(04-26-2023 07:58 AM)Bronco14 Wrote:  

(04-26-2023 07:52 AM)The Sicatoka Wrote:  

(04-26-2023 07:14 AM)Bronco14 Wrote:  Hockey coaches are cheaper than football coaches, so ANY school is going to be spending less on hockey coaches than football coaches.

He didn't compare coach salaries to coach salaries. He said:

They spend more on football coaching salaries than they do on the entire hockey budget.

That FB coaching spend got them 5th of 6 in MAC east. And I still say a MAC/MVFC FB challenge would open a lot of eyes about top level FCS.

I'm searching w/ my magnifying glass where Miami is contemplating moving to FCS & how NCHC vs CCHA saves them any $$$$ since they are FBS & have ZERO intention of moving to FCS

Moving from NCHC to CCHA doesn't save Miami on their football budget, it saves them a bit on their hockey budget - or even, saves them on travel in their hockey budget, which has already been cut, so they can spend more on other parts of their hockey budget.

But it doesn't save them enough on their budget to justify paying the exit fee, so they have a strategy of increasing their priority on basketball and downgrading their priority on hockey while playing in a hockey conference that they don't want to spend what it takes to be competitive in.

The "buyout" idea would seem like a windfall given those priorities -- the idea that there is more benefit in their Chicaggoland orientation being a smaller fish in the much bigger pond of Chicagoland basketball.

Whether that is a good strategy or not, I don't know. Wevs. I would rather they put more focus on hockey than basketball, since hockey is the only sport my alma mater plays where I support the team.

As far as the "opening eyes about top level FCS", that does not seem to be directed to Miami dropping to FCS but rather pressing a point that top level FCS football is better than some people give it credit for.