Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

BGSU Men's Basketball!!

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby hammb » Fri May 08, 2020 9:28 am

BGSU33 wrote: But as for any MAC school, moving down from the FBS to the FCS would not be a cost saving measure whatsoever. It would find itself in an even tighter financial bind.


This has often been my read on it as well. The cost savings is relatively minute compared to the revenue hits you would take. Coaches' salaries would obviously drop a lot, and you save the 22 schollies... But you're still traveling, you're still recruiting (although no doubt smaller budget), etc. Now you get LESS revenue from ESPN (hard to believe), far less revenue from payday games, and probably take a hit on ticket revenue as well (although tough to imagine there's much room to go DOWN in that dept).

To me the choice has always been to either drop football entirely, or drop out from D1 athletics and go much cheaper/leaner. I'm not really a fan of that, as I think BG is a good profile for a D1 university. It's just that the financial landscape of football has long ago passed us by.

mbenecke wrote:Not asking because I have an agenda/opinion here, I'm just genuinely curious:

Could we even have sports at the D1 level without football, financially? I know that football is usually the overwhelming anchor for most departments, but I don't actually know the actual numbers. How sustainable would our department be on a D1 level without the money brought in from football?


Tough to really say considering we don't have access to the actual numbers. I'll just say I find it unfathomable to think that our coaches' salaries and 85 scholarships to D1 football are anywhere near revenue neutral. Given our horrible attendance numbers we're not making much on ticket sales. Especially when you figure a good chunk of that attendance is students who have paid regardless through their fees; and another good chunk are tickets handed out through promotions to sponsors. The ESPN contract is pretty well known, it's about $1million/year, but that is for ALL sports, not just football. Certainly football probably represents 85% of that revenue, but still, it's a drop in the bucket compared to costs.

The university does not publish (that I can find) their budgets broken down by sport. But looking at the approved FY 2020 budget, the Athletics Dept. funding is $13.4 million from general fees (more than half the students' general fee goes to athletics), and only about $9.6 million of all other revenues. I think it's fair to assume that football contributes MOST of that additional revenue, but it's key to remember that actually generated revenue only accounts for 40% of the total budget. Looking at expenses coach Scholarships, coaching salaries, and travel are the 3 largest line items by far. I'm sure football accounts for disproportionate share of those numbers as well.

It's really very difficult to figure out where we stand. People in the dept could easily subtract the football portion of each line item and have a better idea, but it still doesn't account for things like Falcon club. That's $1.5 million in revenue, but how much does it go down if you drop football? My suspicion based only looking at the budget breakdown is that football costs far more than it makes, and if you were willing to keep the general funds in the same range you'd have no problem funding the rest of the sports if you lost the revenue football brings in. Tough to say though for sure though because there is no doubt football accounts for the vast majority of that 40% of "earned" revenue.
User avatar
hammb
The Stabber of Cherries
The Stabber of Cherries
 
Posts: 12737
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 8:21 am
Location: Bowling Green

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby guest44 » Fri May 08, 2020 9:42 am

The general fees to athletics has always been the scam of it all. However, recently random things like textbook buyback revenues have been funneled to athletics since they no longer have a bookstore. If you saw a detailed breakdown by sport you would wonder why they even have athletics. The bubble will pop, and probably that is being expedited by Covid-19.
guest44
Peregrine
Peregrine
 
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 3:27 pm

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby pdt1081 » Fri May 08, 2020 10:54 am

hammb wrote:Tough to really say considering we don't have access to the actual numbers.

Depending how involved you want to get, you can get the information you want. You just need to know what you want to FOIA. There's a pretty decent breakdown over on USCHO of the hockey team. I just can't seem to find the thread right now (they did every public D1 school).
Phi or Die
User avatar
pdt1081
Peregrine
Peregrine
 
Posts: 3307
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 12:09 pm

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby Schadenfreude » Fri May 08, 2020 11:34 am

I strongly support Bowling Green continuing to play football at the highest level with the rest of the MAC. It differentiates us from the Eastern Tennessees and Northern Iowas and Indiana/Purdue-Whatevers. It gives our university welcome national exposure each November. It sends the message that we don't intend to take a backseat to anybody as an institution.

