Quick Poll: Who has more name recognition? Boise State or Butler?

I think it may be relative to the area in which you live.

We don't hear much at all about WKU football here, but I'm still seeing stuff about the Michigan State hoops win for MT in 2016.

Conversely, I bet MT isn't even a mention in Kentucky.

I've been getting a LOT more folks coming up to me when I wear MT gear in Florida (we go 4 times per year) since our NCAA hoops wins.

That said-- I bet most MT fans (I'm not one of them) would trade our hoops success for WKU football's success.

(06-23-2017 09:36 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  Many of you are from schools where you've just always had both basketball and football. I'm coming at it from the perspective of a person who came from a school where we didn't have football for most of our history, and have seen first-hand the impact that football has had not only on the exposure we now get from the media compared to before, but also the amazing effect football has had on the whole culture of our school, which is its own kind of branding and exposure. Because as I said already, we had very few students wearing blue & orange before, and you'll find 'em all over campus now.

Perhaps having only one 20-win season and having never won an NCAA tournament game has something to do with that? Would your story be the same if you had a couple of Sweet 16 appearances and beat Kansas along the way?

(06-23-2017 09:39 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Quick Poll: Who has more name recognition? Boise State or Butler?

I think that might depend on who you ask.

In west and southeast I think Boise probably has more. In the northeast (which doesn't care about CFB) and the Midwest probably Butler.

I will say this --- when MT moved from 1-aa to 1-A football back in 1999 or so -- I could not believe the amount of press we started to receive for playing "big boy" football. I could not believe the amount of folks tailgating and the MT gear I was seeing around the area.

I cannot imagine what its done for teams that had no football at all.

Unfortunately, for us, the newness has worn off.

(06-23-2017 09:48 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 09:39 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Quick Poll: Who has more name recognition? Boise State or Butler?

I think that might depend on who you ask.

In west and southeast I think Boise probably has more. In the northeast (which doesn't care about CFB) and the Midwest probably Butler.

My answer would be 50 / 50

(06-23-2017 09:37 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 09:30 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 07:20 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 06:59 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  Everything in college sports is measured in dollars and cents. Without the $$, there are no facilities or anything else related to a sports program. Looking at WKU in 2010, the average revenue generated by basketball was $1,965,315, while the average revenue generated by football was $5,768,244, or three times that of basketball. So again, football is the bread winner and keeps other sports going, giving further exposure to the university in those sports.

Again though this is an example of a sliding scale that's not comparing apples to apples. You are making this comparison at time when wkcc basketball has sucked and it's football program has experienced unprecedented success.

If the hoops team makes a couple of Sweet 16 runs in the same time frame then I'm not sure these numbers look anything like this. Have to keep the comparisons on par for a valid discussion.

Okay, then find me one year, just one year, where basketball generated more revenue at WKU than football did. I made the effort to scour WKU revenue figures for something tangible. Your turn.

This discussion isn't about what generates more revenue. It's about what builds a schools brand more effectively and efficiently. Pulling from what I put in the value thread...

For instance, following its 2010 tournament march, Butler commissioned a pair of firms to track TV, print, and online media publicity from March to December of that year. The tally topped out at more than $639 million, a figure that dropped to about $500 million after Butler's 2011 Final Four appearance. "We couldn't afford to buy the kind of exposure our team earned," Collins said.

Short of being one of the four playoff teams in football what is going to deliver that type of an impact? No doubt a final four appearance in football (i.e. being one of only four playoff teams) is likely to have more of an impact than the Final Four in basketball but there isn't any of us ever making it to the football playoff no matter how good our season is yet we can make that run in basketball.

Dude, you're the one who said that my revenue figures were from a time when WKU basketball sucked and football enjoyed unprecedented success. So find an example for me of the other side of the coin. Btw, you're wrong about what you said anyway because as previously stated, my figures were from 2010, and WKU went 2-10 that year in football, 0-12 the year prior, and 2-10 the year prior to that. Their basketball team was 16-16, 21-13, and 25-9 in the same 3 years. And if you don't believe that revenue is a huge part of this question, you're living under a rock. As I've said 3 times now, and you know this to be true as well, football is THE revenue generator that keeps other college sports going, giving schools across the country more exposure in other sports.

As for your Butler example, since they did make the Final Four that year, I think it would be more relevant if you compare that to Boise State's 2009 or 2006 football season for comparison.

