Quote:You all aren't going to like this so you may want to stop reading now. I was told yesterday that Dr. Noland is very bottom-line and data driven when it comes to making decisions. If that is true I would not call his attention to Cincinnati's athletics program. Although they increased institutional support by 114% from fiscal year 2004-2005 to fiscal year 2009-2010 (adjusted for inflation $6,300,000 to $13,400,000) Cinci's athletic program lost money all 6 years. Although it only lost $855,000 in FY 2008-2009. it lost $2,500,000 in 2009-2010, $4,000,000 in 2007-2008, $5,700,000 in 2006-2007, $6,700,000 in 2005-2006 and $4,100,000 in 2004-2005. These numbers are rounded down and not adjusted for inflation. There are a number of reasons to bring football back, but comparisons to other programs should be carefully done. Given the state's financial situation a significant increase in cost of any program will be a big red flag. I'd likewise caution about bringing App St up very often. Student fees and institutional support accounted for about 75% of its athletic income from 2004-2005 to 2009-2010, but the ASU athletic program had an income-expense negative each year except 2005-2006 when it had the magnificant surplus of $67,623. The average deficit for the other 5 fiscal years was $350,000 per year. These are self-report data from the USA Today website on college athletic finances. Support from student fees and the university at ETSU is also about 75% of the athletic income, but the program hasn't run a deficit. There are many good arguments for bringing back football, but the financial impact will always be a significant part of the discussion. However you work it out football at a school like ETSU will add more additional costs than it generates in revenue and the higher you try to rise in terms of conference the more it will cost. Florida International is an example. Since moving to the Sunbelt Conference it has had an operating deficit 3 of 5 years.
A lot of schools lose money on football. That's not a reason not to have the sport.
Cincinnati has the smallest donor and fan bases for football in the Big East and one of the smallest in the country. The fanbase has & is literally being built from the ground up. I've often called UC a large scale version of ETSU (only thankfully UC actually committed to improving athletics under a new AD Mike Thomas). Like ETSU, UC's athletic program was largely concentrated around basketball. 99% of the athletic success for the school centered on basketball not football.
Football attendance was piss poor (less than 10k fans showed up for several games in 2002). Students could simply flash their ID at the gate and sit pretty much wherever the hell they wanted dating back as recently as 2007. Facilities sucked. UC was one of only 3 D-1A teams in the country to not have separate practice facilities. The team practiced in the football stadium, in the middle of campus, in full view of the public.
Fan interest was a joke. There was a poll taken in the city in 2009 that showed that a majority of Cincinnati residents did not identify as UC fans. Almost 40% were Buckeye fans, a school just 2hrs up I-71 (sound familiar?). UC fans made up the next highest segment but the collection of Kentucky, Michigan, Xavier, and NDs fans was almost as high.
Fast forward to the end of 2007 and there was a sea change. Brian Kelly was hired as HC and he and AD Mike Thomas went to work. Thomas correctly realized that the way to move the athletic department forward was through football. Kelly and Thomas started building a football fanbase from the ground up. Kelly went on local TV and radio and pleaded for support in the middle of a 10 win season. Thomas took an anyone, anywhere mentality to scheduling and signed contracts with Va Tech, Tennessee, Oklahoma, NC State, O$U, Oregon State, and others. Teams that city residents (can't call them fans) would want to see.
(Side note: This is part of why I and others have been saying that winning is not simply enough. ETSU attendance is a prime example of that. ETSU attendance has dropped in the middle of winning and NCAA tournament seasons. You can't just win, you have to play teams that people want to see).
By the time I arrived at UC in 09 it was like another planet from 2002, or even 2007. I went to one home game in 09, couldn't get a ticket to the rest (a professor offered to sell me a ticket for $200 for a home conference game). By 09 UC football was undefeated, nationally ranked, and receiving a BCS bowl invite. In 2010 the curtain went up on an indoor practice facility (half of which was paid for with a combination of bowl payout and money games against Oklahoma, O$U, and others). The athletic department had to turn away people wanting season tickets in order to have enough to sell to the general public and grow the fan base. The donor base is still small but growing, as is the fan base overall. New fans are being created out of both recent graduates who have now gotten a taste of UC football and area residents, many of whom have gotten their first taste in the last 3-4 years.
And if you think its easy because Cincinnati is a metropolis think again. There is a lot more going on to distract that potential fans could be doing other than attending UC football games. Most city residents didn't grow up UC football fans, many have allegiances to other schools. In reality we're talking about a 6 year growth of a program. The tragedy is that the growth may have started too late as the Big East is falling apart while programs jump to other conferences (because of their football programs I might add). Despite the success of UC basketball, the overall athletic department will likely get left behind because of the shape of its football program. No amount of winning in basketball will make the Big 12 extend an offer to UC.
Like 99% of other cases, it all comes down to football.
RE: Scoring Big With New Football Teams 