(03-01-2013 11:17 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  I had a very candid discussion today with one of the Temple Board of Trustees who has been a long standing member of the Athletics Committee. Honestly, we discussed everything in pretty great detail including that our new President is very pro-athletics and would like to see continued investment in our programs.

There were some very blunt points made though:

1. Temple purchased land on the east side of campus to build a new stadium, but we are not willing to pursue that if there is no chance of the team becoming profitable.

2. Temple expects football revenue to decrease sharply from weekday games. Additionally, there is a concern that the alumni base will be lukewarm to supporting teams that they are unfamiliar or are not regionally known.

3. The continued additions of schools not close to Temple is only increasing a strain on Olympic Sports budgets. This will result in teams being eliminated or scholarships cut. They do not know what will happen here yet, but they know cuts will be coming. Because of the lowered revenue from the TV package and the increased expenses, Temple will most likely limit support of Big East expansion to northeastern teams going forward.

4. Talks with the ACC and Temple have not occurred. This is mainly due to us having a lame duck President and then a period of no President to target those proper channels. With the new President in office now, many are beginning to say it is time for us to reach out to the ACC and start some form of dialogue to gauge their interest and figure out the next steps.

5. If football does not become profitable and if being in the Old Big East results in too much of a loss, Temple will consider removing our Olympic Sports from the old Big East. If the situation becomes bad enough, the football attendance contracts strongly, and no other option is viable to make the athletic program more profitable, the board will not hesitate to renew discussion to cut the football team as we discussed in the early 2000s.

6. Temple Admin is deeply hurt by many of our former Big East members. We were kicked out, spent a great deal of money to reinvent the football team, and as we were added back to the Big East to help them with scheduling issues and paid higher exit rates to leave quickly, we were suddenly abandoned by the schools we wanted to eagerly join and who lobbied us to rejoin the Big East.


Overall, I could tell they are very nervous. They like the teams that are in the conference, but are concerned about our place in the conference and the money situation. The main impression I walked away with is that if Temple is left out of conference realignment then it may no longer make sense for us to play football unless a true northeastern league appears.

In advance of the post from certain members who will say "let Temple go then," I will say that all of the above comments are based around a philosophy that sports should bring in money and engage alumni, and if Temple is in the situation where being in the Big East suppresses both of those facts then a change will occur. Temple's Board seems to feel like the Big East is shifting into that direction and that it may not make sense for us to be here since after Cinci and UConn leave, all the remaining schools will be in the south and mostly over 1,500 miles. Even the thought of UMass's lone addition didn't seem enough to make financial sense; the feeling is it would take multiple regional teams for thsi to make sense.

My point of this post is just to give some insight into what is going on behind the scenes at Temple. It's not a slam or a post with my personal opinion. I'm honestly sharing what was said to me from someone involved with decision making at Temple. And I think they are valid points worth discussing. Hopefully -- we can keep a civil discussion as I really just want to discuss facts and trying to improve this league for all the member schools.

bye

(03-01-2013 11:46 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:29 PM)Tampa Bearcat Wrote:  Based on the conversation, Temple admins still don't get it. You don't join the club then build. You build first to position yourself to join the club. It's a risky proposition for sure.

Temple has built. We've spent around $80m over the past 4 years on new athletic facilities so that we could join the Big East. And we are willing to spend more, but not if realignment happens and there is no chance that the team can become profitable.

You play football at the Linc.

You have a really nice basketball arena thats been there since in the mid/late 1990s.

What else have you done?

(03-02-2013 12:32 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  I thought Temple was private?

I doubt football attendance would improve much if you built a stadium in North Philly.

Temple is (or at least it was the last time I was there) in the middle of a pretty hoody part of Philly. There isnt any parking. Why would more people go up there than go to Lincoln Field. Correct me if Im wrong here but doesnt Temple have limited on campus students?

The rest of the nBE has made huge investments in athletics and you guys are crying about not having any money when you havent spent a dime on improving your product.

Temple's problem is they're trying to be like the Northeastern Private schools financing yuppy sports like rowing, gymnastics and lacrosse. Sounds like they still haven't learned **** if you ask me.

It amazes me that this guy has the nerve to criticize Tulsa. smdh.

(03-02-2013 12:32 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  I thought Temple was private?

I doubt football attendance would improve much if you built a stadium in North Philly.

Temple is (or at least it was the last time I was there) in the middle of a pretty hoody part of Philly. There isnt any parking. Why would more people go up there than go to Lincoln Field. Correct me if Im wrong here but doesnt Temple have limited on campus students?

The rest of the nBE has made huge investments in athletics and you guys are crying about not having any money when you havent spent a dime on improving your product.

Excuse me? We spent $80m over the past 4 years on new athletic facilities. That doesn't include all the extra money we spent before that to rebuild the football program and increase scholarships.