If Bowling Green ever moves away from FBS, I'll probably stop paying attention. Some of the best sports experiences of my life as a fan have involved Bowling Green taking down a football team in the Big Ten or the Big 8. I don't want to ever stop taking our shots at doing that.

I do get that the finances of all this are tricky, especially now. But just about every school in the G5 is in a comparable situation. Historically speaking, Bowling Green is one of the MAC's stronger football programs. This conference is where we belong, and FBS football is part of the MAC's brand.
User avatar
Schadenfreude
Professional tractor puller
Professional tractor puller
 
Posts: 6122
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 7:39 am
Location: Chicagoland

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby Flipper » Fri May 08, 2020 1:42 pm

Tricky is a word....insane is a word...impossible is a word...
It's not the fall that hurts...it's when you hit the ground.
User avatar
Flipper
The Global Village Idiot
The Global Village Idiot
 
Posts: 16214
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:01 am
Location: Ida Twp, MI

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby hammb » Fri May 08, 2020 2:40 pm

pdt1081 wrote:
hammb wrote:Tough to really say considering we don't have access to the actual numbers.

Depending how involved you want to get, you can get the information you want. You just need to know what you want to FOIA. There's a pretty decent breakdown over on USCHO of the hockey team. I just can't seem to find the thread right now (they did every public D1 school).


If I was in a position to actually do that and get paid for it, I would be doing it. If I were Dave Briggs or somebody like that I'd be using the FOIA to get these numbers for both BG & UT and really try to build a picture of what the athletic department would look like with/without playing D1A football.

I just know that the heyday of the MAC is long gone and I don't see us doing anything similar to those late 90s/early 00s ever again. The money has gotten so grotesque at the higher levels that we are just crippling ourselves to live this illusion.
User avatar
hammb
The Stabber of Cherries
The Stabber of Cherries
 
Posts: 12737
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 8:21 am
Location: Bowling Green

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby TommyG » Fri May 08, 2020 10:54 pm

It would be very difficult to get any type of accurate numbers on real revenue or real expenses for football. Money moves from budget to budget to cover things. MAC football isn’t making money and they aren’t supporting other sports. All the departments, not just BG, see no positives in letting the public know how much is lost on football. Thus they make it difficult to determine the ultimate cost.
I’m not sure what the biggest benefit is of being in MAC football. The rare shot at beating a P5 school? Being the best out of the G5 and getting beat handily in New Years bowl?
Our 2 recent MAC championships led to coaches leaving before the bowl game and then losing to mediocre opponents.
I am in agreement with some, I wouldn’t have any interest in FCS. Ultimately I think the MAC will fight tooth and nail to keep FBS football...every AD would take a hit career wise if they lost FBS football and most if not all ADs are hoping to leave as soon as they can for a bigger school.
TommyG
Chick
Chick
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:32 am

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby Flipper » Fri May 08, 2020 11:55 pm

AD's can argue all they want...ultimately...they won't be the people who decide.
It's not the fall that hurts...it's when you hit the ground.
User avatar
Flipper
The Global Village Idiot
The Global Village Idiot
 
Posts: 16214
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:01 am
Location: Ida Twp, MI

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby TalonsUpPuckDown » Sat May 09, 2020 5:55 am

pdt1081 wrote:
hammb wrote:Tough to really say considering we don't have access to the actual numbers.

Depending how involved you want to get, you can get the information you want. You just need to know what you want to FOIA. There's a pretty decent breakdown over on USCHO of the hockey team. I just can't seem to find the thread right now (they did every public D1 school).


