Wichita State and Arkansas Tech to the WAC
$28 million for the stadium upgrade and $21 million for the IPF. That's about $50 million for the facility commitment alone.
If WSU never moved down it would of had a few decades raise that money. Now they'll need to raise that money in 3-5 years at lot more difficult.
The recurring costs of FCS come in at $4 million less per year than FBS. FBS would be a couple more million in revenues from the CFP and a conference TV deal but unless they are going straight to the MWC it will be hard to make FBS pay.
(06-27-2016 06:56 PM)Kittonhead Wrote: [ -> ]$28 million for the stadium upgrade and $21 million for the IPF. That's about $50 million for the facility commitment alone.
If WSU never moved down it would of had a few decades raise that money. Now they'll need to raise that money in 3-5 years at lot more difficult.
Solid points.
I think it basically boils down to the Koch Bros. If they are willing to foot the bill (or, a significant % of it) for this, then it will happen rather quickly and painlessly. If they're not willing to do that, then it will never happen. IMHO.
In the study, all three options would leave the track in place which is a terrible idea. Hopefully they would have long term plans to remove it and build a new track and field facility. I would rather see them demolish one side of the stadium, fix up the west side and use the east side money to build a new track facility. We can go a few years with nothing on the east side but aluminum bleachers. Just say no to a track!
(06-27-2016 06:42 PM)Pony94 Wrote: [ -> ]Wichita State and Arkansas Tech to the WAC
I actually know a few things about Arkansas Tech. Tech could very well in the next few years try and move to the FCS. The most likely spot being the Southland conference.
(06-27-2016 09:14 PM)hawghiggs Wrote: [ -> ] (06-27-2016 06:42 PM)Pony94 Wrote: [ -> ]Wichita State and Arkansas Tech to the WAC
I actually know a few things about Arkansas Tech. Tech could very well in the next few years try and move to the FCS. The most likely spot being the Southland conference.
Wouldn't stun me and probably could run up to UCA budget levels pretty quickly. Being the closest open admission to the Fayetteville-Bentonville corridor and easy to get to from Little Rock puts them in a great position for growing enrollment.
Their downside is media from Fort Smith and Little Rock won't go to the trouble to come there very often.
Paging Koch and Carney Brothers.
(06-27-2016 09:49 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ] (06-27-2016 09:14 PM)hawghiggs Wrote: [ -> ] (06-27-2016 06:42 PM)Pony94 Wrote: [ -> ]Wichita State and Arkansas Tech to the WAC
I actually know a few things about Arkansas Tech. Tech could very well in the next few years try and move to the FCS. The most likely spot being the Southland conference.
Wouldn't stun me and probably could run up to UCA budget levels pretty quickly. Being the closest open admission to the Fayetteville-Bentonville corridor and easy to get to from Little Rock puts them in a great position for growing enrollment.
Their downside is media from Fort Smith and Little Rock won't go to the trouble to come there very often.
That's true about the media. But a rumor going on around town is that Tech is about to purchase a new farm off campus. If this happens. Then they are going to look into building a soccer complex for women.
(06-27-2016 06:20 PM)DavidSt Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wic...93007.html
It is not recommendation, but what the costs it will be in adding football.
It doesn't mean it isn't recommended, it just provides the start costs for the FCS and FBS level.
Since no FBS conference is going to take WSU, their only option is FCS. Now the question is which conference would take them? And who would take them as a football affiliate as the conferences below won't be appealing to the basketball side of the equation?
MVFC has 10 members so do they want to expand to 11? Doubt it.
The Southland is at 11 football members so they could even it out to 12 and split into divisions.
Ohio Valley is at 9 which works great for FCS but it wouldn't be much of a stretch to go to 10.
The Big Sky is full at 14 members now.
(06-28-2016 09:10 AM)MWC Tex Wrote: [ -> ] (06-27-2016 06:20 PM)DavidSt Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/wic...93007.html
It is not recommendation, but what the costs it will be in adding football.