Temple's area used to be bad, but it isn't really that bad anymore as the area is being greatly gentrified. The football arena property would allow for all the campus students to easily go to the game which would increase attendance a lot as the school is trying to get all 38,000 living on or around campus eventually. The property is directly next to the main train line, 4 blocks from the subway, and next to 2 new parking garages that are being built.

I had a time not spitting food on the screen when he said a TRUE NORTHEASTERN FOOTBALL league.

(03-02-2013 12:16 AM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:07 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  I appreciate the frankness of the person you talked to and the manner in which you presented the comments.

Quote:1. Temple purchased land on the east side of campus to build a new stadium, but we are not willing to pursue that if there is no chance of the team becoming profitable.

There are lots of ways to account for revenue/expenses and universities utilize a lot of creative methods, but is there a real expectation that Owl football will turn a real profit soon?

I didn't discuss specific details on the goals of football profitability. But it could have been profitable with a better TV package, especially with a schedule against Rutgers, Syracuse, and Pitt. We have upcoming games against Penn State and Notre Dame and were scheduling games against Vandy. So I think our attendance numbers would have increased.

Fully understood, and we share a mutual concern for 1) a football program that has to close the gap on break-even numbers, 2) operating within a media contract that's much less than expected/estimated, and 3) increasing paid football attendance in a conference that's different than the one we joined.

Our average attendance is within 2K of the Owls, so the challenges are virtually identical with the noted exception of relative closeness of some conference members.

As MickMack stated, glad you guys are members; hope it works out for you and the rest of us.

This is one Memphis fan that is glad to be in a conference with Temple and looks forward to watching basketball and football games against the Owls.

I hope that the powers that be at all of our schools will give our new league a chance. I hope no rash moves are decided upon. Give it time. This has the potential to become a good conference in both major sports.

(03-02-2013 12:02 AM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:59 PM)TigerSeth Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:51 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:32 PM)canewton Wrote:  To be honest, no one gives a **** about the Temple addition. I honestly believe that the majority of NBE fans would be okay with Temple returning to the A10 and MAC. GO.

I asked very kindly in my post to avoid posts like this. But I will say, Temple, and probably UConn fans, feel the same way about all the nBE teams with exception of Memphis. If Temple were to leave along with UConn, and you add Tulsa and Southern Miss, this conference really is CUSA2.0. If this conference doesn't want to be UCUSA2.0 then we need to shift our thinking about realignment and start adding teams back in the east. Either way, I look forward playing Houston.

I agree....problem is the quality teams up north, that play football, are pretty much taken.

Completely agree. That's why I'm (and the Trustee today) have grown to support the idea of Olympic Sports added to the conference. If it drives down the travel cost for us and gives us some regional rivals then it would make sense.

Exactly. I'd like to see UMass (olympic only), and a couple A10 teams added.

the last time I was @ Temple was a Phil and Friends show in 1998. Im sure its nicer.

80 million on athletics? What did you guys buy with that? I can think of pretty nice stadiums that are built for less.

(03-02-2013 12:33 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:26 AM)MickMack Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:10 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Your fan / alumni support sounds pathetic.

How does your endowment add up to Temple's?

Who cares, we've cleared 2 million + that past years 37 million budget, 39 million in revenue. Maybe we should work together. They can help us with our endowment and we can show them how to turn a profit on the Atheletic side.

I have no dog in this fight; however, before we call alumni support for anyone "pathetic," let's look at endowment.

(03-02-2013 12:33 AM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:27 AM)TigerSeth Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:24 AM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:11 AM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:05 AM)TigerSeth Wrote:  Memphis and Temple are more basketball centric schools, so I know we are both bummed about the basketball layout, esp if uconn and cindy bolt soon.

Exactly. The lack of focus around basketball in this conference is troubling. I was very supportive of football adds until the C7 left. This new conference will likely never have the excitement around football like the SEC or Big10. But we could have a great basketball reputation. I wish we would focus more on that.

And, who are you saying isn't putting more focus on basketball.

And, before anyone says ECU, we are moving along nicely with the 15 million dollar practice facility and will soon be making improvements to Williams Arena. We don't have great history, but we are moving in the right direction. Heck we are currently 5th in C-USA, yes I know that doesn't mean very much, But, I'd look down that list. Sorry to "throw" people under the bus, but when you read stories that say Tulane was hard to swallow, but ECU would send people over the edge, Yet Tulane and 2 others are below us in the C-USA standings. How are we the ones sending people over the edge and not others? Just a question I'd really like to know the REAL answer to.

I think you guys have real nice potential in hoops....you have already made some strides.

I think ECU has made strides, but it isn't a Georgetown, VCU, or Memphis. It does have a lot of potential though, but it would be great to add some schools with more history.

Sorry, but how the heck does history help TODAY. Again, sorry not to throw people under the bus, but Huston has great history in basketball, but it sure as hell isn't helping them now. Average half the attendance ECU is in basketball and currently sitting 10th in C-USA (4-9) 15-11.