I also think that part of the answer lies in what part of the country a university is in. When you're talking about states like Indiana (Butler), Kentucky, or North Carolina, those have traditionally always been basketball states because their football sucks most years. It's not at all surprising to see Butler become media darlings there when they have a good run. But they're an anomaly because in most of the country, football is king.

Interesting graphic on Butler's applications as a result of their basketball success...

The day Boise beat Oklahoma 8.4 million people watched that game.

The Duke-Butler title game was viewed by 48 million, which obviously doesn't include the other five games played.

(06-23-2017 10:02 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  The day Boise beat Oklahoma 8.4 million people watched that game.

The Duke-Butler title game was viewed by 48 million, which obviously doesn't include the other five games played.

That's apples and oranges. First, that was the first of many BCS bowl games for them and it put them on the map. Second, Butler was playing in the NT game which is going to get 50 million viewers no matter whose playing. Its weird to me that the majority of Americans don't give a crap about College Basketball until the tournament starts then its "March Madness" but College football is followed heavily from Game one to the National Championship in Jan.

I do think you are right about this being a regional question, not a National One. That begs the other question, if its regional then whats best for Louisiana Tech "Football" and whats best for Uconn "Basketball"? The BigTen holds sway over all others in that they are rabid about both. Both have importance and generate major revenue.

winning consistently and knocking off the big boys. pick a sport.

(06-23-2017 09:56 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 09:37 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 09:30 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 07:20 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 06:59 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  Everything in college sports is measured in dollars and cents. Without the $$, there are no facilities or anything else related to a sports program. Looking at WKU in 2010, the average revenue generated by basketball was $1,965,315, while the average revenue generated by football was $5,768,244, or three times that of basketball. So again, football is the bread winner and keeps other sports going, giving further exposure to the university in those sports.

Again though this is an example of a sliding scale that's not comparing apples to apples. You are making this comparison at time when wkcc basketball has sucked and it's football program has experienced unprecedented success.

If the hoops team makes a couple of Sweet 16 runs in the same time frame then I'm not sure these numbers look anything like this. Have to keep the comparisons on par for a valid discussion.

Okay, then find me one year, just one year, where basketball generated more revenue at WKU than football did. I made the effort to scour WKU revenue figures for something tangible. Your turn.

This discussion isn't about what generates more revenue. It's about what builds a schools brand more effectively and efficiently. Pulling from what I put in the value thread...

For instance, following its 2010 tournament march, Butler commissioned a pair of firms to track TV, print, and online media publicity from March to December of that year. The tally topped out at more than $639 million, a figure that dropped to about $500 million after Butler's 2011 Final Four appearance. "We couldn't afford to buy the kind of exposure our team earned," Collins said.

Short of being one of the four playoff teams in football what is going to deliver that type of an impact? No doubt a final four appearance in football (i.e. being one of only four playoff teams) is likely to have more of an impact than the Final Four in basketball but there isn't any of us ever making it to the football playoff no matter how good our season is yet we can make that run in basketball.

Dude, you're the one who said that my revenue figures were from a time when WKU basketball sucked and football enjoyed unprecedented success. So find an example for me of the other side of the coin. Btw, you're wrong about what you said anyway because as previously stated, my figures were from 2010, and WKU went 2-10 that year in football, 0-12 the year prior, and 2-10 the year prior to that. Their basketball team was 16-16, 21-13, and 25-9 in the same 3 years. And if you don't believe that revenue is a huge part of this question, you're living under a rock. As I've said 3 times now, and you know this to be true as well, football is THE revenue generator that keeps other college sports going, giving schools across the country more exposure in other sports.

As for your Butler example, since they did make the Final Four that year, I think it would be more relevant if you compare that to Boise State's 2009 or 2006 football season for comparison.

I also think that part of the answer lies in what part of the country a university is in. When you're talking about states like Indiana (Butler), Kentucky, or North Carolina, those have traditionally always been basketball states because their football sucks most years. It's not at all surprising to see Butler become media darlings there when they have a good run. But they're an anomaly because in most of the country, football is king.

Dude, revenue is but one of many aspects of brand. Though I misunderstood the years you looked at I never said basketball would be higher and the revenue discrepancy between football and basketball is always going to exist. Much larger venues, higher prices on the tickets, higher prices on concessions. Consider a school that averages 20K over six football games will have 120,000 people through the gates. Same school averages 6K for 13 home games in basketball has 78,000 total butts. As a result advertisers are going to pay more for space inside the football stadium than basketball. Every revenue driving factor is skewed in football's favor. This isn't a revenue debate. It's which one can you build a brand on more? That's the question. If you want to have a revenue debate feel free to start a new thread.