It doesn't mean it isn't recommended, it just provides the start costs for the FCS and FBS level.
Since no FBS conference is going to take WSU, their only option is FCS. Now the question is which conference would take them? And who would take them as a football affiliate as the conferences below won't be appealing to the basketball side of the equation?
MVFC has 10 members so do they want to expand to 11? Doubt it.
The Southland is at 11 football members so they could even it out to 12 and split into divisions.
Ohio Valley is at 9 which works great for FCS but it wouldn't be much of a stretch to go to 10.
The Big Sky is full at 14 members now.
They have a home in the MVFC, don't kid yourself thinking they don't.
Between Koch, Carney, Ruffin, DeBoer and others I think we could raise quite a bit of what is needed if we can get them on board. There are also a number of corporate types that could invest if they feel that this could benefit them in the long run.
And some of the stadium upgrades could be made over a few years time. I haven't made it all the way through the report yet as I'm still trying to do my job as well, but the summaries I've read I think look promising.
(06-28-2016 11:14 AM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ]Between Koch, Carney, Ruffin, DeBoer and others I think we could raise quite a bit of what is needed if we can get them on board. There are also a number of corporate types that could invest if they feel that this could benefit them in the long run.
And some of the stadium upgrades could be made over a few years time. I haven't made it all the way through the report yet as I'm still trying to do my job as well, but the summaries I've read I think look promising.
What do you guys really hope to accomplish with FBS football? I mean we both can agree Kansas and Kansas State are very well established and well funded. Yet they can't even field consistently good teams.
(06-28-2016 12:04 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 11:14 AM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ]Between Koch, Carney, Ruffin, DeBoer and others I think we could raise quite a bit of what is needed if we can get them on board. There are also a number of corporate types that could invest if they feel that this could benefit them in the long run.
And some of the stadium upgrades could be made over a few years time. I haven't made it all the way through the report yet as I'm still trying to do my job as well, but the summaries I've read I think look promising.
What do you guys really hope to accomplish with FBS football? I mean we both can agree Kansas and Kansas State are very well established and well funded. Yet they can't even field consistently good teams.
KU doesn't care about football. I believe we can pass them in time. KSU cares but they're KSU so who knows. But we can still put a solid program together. Will we ever compete for a national championship? Probably not. But you can say the same thing for about 100 other FBS schools.
What it could accomplish is enrollment growth, more visibility in the region and potentially nationally. More school pride and a better student experience on campus. More involvement and interaction with the community, both business and simply fans. Potentially a better conference for basketball and other sports which would only help all of the above as well. Increased giving to the university both in athletics and academics.
So I guess not a damn thing.
(06-28-2016 12:38 PM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 12:04 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 11:14 AM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ]Between Koch, Carney, Ruffin, DeBoer and others I think we could raise quite a bit of what is needed if we can get them on board. There are also a number of corporate types that could invest if they feel that this could benefit them in the long run.
And some of the stadium upgrades could be made over a few years time. I haven't made it all the way through the report yet as I'm still trying to do my job as well, but the summaries I've read I think look promising.
What do you guys really hope to accomplish with FBS football? I mean we both can agree Kansas and Kansas State are very well established and well funded. Yet they can't even field consistently good teams.
KU doesn't care about football. I believe we can pass them in time. KSU cares but they're KSU so who knows. But we can still put a solid program together. Will we ever compete for a national championship? Probably not. But you can say the same thing for about 100 other FBS schools.
What it could accomplish is enrollment growth, more visibility in the region and potentially nationally. More school pride and a better student experience on campus. More involvement and interaction with the community, both business and simply fans. Potentially a better conference for basketball and other sports which would only help all of the above as well. Increased giving to the university both in athletics and academics.
So I guess not a damn thing.
Where do you think the Shockers will get an FBS invite now? To me, the WSU President is so sure of an invite, that he wouldn't even toy with the idea of FCS.
