(12-24-2022 06:17 PM)Erictelevision Wrote:  Those athletes don’t generate revenue

Neither do FCS football players outside of MAYBE a half dozen schools.

(12-29-2022 11:46 AM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(12-26-2022 10:30 PM)TUowl06 Wrote:  

(12-26-2022 09:08 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(12-26-2022 09:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  Football and men's basketball require a lot more compromises. And football involves 85 players, not just 15 or so.

Before Rice got bigger, football players were almost 5% of their undergraduate enrollment.

It's not 85 a year, it's 10 or 12 a year that fall under the line. At many schools, that's not going to tip the scales.

(12-26-2022 08:40 PM)TUowl06 Wrote:  I just saw Northeastern's acceptance rate for their most recent freshman class was 6.7% (91,000 applicants)?!?! Wow, has NU come a long way in the last 20 years or so!

Northeastern gets 4x the applicants as Georgetown. Is Northeastern 4x as selective? No.

Northeastern's yield (the percentage of accepted students that actually accept the offer of admission) is 27%, or about one in four accepted actually go there. Georgetown loses a lot of kids to full rides elsewhere but still yields at 47%.

Harvard yields at 83%.

I would consider NYU and Boston U to be far better comparisons than Georgetown given context. As it is, Northeastern has blown past Drexel over the course of the last 10-20 years. Hell, there was a time when I was looking at schools, that Northeastern was considered an overpriced Temple. Maybe it still is? Just one with more subjective admission procedures? Syracuse, my "either or", was certainly considered the better school than Northeastern at the time.

Curriculum structure for student-athletes who partake in a co-op/internship based academic program (institution) led to me this revelation. I was looking at Drexel and Northeastern specifically.

How much have Boston U's and Northeastern's academic reputations changed since they dropped football? Boston U. ended football just as I was getting old enough to really pay attention to 1-AA. Northeastern threw in the towel right around the time I graduated from Temple and not long after the Owls voted to keep the program after being kicked out of the Big East.

I transferred from BU to Temple and have master's from Drexel. Northeastern was the weirdest school I ever visited. Just a very odd vibe at that place.

What sort of vide?

(12-29-2022 12:04 PM)Curtisc83 Wrote:  

(12-29-2022 11:46 AM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(12-26-2022 10:30 PM)TUowl06 Wrote:  

(12-26-2022 09:08 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(12-26-2022 09:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  Football and men's basketball require a lot more compromises. And football involves 85 players, not just 15 or so.

Before Rice got bigger, football players were almost 5% of their undergraduate enrollment.

It's not 85 a year, it's 10 or 12 a year that fall under the line. At many schools, that's not going to tip the scales.

(12-26-2022 08:40 PM)TUowl06 Wrote:  I just saw Northeastern's acceptance rate for their most recent freshman class was 6.7% (91,000 applicants)?!?! Wow, has NU come a long way in the last 20 years or so!

Northeastern gets 4x the applicants as Georgetown. Is Northeastern 4x as selective? No.

Northeastern's yield (the percentage of accepted students that actually accept the offer of admission) is 27%, or about one in four accepted actually go there. Georgetown loses a lot of kids to full rides elsewhere but still yields at 47%.

Harvard yields at 83%.

I would consider NYU and Boston U to be far better comparisons than Georgetown given context. As it is, Northeastern has blown past Drexel over the course of the last 10-20 years. Hell, there was a time when I was looking at schools, that Northeastern was considered an overpriced Temple. Maybe it still is? Just one with more subjective admission procedures? Syracuse, my "either or", was certainly considered the better school than Northeastern at the time.

Curriculum structure for student-athletes who partake in a co-op/internship based academic program (institution) led to me this revelation. I was looking at Drexel and Northeastern specifically.

How much have Boston U's and Northeastern's academic reputations changed since they dropped football? Boston U. ended football just as I was getting old enough to really pay attention to 1-AA. Northeastern threw in the towel right around the time I graduated from Temple and not long after the Owls voted to keep the program after being kicked out of the Big East.

I transferred from BU to Temple and have master's from Drexel. Northeastern was the weirdest school I ever visited. Just a very odd vibe at that place.

What sort of vide?

Like very fake everything from aesthetics to the people. Ever meet someone who seems so inauthentically happy? That was Northeastern. It was like being in a movie where these people had never left their little bubble.

(12-24-2022 05:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:27 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  I realize that non-scholarship football doesn’t mean that an athletic dept saves a ton of money, but it is really surprising to me that Boston U didn’t cut scholarships and join the Patriot—which was their ultimate goal for Olympic Sports.

I read some articles from the time, poor attendance and operating in a deficit were the cited reasons. It was a really ugly scene the way they cancelled the program during the season, the players were demoralized. They wore generic uniforms the remainder of the season.

One reason: John Silber.

There's also Title IX, CTE and the cost of a program with 85 athletes.
Title IX applies to opportunity, not just the number of scholarships. And there is the issue of possible compromises on admission standards to get football players.