(06-23-2017 10:23 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  winning consistently and knocking off the big boys. pick a sport.

Prolly right. At the end of day put the answer in its simplest form.

(06-23-2017 09:39 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Quick Poll: Who has more name recognition? Boise State or Butler?

Butler gets a lot more press and is talked about more than Boise ever is during basketball season.

Football, however basketball is easier to sustain.

Example is Boise, premier G5 in FB. They got to that point by having a great coach stick around longer than expected. Since Petersen left, they are viewed differently. I doubt a great coach, who is getting 200-400% salary increase offers from P5 schools will ever stick with a G5 school long enough for them to create another Boise type scenario. I could be wrong.

(06-23-2017 10:46 AM)HerdZoned Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 09:39 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Quick Poll: Who has more name recognition? Boise State or Butler?

Butler gets a lot more press and is talked about more than Boise ever is during basketball season.

That may be true, but there are more ears listening to college football than there are to college basketball. You ask a college sports fan to tell you something about Boise and something about Butler, more will likely have a response for Boise.

(06-23-2017 10:46 AM)HerdZoned Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 09:39 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Quick Poll: Who has more name recognition? Boise State or Butler?

Butler gets a lot more press and is talked about more than Boise ever is during basketball season.

I've lost track of the number of times I have heard folks wanting their team to be "Boise of the East", I don't recall hearing a "Butler of the South" comment.

(06-23-2017 09:44 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 09:36 AM)Volkmar Wrote:  Many of you are from schools where you've just always had both basketball and football. I'm coming at it from the perspective of a person who came from a school where we didn't have football for most of our history, and have seen first-hand the impact that football has had not only on the exposure we now get from the media compared to before, but also the amazing effect football has had on the whole culture of our school, which is its own kind of branding and exposure. Because as I said already, we had very few students wearing blue & orange before, and you'll find 'em all over campus now.

Perhaps having only one 20-win season and having never won an NCAA tournament game has something to do with that? Would your story be the same if you had a couple of Sweet 16 appearances and beat Kansas along the way?

No, I doubt it. Our basketball team (.527) actually has a better all-time winning percentage than our football team (.457) does. And yet we have 25K show for football in our 6 short years, whether we have a winning record or not, and are lucky to get 2K for basketball, which we've had for nearly 4 decades now. And the media attention we get through the course of a football season is greater than any media attention we've had during the course of a basketball season, whether it's a rare tournament appearance or not. Would we have more exposure during a deeper NCAA run? Definitely. Would it be more exposure than we'd get for winning C-USA and making a better bowl game against a P5 and getting an upset there? Based on what I've seen with UTSA, it's difficult to say.

The NCAA Tournament is the game-changer. Across most of the USA, more people attend football games and watch football games on TV during the course of the season than do basketball. But once that NCAA Tournament rolls around, we're looking at the other side of the coin because each school's bowl season consists of one game, whereas the NCAA Tournament, if you're making a run, consists of several games, and your viewership will build with each successive contest, because the deeper your team goes, the more the excitement grows. There's just no football equivalent to the NCAA Tournament, where that many teams are invited to a grand, national, season-ending tournament to determine a one-and-final champion. And that's why the TV viewership numbers you shared for Duke/Butler vs. OU/Boise State are what they are, and btw, they're pretty astounding numbers, which honestly now makes me question my original answer of football.

There's still no question though that football's money is the reason other college sports are even around to begin with, and the bigger the purse from football, the better a university will likely be in other sports as well because of the trickle-down effect from the money, not to bring Ronald Reagan into this or something. lol

(06-23-2017 11:07 AM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 10:46 AM)HerdZoned Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 09:39 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Quick Poll: Who has more name recognition? Boise State or Butler?

Butler gets a lot more press and is talked about more than Boise ever is during basketball season.

I've lost track of the number of times I have heard folks wanting their team to be "Boise of the East", I don't recall hearing a "Butler of the South" comment.

Our AD and coach have mentioned Butler, Gonzaga, and Wichita a number of times as examples of what MT wants to do in terms of building a national brand in basketball.

But the school that our leadership has sought to model itself after is Louisville who has done it both in football and basketball though I don't believe that is realistic as they had a better starting place and have ascended to a place we never will.

Football is an event. If someone goes to a football they typically tailgate, spending several hours before the game on your campus. People attend basketball to see the game. I know I much more dialed into my alumni/university community since the football program started.