As stated previously, a new FBS WAC with some Texas FCS teams, NMSU, and some northern Big Sky teams is the possible invitor. After Wichita St gets its football feet on the ground, CUSA or the AAC is possible.
(06-28-2016 05:29 PM)NoDak Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 12:38 PM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 12:04 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 11:14 AM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ]Between Koch, Carney, Ruffin, DeBoer and others I think we could raise quite a bit of what is needed if we can get them on board. There are also a number of corporate types that could invest if they feel that this could benefit them in the long run.
And some of the stadium upgrades could be made over a few years time. I haven't made it all the way through the report yet as I'm still trying to do my job as well, but the summaries I've read I think look promising.
What do you guys really hope to accomplish with FBS football? I mean we both can agree Kansas and Kansas State are very well established and well funded. Yet they can't even field consistently good teams.
KU doesn't care about football. I believe we can pass them in time. KSU cares but they're KSU so who knows. But we can still put a solid program together. Will we ever compete for a national championship? Probably not. But you can say the same thing for about 100 other FBS schools.
What it could accomplish is enrollment growth, more visibility in the region and potentially nationally. More school pride and a better student experience on campus. More involvement and interaction with the community, both business and simply fans. Potentially a better conference for basketball and other sports which would only help all of the above as well. Increased giving to the university both in athletics and academics.
So I guess not a damn thing.
Where do you think the Shockers will get an FBS invite now? To me, the WSU President is so sure of an invite, that he wouldn't even toy with the idea of FCS.
As stated previously, a new FBS WAC with some Texas FCS teams, NMSU, and some northern Big Sky teams is the possible invitor. After Wichita St gets its football feet on the ground, CUSA or the AAC is possible.
Could the MAC try and go for a pairing?
MAC West: WSU
MAC East: ODU
With the idea it could help the MAC in basketball and baseball. Add two schools that draw in hoops.
Renegotiate the TV contract up for AAC money....
(06-28-2016 05:42 PM)Kittonhead Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 05:29 PM)NoDak Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 12:38 PM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 12:04 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 11:14 AM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ]Between Koch, Carney, Ruffin, DeBoer and others I think we could raise quite a bit of what is needed if we can get them on board. There are also a number of corporate types that could invest if they feel that this could benefit them in the long run.
And some of the stadium upgrades could be made over a few years time. I haven't made it all the way through the report yet as I'm still trying to do my job as well, but the summaries I've read I think look promising.
What do you guys really hope to accomplish with FBS football? I mean we both can agree Kansas and Kansas State are very well established and well funded. Yet they can't even field consistently good teams.
KU doesn't care about football. I believe we can pass them in time. KSU cares but they're KSU so who knows. But we can still put a solid program together. Will we ever compete for a national championship? Probably not. But you can say the same thing for about 100 other FBS schools.
What it could accomplish is enrollment growth, more visibility in the region and potentially nationally. More school pride and a better student experience on campus. More involvement and interaction with the community, both business and simply fans. Potentially a better conference for basketball and other sports which would only help all of the above as well. Increased giving to the university both in athletics and academics.
So I guess not a damn thing.
Where do you think the Shockers will get an FBS invite now? To me, the WSU President is so sure of an invite, that he wouldn't even toy with the idea of FCS.
As stated previously, a new FBS WAC with some Texas FCS teams, NMSU, and some northern Big Sky teams is the possible invitor. After Wichita St gets its football feet on the ground, CUSA or the AAC is possible.
Could the MAC try and go for a pairing?
MAC West: WSU
MAC East: ODU
With the idea it could help the MAC in basketball and baseball. Add two schools that draw in hoops.
Renegotiate the TV contract up for AAC money....
The MAC would be better served with Stony Brook or JMU and ODU or UMass.
The MAC doesn't help Wichita State's enrollment growth ideas, which are to get more students from its south - the metroplex - and maybe west (Denver).
