just have to believe that some of the old flames can be rekindled to the extent that it is needed.

At Lafayette they merely need to resurrect what is currently a moribund hoops program. The flames are sitting there waiting to be fanned. A competitive program would, in my opinion, put Lafayette student interest, alumni support, and overall excitement at the same levels we see at Bucknell and Holy Cross. Allowing this fall from grace to happen is as stupid for Lafayette (are ya listening, Uncle Artie?!!) as moving the wrestling program to the other side of South Mountain was at Lehigh.

Lehigh wrestles at a renovated Grace Hall.

They only move really big matches to Stabler, like Ok State

[Doc QB]

I also wonder what the total operating budgets are for some of the schools who have dropped football recently...the 3 to 4 million bucks they save, are they really a chunk of change that can change the university's complexion and academic mission in a meaningful way?

And, I wonder what other academic departments operating costs are, the ones who are not research driven, not pulling in NIH bucks for research (which, if a biomedical type PhD pulls in a million dollar grant, some institutions take 25% from it right away and give back to entire school in some way). What does it cost to run a Philosphy department (sorry, had to throw in those Starbuck's waiters-to-be in there), a economics department that does not have economists lobbying, a sociology department with professors not writing books, brining in dollars for the school? If not for the research enterprises of some departments and the dollars that are capable of generating $$ for THEIR use and for the school, don't MOST departments lose cash? Is the order of that loss really less than a couple million for a football team? A few million kinda seems small to me, present economy or otherwise.

And if the losses of an academic department are on par with the losses for football...one must ask (and it harkens back to LFN comment about rallying points)...how many philosophy majors take money out of the near minimum wage Starbucks jobs to donate back, and how many people who played a sport, supported a sport, or connected with a sport donate?

I know a fair number of athletes who feel connected to their school and the opportunity football game them...and when I go back to Lehigh games and my old fraternity, brothers (athletes and non-athletes alike) are all showing up for post football game cocktails with their nice cars, families, good jobs...and they ALL donate. And none were philosophy majors.

Is there a cost analysis the presidents at some of these schools are missing? Or am I just poisoned by how I see two schools dear to my heart operating?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

At <insert name of school here> they merely need to resurrect what is currently a moribund <insert name of sport> program. The flames are sitting there waiting to be fanned. A competitive program would, in my opinion, put student interest, alumni support, and overall excitement at the same levels we see at <insert names of successful schools here>.

The mad-lib above (sorry, carney) can be applied to any sport and any school. A competitive basketball program would do well - but so would a competitive football program. It's no secret that Lafayette's attendance went up in football because they are now consistently competing for championships. Yes, Fisher helps, but if they were a 2-9 team stinking up the joint, they'd be below Holy Cross' attendance for sure.

Tellingly, with the mad lib above substitute "Fordham", "hoops" and "Dayton and Xavier" above, and you've now described the hopes and dreams of Ram fans.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I also wonder what the total operating budgets are for some of the schools who have dropped football recently...the 3 to 4 million bucks they save, are they really a chunk of change that can change the university's complexion and academic mission in a meaningful way?

...

Is there a cost analysis the presidents at some of these schools are missing? Or am I just poisoned by how I see two schools dear to my heart operating?

IMO - and I understand you're preaching to the choir here - the answers to your questions are: more than half those $3-4 million bucks are spent on financial aid, so if you target high-need kids with the resulting "savings" you're saving nothing. In fact, someone posted on my blog that Hofstra's operating costs were no more than $650,000 a year. If that's the only savings, that's a only drop in the funding ocean.

The other question involves the biases of the presidents in question. If you've already come up with the answer that you want to drop football, you'll come up with the "cost analysis" (read: baloney) to justify your opinion. I am near-certain that this is what happened at Hofstra, too.

[Shockerman]

Just to throw this out there...We are a basketball school and play in a basketball league. Since dropping football in 1986 we have been to 2 NCAA tournaments. Whenever you hear lets drop football to help support basketball make sure you call BS right away.