Every time the "upgrade conference" topic starts I look at UAB and other former Sunbelt members and wonder if we are trying to bite of more than we can handle. With the exception of two years ago when the UAB upset UK in the tourny their post Sun Belt life has been less than note worthy.
We are one of the teams in the Sun Belt that dominates basketball. UL being the other school that has been dancing recently. Since our dominion over the round ball is less than total can we expect to be the next big thing in the MAC, MVC, or wherever we end up?
I ask this in the spirit of conversation so be gentle!
FLAME! FLAME! FLAME!
Uh, riddle me this, Tru-MAN: Why isn't WKU in Sun Belt for Football? Wouldn't it be smarter to join, take some prisoners and kick some tail, and THEN move up to another conference? I obviously don't know why WKU FB is the way it is....
RBM, it comes down to MONEY. Our President and AD has done a lot of research and calculations on this subject. From what I understand, financially, it doesn't seem profitable to play I-A in the Sun Belt. I know that is up for arguement by ArkStfan. I am only stating what I've heard. I am not disagreeing or agreeing. I like the Sun Belt, I'd be happy to play I-A in the Sun Belt.
As for UAB, they may not have had as much success, but financially, I am sure the C-USA has been much better for them than the SBC. Where would you have rather been the last ten years Truman?
I do find it funny that a Murray St Fan is questioning Hilltopper football.
:roflol: :roflol: :roflol: :roflol: :roflol: :lolup:
galojay Wrote:As for UAB, they may not have had as much success, but financially, I am sure the C-USA has been much better for them than the SBC. Where would you have rather been the last ten years Truman?
Point well taken.
Galo - are you saying being where you are now - I-AA - is more profitable than being I-A in the Sun Belt? I know nothing about WKU football. Just asking!
racerbymarriage Wrote:Galo - are you saying being where you are now - I-AA - is more profitable than being I-A in the Sun Belt? I know nothing about WKU football. Just asking!
that is he theory expressed by some. I am not sure it is a fair comparision when you realize the Belt is a start up 1A league, (that I still believe the powers that be in the NCAA were/are trying to kill).
RBM, I haven't seen the numbers or the research. I can only share what I've heard. I know I-AA loses money. Does I-A Sun Belt lose money? I dunno.
Making $ or Losing $ depends on many things. Attendence, merchandise, advertising. Your $ situation depends on how you run your organization. I was under the assumption that just about every program loses money on football and only the largely attended BC$ schools make money on football.
When I was at PSU towards the end of the last century, football earned enough $$ to fund all student organizations and clubs on campus (over 300). They shared the wealth.
You also have to keep in mind that going to a BCS school also means paying much more in tuition than going to another school in the state system. In some respects, you PAY to be at that bigger school.
Speaking of money, check out the line about NCAA over-reliance on the MBB tourney to practically fund the entire organization. Talk about putting all of your eggs in one basket...third paragraph down
NCAA looks in mirror, sees some vulnerability
By Mark Alesia
mark.alesia@indystar.com
The NCAA won a big legal victory last week when a judge threw out almost all of a high-profile case brought by two former Alabama football coaches who sued the association over enforcement procedures.
Regularly absorbing arrows from critics, the NCAA might suffer losses here or there, but it never seems truly vulnerable while helping put on the games loved by millions. Yet the NCAA does have a vulnerable side. It was outlined in a "risk assessment," prepared with the consulting company Deloitte and released earlier this year to the NCAA executive committee.
One of the risks identified was challenges to its enforcement process, as in the Alabama case. Another was the NCAA's dependence on revenue from the Division I men's basketball tournament, which brings in at least 90 percent of the association's money. In 2005-06, it's $475 million out of $521 million.
On Aug. 1 in New York, jury selection is scheduled to begin in a 4-year-old case involving the National Invitation Tournament, which says the men's basketball NCAA Tournament violates antitrust laws. The NIT says schools shouldn't be forced to go to the NCAA tourney if they're invited, that there should be a free market for schools and tournament organizers.
"It's another case that's significant," NCAA general counsel Elsa Cole said. "We think the association has the right to ask members to commit to certain rules for the benefits of membership. We want to preserve the ability to have the championship be a meaningful experience for student-athletes."
The risk assessment reflected prudent leadership, not concern about the future, said Jim Isch, NCAA senior vice president for administration and finance. It is the first such study done by the NCAA.
It identified four main issues:
• Federal or state legislative intervention
The report specifically mentioned the NCAA's tax-exempt status as a nonprofit enterprise.
During a Congressional hearing last year on abuses in recruiting, Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., said of college sports programs: "They all benefit from the tax code, raking in millions of dollars through the commercialization of sports. If we went to their not-for-profit status, that would change this dramatically, if they did not come up with a policy here."
A few months later -- light speed for the NCAA -- new recruiting rules were instituted.
Also last year, a congressional committee held a hearing on NCAA enforcement procedures. In 2003 in California, a "student-athlete bill of rights" passed the state senate but eventually fizzled.
"When needed, obtain consultants with effective relationships with decision-makers or elected leadership," the risk assessment report said.
• Lack of revenue diversification
"The Association's reliance on a single source of revenue (the Division I men's basketball tournament) makes the organization vulnerable to competitive actions (or) adverse events . . .," the report said.
In January, the executive committee approved a "financial recovery plan" if the tournament is cancelled. For next season, the plan includes reductions in the NCAA operating budget, reductions in payments to schools and an insurance policy to cover $141 million.
Last year, the NCAA struck a deal with Indianapolis officials to make the city a permanent back-up site for the Final Four.