(06-28-2016 05:57 PM)NoDak Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 05:42 PM)Kittonhead Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 05:29 PM)NoDak Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 12:38 PM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 12:04 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote: [ -> ]What do you guys really hope to accomplish with FBS football? I mean we both can agree Kansas and Kansas State are very well established and well funded. Yet they can't even field consistently good teams.
KU doesn't care about football. I believe we can pass them in time. KSU cares but they're KSU so who knows. But we can still put a solid program together. Will we ever compete for a national championship? Probably not. But you can say the same thing for about 100 other FBS schools.
What it could accomplish is enrollment growth, more visibility in the region and potentially nationally. More school pride and a better student experience on campus. More involvement and interaction with the community, both business and simply fans. Potentially a better conference for basketball and other sports which would only help all of the above as well. Increased giving to the university both in athletics and academics.
So I guess not a damn thing.
Where do you think the Shockers will get an FBS invite now? To me, the WSU President is so sure of an invite, that he wouldn't even toy with the idea of FCS.
As stated previously, a new FBS WAC with some Texas FCS teams, NMSU, and some northern Big Sky teams is the possible invitor. After Wichita St gets its football feet on the ground, CUSA or the AAC is possible.
Could the MAC try and go for a pairing?
MAC West: WSU
MAC East: ODU
With the idea it could help the MAC in basketball and baseball. Add two schools that draw in hoops.
Renegotiate the TV contract up for AAC money....
The MAC would be better served with Stony Brook or JMU and ODU or UMass.
The MAC doesn't help Wichita State's enrollment growth ideas, which are to get more students from its south - the metroplex - and maybe west (Denver).
Shouldn't Chicago where NIU is located be a target for Wichita State?
(06-28-2016 05:29 PM)NoDak Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 12:38 PM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 12:04 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 11:14 AM)SubGod22 Wrote: [ -> ]Between Koch, Carney, Ruffin, DeBoer and others I think we could raise quite a bit of what is needed if we can get them on board. There are also a number of corporate types that could invest if they feel that this could benefit them in the long run.
And some of the stadium upgrades could be made over a few years time. I haven't made it all the way through the report yet as I'm still trying to do my job as well, but the summaries I've read I think look promising.
What do you guys really hope to accomplish with FBS football? I mean we both can agree Kansas and Kansas State are very well established and well funded. Yet they can't even field consistently good teams.
KU doesn't care about football. I believe we can pass them in time. KSU cares but they're KSU so who knows. But we can still put a solid program together. Will we ever compete for a national championship? Probably not. But you can say the same thing for about 100 other FBS schools.
What it could accomplish is enrollment growth, more visibility in the region and potentially nationally. More school pride and a better student experience on campus. More involvement and interaction with the community, both business and simply fans. Potentially a better conference for basketball and other sports which would only help all of the above as well. Increased giving to the university both in athletics and academics.
So I guess not a damn thing.
Where do you think the Shockers will get an FBS invite now? To me, the WSU President is so sure of an invite, that he wouldn't even toy with the idea of FCS.
As stated previously, a new FBS WAC with some Texas FCS teams, NMSU, and some northern Big Sky teams is the possible invitor. After Wichita St gets its football feet on the ground, CUSA or the AAC is possible.
That would be a great option for them.
Football only of course making it painless.
Having good academic associations and protecting the basketball program. That is until the AAC or MWC call even long term it is not bad.
(06-28-2016 06:16 PM)Kittonhead Wrote: [ -> ] (06-28-2016 05:57 PM)NoDak Wrote: [ -> ]The MAC would be better served with Stony Brook or JMU and ODU or UMass.
The MAC doesn't help Wichita State's enrollment growth ideas, which are to get more students from its south - the metroplex - and maybe west (Denver).
Shouldn't Chicago where NIU is located be a target for Wichita State?
Wichita St is already regional to the metroplex. Chicago isnt. The MVC already has Loyola, and that hasn't made an appreciable difference to WSU's goals.
College football doesn't seem important to most Chicagoland kids anyway. Pro maybe.