Sorry, but you know ECU fans can say the same about football and baseball. It's sure would be nice to have teams like us that fill their stadium and average 47,000+ and in baseball are top 25 in attendance and have made 20+ regionals.

(03-02-2013 12:41 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:02 AM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:59 PM)TigerSeth Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:51 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:32 PM)canewton Wrote:  To be honest, no one gives a **** about the Temple addition. I honestly believe that the majority of NBE fans would be okay with Temple returning to the A10 and MAC. GO.

I asked very kindly in my post to avoid posts like this. But I will say, Temple, and probably UConn fans, feel the same way about all the nBE teams with exception of Memphis. If Temple were to leave along with UConn, and you add Tulsa and Southern Miss, this conference really is CUSA2.0. If this conference doesn't want to be UCUSA2.0 then we need to shift our thinking about realignment and start adding teams back in the east. Either way, I look forward playing Houston.

I agree....problem is the quality teams up north, that play football, are pretty much taken.

Completely agree. That's why I'm (and the Trustee today) have grown to support the idea of Olympic Sports added to the conference. If it drives down the travel cost for us and gives us some regional rivals then it would make sense.

Exactly. I'd like to see UMass (olympic only), and a couple A10 teams added.

For olympic sports-only invites, I wouldn't go beyond VCU and UMass.

What intersection is this land located? I'm trying to figure this out on an aerial. I found one large lot with what looks like a HS football field and a couple of baseball fields beside some train tracks. Everything else looks concrete. You couldn't pay me enough to live somewhere like that.

(03-02-2013 12:41 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  the last time I was @ Temple was a Phil and Friends show in 1998. Im sure its nicer.

80 million on athletics? What did you guys buy with that? I can think of pretty nice stadiums that are built for less.

That's because you're in the middle of nowhere. Try cramming upgrades into an established urban area.

(03-02-2013 12:38 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:32 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  I thought Temple was private?

I doubt football attendance would improve much if you built a stadium in North Philly.

Temple is (or at least it was the last time I was there) in the middle of a pretty hoody part of Philly. There isnt any parking. Why would more people go up there than go to Lincoln Field. Correct me if Im wrong here but doesnt Temple have limited on campus students?

The rest of the nBE has made huge investments in athletics and you guys are crying about not having any money when you havent spent a dime on improving your product.

Temple's problem is they're trying to be like the Northeastern Private schools financing yuppy sports like rowing, gymnastics and lacrosse. Sounds like they still haven't learned **** if you ask me.

It amazes me that this guy has the nerve to criticize Tulsa. smdh.

Dude, take it somewhere else.

Temple gymnastics has been around longer than the football team -- 80+ years. It funds itself through the alumni and national money from wealthy gymnastics donors. So there is nothing elite about it. In fact, it's one of the few sports where Temple alumni come out to watch. Temple gymnastics has hosted NCAAs a bunch of times and is also one of the main reasons the Olympic Trials were in Philly in 2008. So maybe you need to do your research.

I'm not discussing Tulsa on this thread. My opinion is well-known that I do not want to expand unless it's to add Olympic Sports only teams to make the conference more competitive in basketball and reduce travel expenses.

I had no clue Temple had 38K students.

I always just thought of it as a small school like the other Philly schools.

(03-02-2013 12:44 AM)MickMack Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:41 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  the last time I was @ Temple was a Phil and Friends show in 1998. Im sure its nicer.

80 million on athletics? What did you guys buy with that? I can think of pretty nice stadiums that are built for less.

That's because you're in the middle of nowhere. Try cramming it into an established urban area.

Only on this board is Tulsa, OK (metro 1,000,000 plus) considered middle of no where.

(03-02-2013 12:44 AM)MickMack Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:41 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  the last time I was @ Temple was a Phil and Friends show in 1998. Im sure its nicer.

80 million on athletics? What did you guys buy with that? I can think of pretty nice stadiums that are built for less.

That's because you're in the middle of nowhere. Try cramming it into an established urban area.

Yep. The price to buy up urban parcels and put them together into a sizable plot of land is extremely expensive. That is one reason why redevelopment in our urban cores takes help from local government a lot of times to move forward.

(03-02-2013 12:45 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  I had no clue Temple had 38K students.

I always just thought of it as a small school like the other Philly schools.

Nah -- we're the largest school in the Philly area and 26th largest in the US. We are public/private depending on the college.

(03-02-2013 12:46 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:44 AM)MickMack Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 12:41 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  the last time I was @ Temple was a Phil and Friends show in 1998. Im sure its nicer.

80 million on athletics? What did you guys buy with that? I can think of pretty nice stadiums that are built for less.

That's because you're in the middle of nowhere. Try cramming it into an established urban area.

Only on this board is Tulsa, OK (metro 1,000,000 plus) considered middle of no where.

The city of Tulsa is not nearly as densely packed as Philadelphia.