Are you referring to this sheet?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing
2-time BGSU Intramural Curling Champion.
User avatar
TalonsUpPuckDown
Peregrine
Peregrine
 
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 10:59 am

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby zete » Sat May 09, 2020 7:49 am

legit sellouts at the Doyt during the next 10 years. My guess is Zero. What is your guess?
SAme old Same old
User avatar
zete
Peregrine
Peregrine
 
Posts: 1111
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby guest44 » Sat May 09, 2020 9:14 am

At the end of the day, the job of the AD is very similar to that of the NCAA these days. It’s to pretty much protect the way things used to be. The athletes get none, and take money from any source available to justify mediocrity and inflated salaries. Once the athletes actually have free market rights, the bubble bursts immediately and the schools lose the control they fight so hard for. That is coming very very soon.
guest44
Peregrine
Peregrine
 
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 3:27 pm

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby footballguy51 » Sat May 09, 2020 9:33 am

From a direct financial standpoint, football costs more than it brings in. However, if you look Beyond the direct links, I have to wonder what revenue can be linked to the program. Use of our stadium for high school playoff games must bring some type of revenue (rental fee) or an intangible (recruitment of students by getting them on campus). How many “official sponsors” would we not have if we didn’t have a football program, or how many would no longer pay the same price to be our sponsor? How many students would we lose by not having a football program (they may not go to the games, but they know about us because we are in the news for football and we are known on the national landscape)?
ROLL ALONG!!!
User avatar
footballguy51
Peregrine
Peregrine
 
Posts: 2649
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 5:19 pm

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby guest44 » Sat May 09, 2020 10:52 am

I’d also argue that if the program doesn’t get turned around sooner than later, being on TV to get smoked by 40 each time, is actually having the opposite effect in hurting BGSU.

The sponsorships are a drop in the bucket in comparison to the other revenue sources. I can’t remember the number, but it is listed on the projected budget online. Especially after Learfield takes a cut of all of that stuff.
guest44
Peregrine
Peregrine
 
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 3:27 pm

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby BGSU33 » Sat May 09, 2020 1:28 pm

I'm at the point now where I'm pretty sick of seeing how collegiate sports has evolved all together. But what really ticks me off is how many collegiate programs, departments and staffs at a vast number of universities exist BECAUSE of football. Yet, everyone wants to target football as the sport to cut, drop down, etc.

Look, I get and understand the concept and implementation of things like Title IX. But I also understand how collegiate athletics has evolved from the rah-rah days of school spirit of essentially club sports teams into the business it has now become. Power Five football programs pay the salaries of school administrators, departments and a number of non-revenue and Olympic sport programs expenses. Many of those programs bring in zero revenue and are a huge drain on the athletic budget. Yet, they exists, some simply to comply and to balance the numbers. Take say, Iowa State softball for example. Now pull up their schedule. You'll probably see several non-conference trips to places such as Hawaii, California, Florida or Arizona. So who is paying all the money for their airfare to and from, all the hotel rooms needed, all of their meals each day they are there, and for the bus to pick them up and take them around every day of that trip? And you're talking about a travel party of about 20-some players, 3-4 coaches, a trainer and maybe an SID. Iowa State football is essentially flipping the bill, that's who. And that happens over and over and over at schools all the time. People want to talk about the fairness issues related to the equity of participation numbers (and I don't disagree with that), but how come those same people stick their head in the sand on the flip side about the financial "fairness" issues when these other programs are then funded and supported by money they didn't make, but that football did? Those same people who bitch and moan about football being the problem are they same ones who have no problem with the money other programs receive and benefit from that was allocated to them from football.