Isch said the NCAA wants to increase revenue by growing championships in sports other than men's basketball, increasing their ticket sales and sponsorships.
"Identify the 'next comer' that will supplement or increase the value of assets," the report said. It added, "Encourage 'harvesting' of additional revenue opportunities from key championships."
The report also talked about saving money and perhaps increasing fan interest by having more than one sport's championship at a single site. That's already happening in Division II.
• Court decisions
"Adverse legal rulings and interpretations by the court systems has the potential to impact the Association's ability to govern and regulate intercollegiate athletics. . .," the report said.
Enforcement is a frequent subject of lawsuits against the NCAA. The association is not legally obligated to follow due process as it's recognized in a court of law.
"Merited or not, the NCAA has at least the perception of a fairness problem," Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, said at a Congressional hearing last year.
The Alabama coaches alleged that the NCAA conspired illegally to implicate them, but the judge threw out that part of the case.
"Something that's key in that case is the integrity of our enforcement and hearing process, and we feel we were vindicated," Cole said.
Earlier this year, however, the NCAA was embarrassed in the case of former Washington football coach Rick Neuheisel. He sued the school and the association over his firing.
An oversight about a change in its rules led to the NCAA paying $2.5 million of a $4.5 million settlement with Neuheisel. The trial also disclosed an internal NCAA e-mail in which one staff member wrote that another was overzealous in pursuing Neuheisel, saying he was doing it "to make himself feel important and give him clout over institutions."
The risk assessment suggests using outside attorneys to review enforcement, athlete reinstatement, the committee on infractions and infractions appeals.
• Reputation
"Reputation is a common theme in all the significant risks identified and therefore requires indisputable positive direction and clear-cut leadership practices that strengthen the NCAA's brand and its reputation," the report said.
The NCAA wants to be known as more than a group of highly paid administrators who ring a large cash register every March. That's the reason for the NCAA's aggressive ad campaign that trumpets its number of athletes (360,000) and the fact that most will "go pro in something other than sports." That refrain extends beyond television ads to scoreboard messages at the Final Four.
Two of the suggestions in the report were: "Surround the NCAA president with third parties who will advocate for and support the NCAA" and "Generate national media opportunities for university presidents on key topics."
Everyone talks about the fact that most college athletic programs don't make money. My question is this who is? Nothing has the millions upon millions that are poured into college atheletics without somebody getting very rich. I have never understood that part of the picture.
First and foremost remember this.
A lot of the financial "loss" in athletics isn't from checks written outside the university.
I don't know what an athletic scholarship costs the WKU athletic department for tuition, meals, room and board but for numbers sake let's say its $12,000 a year. I think I read that WKU awards around 165 athletic scholarships. That's $1.98 million a year. Where does that money go? Well part of it is paid to WKU in tuition, part the bookstore, part to residence hall department, part to the food services department. Now I'm sure those billings aren't set to lose money so the school is making money off the expense of the athletic department. If Kentucky is typical of most states part of WKU's state funding is based on enrollment. So for each person who is enrolled because they are either on a full ride or partial scholarship WKU is getting additional state funds.
Also if WKU is typical the athletic department is paying the physical plant department, the IT department and other university departments for services provided to athletics. Again it is athletics paying other arms of the university for services helping the bottom line of those departments.
Now there are plenty of expenses that the school doesn't recover such as salaries, travel costs, utilities, promotions, marketing, and such.
The big kicker is that Div1A requires migratory scholarship increase from 65 to 85.... If attendance doesn't increase in dircet proportion to Scholly monies, food, and housing athletes.... and travel to away games.... The benefit ain't gonna be there.
WKU needs to get their attendance up. I think it will be much better this year since we have EKU at home and hopefully halloween and rain storms don't interfere....
Those added schollys will probably throw the Title IX out of whack too. Assuming the WKU lady sports are at full schollys, either something will get cut, or something will get added...
I really think we would do well in the MAC or MVC in basketball right away, I think we could win either one of those leagues the second year we were in them, as for football it would definitely take a few years to come up.
Uh, didn't y'all LOSE to EVANSVILLE last year? I think that's a pretty bold statement to make, considering the bottom feeder beat you... :)
Sorry RBM, but I can't let that one go without comment. Has any of your teams ever played at Robbers Stadium (Roberts Stadium in Evansville)? It's next to impossible to come in there and pull one out against the home team. I went to the game and it was horrible. Yes, we played bad, but the coaches could've suited up and beat the team that E'ville put on the floor. Let's just put it this way, they were in the bonus within 8 minutes in the first half and double bonus before the 12 minute mark. At the same time, they got their first foul called on them at the 11 minute mark, and it was a technical on the bench. Does that sound like even officiating to you? The rest of the game didn't get much better, but we still were in it at the end. It's the same thing that happened to us up there three years ago. That was the the last year that we won the Sun Belt, so we weren't a bad team then. I think a lot of it has to do with where we were playing, not who.
That's my two cents on it.
RBM, didn't we kick yall's arses in Murray and you guys were supposed to be the cream of the lovc crop.
right on big squirrel, i agree with everything you just said, I saw it with my own eyes too.
Heh heh I just had to get a jab in there, sorry. Yes, I've been to Roberts to see E-ville play - M-I-L has season tix. I don't particularly like it myself. I just figured WKU had a bad night. You know how those things go. The MSU team you guys played was a different team than we expected to field. But sh*t happens and although it's unfortunate, we played the hand we were dealt with. This year should be much much better!