You go non-scholarship and play more interesting and local opponents, it would have made more sense than to cut it. Attendance was great during their YanCon title run. I think Hoya is correct, it was a personal crusade. Which ironically, is why Holy Cross isn't FBS and why Villanova dropped their program in the 80's and never moved up when handed a golden ticket.

(01-02-2023 02:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:27 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  I realize that non-scholarship football doesn’t mean that an athletic dept saves a ton of money, but it is really surprising to me that Boston U didn’t cut scholarships and join the Patriot—which was their ultimate goal for Olympic Sports.

I read some articles from the time, poor attendance and operating in a deficit were the cited reasons. It was a really ugly scene the way they cancelled the program during the season, the players were demoralized. They wore generic uniforms the remainder of the season.

One reason: John Silber.

There's also Title IX, CTE and the cost of a program with 85 athletes.
Title IX applies to opportunity, not just the number of scholarships. And there is the issue of possible compromises on admission standards to get football players.

You go non-scholarship and play more interesting and local opponents, it would have made more sense than to cut it. Attendance was great during their YanCon title run. I think Hoya is correct, it was a personal crusade. Which ironically, is why Holy Cross isn't FBS and why Villanova dropped their program in the 80's and never moved up when handed a golden ticket.

Also, people in the northeast don't really care about college football. Having it at your school is not a requirement.

(01-02-2023 05:02 PM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(01-02-2023 02:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:27 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  I realize that non-scholarship football doesn’t mean that an athletic dept saves a ton of money, but it is really surprising to me that Boston U didn’t cut scholarships and join the Patriot—which was their ultimate goal for Olympic Sports.

I read some articles from the time, poor attendance and operating in a deficit were the cited reasons. It was a really ugly scene the way they cancelled the program during the season, the players were demoralized. They wore generic uniforms the remainder of the season.

One reason: John Silber.

There's also Title IX, CTE and the cost of a program with 85 athletes.
Title IX applies to opportunity, not just the number of scholarships. And there is the issue of possible compromises on admission standards to get football players.

You go non-scholarship and play more interesting and local opponents, it would have made more sense than to cut it. Attendance was great during their YanCon title run. I think Hoya is correct, it was a personal crusade. Which ironically, is why Holy Cross isn't FBS and why Villanova dropped their program in the 80's and never moved up when handed a golden ticket.

Also, people in the northeast don't really care about college football. Having it at your school is not a requirement.

What's interesting is some northeastern schools that dropped their programs also brought them back due to popular demand: Fordham, Villanova, Duquesne, and Georgetown come to mind.

I get that Duquesne and Georgetown are fringe northeast, but were considered Eastern Independents.

I wouldn't put Boston U in that category though, they remind me more of NYU—which isn't bringing back football either.

(01-02-2023 05:02 PM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(01-02-2023 02:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:27 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  I realize that non-scholarship football doesn’t mean that an athletic dept saves a ton of money, but it is really surprising to me that Boston U didn’t cut scholarships and join the Patriot—which was their ultimate goal for Olympic Sports.

I read some articles from the time, poor attendance and operating in a deficit were the cited reasons. It was a really ugly scene the way they cancelled the program during the season, the players were demoralized. They wore generic uniforms the remainder of the season.

One reason: John Silber.

There's also Title IX, CTE and the cost of a program with 85 athletes.
Title IX applies to opportunity, not just the number of scholarships. And there is the issue of possible compromises on admission standards to get football players.

You go non-scholarship and play more interesting and local opponents, it would have made more sense than to cut it. Attendance was great during their YanCon title run. I think Hoya is correct, it was a personal crusade. Which ironically, is why Holy Cross isn't FBS and why Villanova dropped their program in the 80's and never moved up when handed a golden ticket.

Also, people in the northeast don't really care about college football. Having it at your school is not a requirement.

People in the northeast like football. Put a winning product on the field, and people will show up.

(01-02-2023 05:55 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(01-02-2023 05:02 PM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(01-02-2023 02:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-24-2022 05:27 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  One reason: John Silber.

There's also Title IX, CTE and the cost of a program with 85 athletes.
Title IX applies to opportunity, not just the number of scholarships. And there is the issue of possible compromises on admission standards to get football players.

You go non-scholarship and play more interesting and local opponents, it would have made more sense than to cut it. Attendance was great during their YanCon title run. I think Hoya is correct, it was a personal crusade. Which ironically, is why Holy Cross isn't FBS and why Villanova dropped their program in the 80's and never moved up when handed a golden ticket.

Also, people in the northeast don't really care about college football. Having it at your school is not a requirement.

People in the northeast like football. Put a winning product on the field, and people will show up.

I suspect that most Northeastern teams would get only slightly more attention if they were actually good. Teams like BC, Syracuse and Maryland have never been that popular, even during their best years. I’m not even going to get started on Rutgers and Temple, which have been bad for almost their entire football histories.


And this is FCS football, which hardly has any following anywhere. Most people’s knowledge of FCS football is limited entirely to North Dakota State-most people have no idea if any FCS team except NDSU has gone 11-0 or 0-11 in a given year. Winning in FCS can’t really get you more fans if nobody knows that you’re winning.