It was very, VERY telling where the state of affairs are in collegiate athletics nowadays when you saw how Kansas' lousy football program was shown to be vastly more important to KU athletics than its annually national championing contending basketball program was during the conference landscape shifts several years ago. If that didn't drive home the point, then nothing does. Power Five football could survive and profit by itself greatly. Group of Five football programs can and could survive based on what they can and are able to bring in too. There are also a number of men's basketball programs, some women's basketball programs and a few baseball programs that can as well. I'm sure there's a few other examples out there as well. But what about the vast majority of all the other programs out there? The ones who bring in little or zero revenue, yet, spend gobs of money to simply exist and compete. Their carwash fundraisers and small donations are not even close to making ends meet. This is where the biggest problem exists in collegiate athletics funding and spending, and in a time such as now, it needs to be addressed more than ever. IMO, the NCAA should revise its D-I membership criteria and focus more on select sports programs over the sheer number of them simply to qualify for D-I membership. And if collegiate athletics is now a business like everyone says it is and has become (and I don't disagree), then it should and needs to be treated more like one. And this is where the model - or business model - of collegiate athletics is being tested more than ever.

So spare me the BG football needs cut or dropped down logic. BG football "could" and is capable and could be able to support ITSELF - not the rest of the athletic department or other athletic teams - but ITSELF - at the FBS level, based on what it is capable of making and bringing in through payout games, tickets sales, broadcast revenue, donor aid, etc. It's something doable. BG football can take care of itself at the FBS level, but what it can't support is all of the other BG programs as well such as how many P5 schools can because of how much more money they bring in. But again, that's not BG football's problem, that's a BG athletic department problem. People need to stop blaming football for all of the department's shortcomings. And that's not just limited to BG, that's for many other schools as well. Because aside from men's hoops and hockey, what other programs at BG could realistically be capable of doing the same? Maybe one or two. We have one sport at BG that can go play a single game and get over MILLION dollars to do it. There's not a single team at BG that comes anywhere remotely close to that ability. You could pool entire multiple programs together for entire seasons and still not match that figure for one football game. BG football can also draw anywhere from 5,000 - 20,000 actual fans to Bowling Green to see it. Sure there are those Tuesday night games that we have more of a basketball or hockey sized crowd. But for those games where football gets 10,000 - 20,000, we have nothing else that touches it. And BG football appears on national tv more by itself than the other 16 teams combined for people to watch it. BG's biggest athletic "problem" isn't with its football program. There are about 13-14 others programs that are a much bigger issue in more ways than one. The cost of simply having them (scholarships, coaches salaries, facilities, upkeep) and competing with them (travel, lodging, meals) with all the money they require and spend while they bring in nothing is our biggest problem. THAT is our biggest ($$$) issue!
GO BG!!!
User avatar
BGSU33
Peregrine
Peregrine
 
Posts: 9457
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 10:29 am
Location: Charlottesville, VA

Re: Groce & Jans both interview at ETSU

Postby FalconTurf » Sat May 09, 2020 4:33 pm

Only have rough numbers but I have trouble believing the program can break even. Just like any other athletic program at BGSU, the football program needs support. To be a university of note with 18,000 students it appears to be a MUST to have D1 athletics. I like athletics at BG, I support them with a Falcon Club membership and season tickets, but to suggest they can survive without University support seems far-fetched to me. To suggest they will come closer than golf or baseball is reasonable by percentage of expenses but by actual dollars?

6 games x 25,000 fans x $20 a ticket = $3,000,000 (if you include student fees to get their $20)
2 payday games x $1,000,000 = $2,000,000
Sponsors / advertisers?
TV contract(s)?

$21,000 in-state (bronze meal plan and no cost of living expenses or summer school) x 85 scholarships = $1,785,000 (https://www.bgsu.edu/admissions/cost-summary.html)
Loeffler pay $530,000 + assistants $925,860 = $1,455,860 (https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/football/assistant)
Support personnel?
Equipment?
Travel / hotels ?
Non-conference home opponents?
I proudly chose to be a Falcon and a Falcon I will remain until the end.
FalconTurf
Peregrine
Peregrine
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 9:37 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Men's Hoops

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron