OVC 2 teams - SoCon 1 team

[gman]

Wichita State had a football team but did the sensible thing and dropped it in 1986.

http://footballscoop.com/news/wichita-s ... wants-pay/

-I didn't see this topic on another thread

.....and they are trying to revive it.

It’s dead at the present time. http://footballscoop.com/news/wichita-s ... wants-pay/

[DungeonRealm]

Wichita State had a football team but did the sensible thing and dropped it in 1986.

http://footballscoop.com/news/wichita-s ... wants-pay/

-I didn't see this topic on another thread

.....and they are trying to revive it.

But don't want to pay for it because it would take away from their HUGE advantage putting so much of their donor money available to them towards basketball, its a HUGE advantage and they don't want to lose it lol, no thanks on adding any of these types of teams to the SoCon ever again (ie. Belmont, Lipscomb ect. ect. ect.), would not benefit Furman at all, in fact lets get rid of UNCG please lol

UNCG has certainly benefited Furman basketball and baseball with quality competition. Football is no longer the top sport for the SoCon. It’s a money losing sport.

We are not talking about the same thing

Furman would be much better off in basketball if every team in the SoCon had to put money into football as well, allowing a team like UNCG in that can put all their money towards basketball is a big unfair advantage
Having Davidson out of the league has been great for the rest of us, dropping UNCG would be similarly great and much more fair for the rest of the league

[DungeonRealm]

Unrelated, but if the SoCon ever decided to expand under the new commissioner, Belmont is a school I would target as a basketball-only entrant.

No more basketball only schools, already an unfair advantage for UNCG and don't like it, they spend all their money on Basketball (since no football) just like (Davidson and CofC did), don't want any part of that

Davidson HAS a Division 1 FCS Football Team.

They had a winning season in 2018, while beating a Butler (yeah, they also have Football) Team the game before Butler darn near beat a P5/Big XII Team & the Wildcats darn near beat an FCS Playoffs-bound San Diego Team, losing their lead with under 2 minutes to play.

I don't know how much Davidson spends on Football or Basketball. I know they have a student enrollment of 1,810 and an endowment of $822 million. I also know they DO have an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team...which you said they didn't. Davidson also has an NCAA Division 1 Basketball Team that is a #4 seed and hosting a 1st round game in the NIT.

I don't know how much Furman spends on Football or Basketball. I know Furman has a student enrollment of 2,746 and an endowment of $661 million. Furman also has an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team. Furman also has an NCAA Division 1 Basketball Team that is a #3 seed and hosting a 1st round game in the NIT.

Finally, I believe (but don't know) that expenditures on Athletics are not a "zero-sum game." I KNOW there are people and organizations who donate money to Furman University and/or Furman Athletics BECAUSE Furman has an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team. Though it is certainly possible, I doubt there are many people or organizations withholding their contributions to Furman University and/or Furman Athletics because they DO have an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team. I don't know how much the net loss (if any) that Furman Football represents for Furman Athletics, but IF there is a loss, to make the assumption that amount is the net amount that could be added to Furman's Basketball budget if Furman did not have an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team is, IMO, flawed thinking. Some donors would withhold making any donations, so that amount, whatever it is, would need to be subtracted from the 'net gain' for the Athletics budget. Then, it, of course, wouldn't be 'fair' for Men's Basketball to reap all of the (alleged) financial benefits of not having Football. Certainly, those 'savings' would need to be 'fairly' divided across all of Furman's remaining sports - probably pro rata by Athlete Headcount would be the 'fairest' way to divide the (alleged) gains...so Men's & Women's Lacrosse, I believe, would receive the largest (alleged) benefit, followed by Baseball & Softball maybe, then Men's and Women's Soccer....etc.

So...I just calculated the % of an (alleged) benefit from not having an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football that 'fairly' should be allocated to Men's Basketball. It's 4.42% of the (alleged) savings less the amount of decreased donations. AKA - not much (if anything)...

...but if we believe the data available here: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/details

Reporting Year: 07/01/2017 - 06/30/2018
Total Revenues by Team
Varsity Teams Men's Teams
Football $7,283,282

Total Expenses by Team
Varsity Teams Men's Teams
Football $6,620,250

...this entire conversation is moot...because Furman Football turned a $663,032 profit in this reporting year...

So...the real question is how much would we have to REDUCE the Men's Basketball budget if Furman did not have an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team?

In case you want to see the Basketball $'s...

Reporting Year: 07/01/2017 - 06/30/2018
Total Revenues by Team
Varsity Teams Men's Teams
Basketball $2,763,225

Total Expenses by Team
Varsity Teams Men's Teams
Basketball $2,301,306

Basketball Profit: $461,919

What is FUBeAR missing? Why is this even a conversation that some peeps seem to so desperately want to have????

I was stating they don't have scholarship football, they don't put jack money into football, they put it all in basketball

IE. Huge advantage for them compared to schools with scholarship football, glad they are gone and don't want another team like that ever again

[DungeonRealm]

I am not advocating against having football, I love football

I am advocating against adding anybody to the SoCon that does not have scholarship SoCon football because it makes no sense for Furman basketball to do so, as those schools would have a huge advantage over us

[FUBeAR]

Unrelated, but if the SoCon ever decided to expand under the new commissioner, Belmont is a school I would target as a basketball-only entrant.

No more basketball only schools, already an unfair advantage for UNCG and don't like it, they spend all their money on Basketball (since no football) just like (Davidson and CofC did), don't want any part of that

Davidson HAS a Division 1 FCS Football Team.

They had a winning season in 2018, while beating a Butler (yeah, they also have Football) Team the game before Butler darn near beat a P5/Big XII Team & the Wildcats darn near beat an FCS Playoffs-bound San Diego Team, losing their lead with under 2 minutes to play.

I don't know how much Davidson spends on Football or Basketball. I know they have a student enrollment of 1,810 and an endowment of $822 million. I also know they DO have an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team...which you said they didn't. Davidson also has an NCAA Division 1 Basketball Team that is a #4 seed and hosting a 1st round game in the NIT.

I don't know how much Furman spends on Football or Basketball. I know Furman has a student enrollment of 2,746 and an endowment of $661 million. Furman also has an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team. Furman also has an NCAA Division 1 Basketball Team that is a #3 seed and hosting a 1st round game in the NIT.

Finally, I believe (but don't know) that expenditures on Athletics are not a "zero-sum game." I KNOW there are people and organizations who donate money to Furman University and/or Furman Athletics BECAUSE Furman has an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team. Though it is certainly possible, I doubt there are many people or organizations withholding their contributions to Furman University and/or Furman Athletics because they DO have an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team. I don't know how much the net loss (if any) that Furman Football represents for Furman Athletics, but IF there is a loss, to make the assumption that amount is the net amount that could be added to Furman's Basketball budget if Furman did not have an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team is, IMO, flawed thinking. Some donors would withhold making any donations, so that amount, whatever it is, would need to be subtracted from the 'net gain' for the Athletics budget. Then, it, of course, wouldn't be 'fair' for Men's Basketball to reap all of the (alleged) financial benefits of not having Football. Certainly, those 'savings' would need to be 'fairly' divided across all of Furman's remaining sports - probably pro rata by Athlete Headcount would be the 'fairest' way to divide the (alleged) gains...so Men's & Women's Lacrosse, I believe, would receive the largest (alleged) benefit, followed by Baseball & Softball maybe, then Men's and Women's Soccer....etc.

So...I just calculated the % of an (alleged) benefit from not having an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football that 'fairly' should be allocated to Men's Basketball. It's 4.42% of the (alleged) savings less the amount of decreased donations. AKA - not much (if anything)...

...but if we believe the data available here: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/details

Reporting Year: 07/01/2017 - 06/30/2018
Total Revenues by Team
Varsity Teams Men's Teams
Football $7,283,282

Total Expenses by Team
Varsity Teams Men's Teams
Football $6,620,250

...this entire conversation is moot...because Furman Football turned a $663,032 profit in this reporting year...

So...the real question is how much would we have to REDUCE the Men's Basketball budget if Furman did not have an NCAA Division 1 FCS Football Team?

In case you want to see the Basketball $'s...

Reporting Year: 07/01/2017 - 06/30/2018
Total Revenues by Team
Varsity Teams Men's Teams
Basketball $2,763,225

Total Expenses by Team
Varsity Teams Men's Teams
Basketball $2,301,306

Basketball Profit: $461,919

What is FUBeAR missing? Why is this even a conversation that some peeps seem to so desperately want to have????

I was stating they don't have scholarship football, they don't put jack money into football, they put it all in basketball

IE. Huge advantage for them compared to schools with scholarship football, glad they are gone and don't want another team like that ever again

I don't want any Non-Football Schools in the SoCon either; so we agree on that!

But you did say Davidson doesn't have Football Team and they do. By the way I made a mistake also. It wasn't Butler that almost beat an FBS P5/Big XII Team, it was Drake, who somebody also recently incorrectly said doesn't have a Football Team either. Davidson didn't play Drake in 2018, but the Wildcats did beat Stetson, who beat Drake. BTW, Drake Basketball (24-9) tied Loyola for the Regular Season MVC Title, but lost in the MVC Tournament and is playing in the CIT Tournament.

If not having scholarship is a HUGE Advantage for Davidson, I guess they've really squandered that advantage because I see their hoops Team sitting right where Furman is...and actually 1 seed lower in the NIT.

Let's look deeper...I see 15 Teams in the NCAA Tournament that don't have scholarship Football...
Gonzaga
Marquette
VCU
Seton Hall
Belmont
St. John's
Saint Mary's
Northeastern
Saint Louis
UC-Irvine
Vermont
Northern Kentucky
Bradley
Fairleigh Dickinson
Iona

I see 9 Teams ranked in the Mid-Major Top 25 that do have scholarship Football AND are also in the NCAA Tournament
Wofford
Buffalo
Murray State
New Mexico State
Liberty
Georgia State
Yale (it's really scholarship football...regardless of what they say)
Gardner-Webb
Abilene Christian

...and we know that the other 44 (68-15-9 = 44) Teams in the NCAA Tournament all have scholarship Football.

I also see 6 Teams ranked in the Mid-Major Top 25 that have scholarship Football.
Toledo
Furman
ETSU
South Dakota State
Sam Houston State
Montana

These Teams, arguably, just missed making the NCAA Tournament this year.
9+6 = 15

So...it seems that not having scholarship Football is NOT really some kind of (imagined) HUGE advantage in having a successful Basketball Team for mid-major Teams. Looks to be about a 'wash' using this year's data.

[DungeonRealm]

All I was talking about was that they don't have scholarship football, to me that puts them in the same boat, that's what I was referring too

Its a tremendous advantage and one of the reasons Davidson has been able to retain Mckillop, higher assistant coach pay, have large recruiting budget, facilities upgraded, better program marketing ect, to aid with having so much success over the years

The same can now be said for UNCG

The same would be the case with Belmont

[FUBeAR]

All I was talking about was that they don't have scholarship football, to me that puts them in the same boat, that's what I was referring too

Got it.

And...I didn't really know all the 'stuff' I just posted until I took the time to do some research...and that research leads me to believe...
1) Football is not a 'money-losing' sport for Furman -always assumed everyone who says it is was correct...but the data available from the US Dept. of Education says, to me...."Not so fast my friend"
2) Thus, if Football is not a money-losing sport, or even if it doesn't lose much, then there is and would be no automatically derived benefit to Furman Basketball if Furman Football did not exist.
3) Both financially and competitively, there doesn't really seem to be some kind of 'advantage' to schools that don't have Football - scholarship Football or Non-Scholarship.

Also - none of this addresses the 'residual' benefits of having or detriment of not having Football at a College in the Southeast. One only needs to assess Mercer's rising enrollment numbers while increasing its student selectivity (test scores/GPA's, etc.) and the increase in the Mercer Athletic Foundation (MAF) inflows since Football was re-started in 2013. And, before anyone 'goes there,' the declining results of the Mercer Basketball program are COMPLETELY independent of starting Football - several other much more highly-correlated factors have driven that negative change.

[FUBeAR]

All I was talking about was that they don't have scholarship football, to me that puts them in the same boat, that's what I was referring too

Its a tremendous advantage and one of the reasons Davidson has been able to retain Mckillop, higher assistant coach pay, have large recruiting budget, facilities upgraded, better program marketing ect, to aid with having so much success over the years

The same can now be said for UNCG

The same would be the case with Belmont

Maybe, if Davidson, UNCG, and Belmont had Football programs that were bleeding red ink, then that might compromise their ability to fund Basketball...and, in that case, you would be correct. But they don't (I doubt Davidson Football does), so we can't really say they have an advantage over schools that do have Football programs...UNLESS those other schools' Football Programs are bleeding funds away from Basketball.

Maybe they are at some schools, but according to that US Dept of Education data, at Furman, the Football Program CONTRIBUTES, as does the Basketball Program, to the overall Athletics budget and, thus supports all of the other sports (for the most part). So, Furman is at no disadvantage to Davidson or UNCG or Belmost because Furman has a scholarship Football Program...and the Paladins, may, actually, have an advantage over those schools BECAUSE of having a Football Team.

Does that make sense?

Seems obvious to me...unless the US Dept of Education data is completely bogus. Is it?

[DungeonRealm]

All I was talking about was that they don't have scholarship football, to me that puts them in the same boat, that's what I was referring too

Got it.

And...I didn't really know all the 'stuff' I just posted until I took the time to do some research...and that research leads me to believe...
1) Football is not a 'money-losing' sport for Furman -always assumed everyone who says it is was correct...but the data available from the US Dept. of Education says, to me...."Not so fast my friend"
2) Thus, if Football is not a money-losing sport, or even if it doesn't lose much, then there is and would be no automatically derived benefit to Furman Basketball if Furman Football did not exist.
3) Both financially and competitively, there doesn't really seem to be some kind of 'advantage' to schools that don't have Football - scholarship Football or Non-Scholarship.

Also - none of this addresses the 'residual' benefits of having or detriment of not having Football at a College in the Southeast. One only needs to assess Mercer's rising enrollment numbers while increasing its student selectivity (test scores/GPA's, etc.) and the increase in the Mercer Athletic Foundation (MAF) inflows since Football was re-started in 2013. And, before anyone 'goes there,' the declining results of the Mercer Basketball program are COMPLETELY independent of starting Football - several other much more highly-correlated factors have driven that negative change.

Would Belmont or UNCG have to dip into their athletics budgets to start up a football program and take money away from the Basketball budget? Yes, unless a billionaire came forward and provided unlimited funds to them for football.
Thus they use almost all money towards hoops, which is a big advantage for them compared to the other 9 teams in the SoCon

That's why Wichita St. does not start football, they don't have said billionaire coming forward and don't want to dip into their basketball fund essentially to get it going, they like having that money advantage

[DungeonRealm]

Gonzaga
Marquette
VCU
Seton Hall
Belmont
St. John's

Those are at large bids

Did any school with scholarship football outside P5 football schools get an at large bid?

[DungeonRealm]

The NIT is littered with no football or non scholarship football schools

[apaladin]

UCF
Temple
Nevada
Houston
All at large with football. There are more that would have gotten bids but got auto bids.

[FUBeAR]

All I was talking about was that they don't have scholarship football, to me that puts them in the same boat, that's what I was referring too

Got it.

And...I didn't really know all the 'stuff' I just posted until I took the time to do some research...and that research leads me to believe...
1) Football is not a 'money-losing' sport for Furman -always assumed everyone who says it is was correct...but the data available from the US Dept. of Education says, to me...."Not so fast my friend"
2) Thus, if Football is not a money-losing sport, or even if it doesn't lose much, then there is and would be no automatically derived benefit to Furman Basketball if Furman Football did not exist.
3) Both financially and competitively, there doesn't really seem to be some kind of 'advantage' to schools that don't have Football - scholarship Football or Non-Scholarship.

Also - none of this addresses the 'residual' benefits of having or detriment of not having Football at a College in the Southeast. One only needs to assess Mercer's rising enrollment numbers while increasing its student selectivity (test scores/GPA's, etc.) and the increase in the Mercer Athletic Foundation (MAF) inflows since Football was re-started in 2013. And, before anyone 'goes there,' the declining results of the Mercer Basketball program are COMPLETELY independent of starting Football - several other much more highly-correlated factors have driven that negative change.

Would Belmont or UNCG have to dip into their athletics budgets to start up a football program and take money away from the Basketball budget? Yes, unless a billionaire came forward and provided unlimited funds to them for football.
Thus they use almost all money towards hoops, which is a big advantage for them compared to the other 9 teams in the SoCon

That's why Wichita St. does not start football, they don't have said billionaire coming forward and don't want to dip into their basketball fund essentially to get it going, they like having that money advantage

Starting up is different than ongoing, but Mercer did it and I can almost guarantee that the basketball budget at Mercer was not reduced by 1 single penny to start up Football. I can find out if you doubt that. The problem WSU has/had in starting Football is that they moved their sports from the MVC to the AAC in the midst of that 'conversation.' All of the Members of the AAC sponsor Football (except WSU), but they play in the FBS (G5...but they like to say they are in the P6...they aren't). Very different set of economics associated with FCS (Scholarship or Non-Scholarship) and FBS Football. If they don't have the funds to start up FBS Football without compromising their Basketball Funding, then they shouldn't (and won't) do it. That just makes sense.

BUT...at school's where (established) Football is making money or not losing very much, there is no financial DISADVANTAGE to school's that don't have Football. If they have a bigger Basketball budget than Furman does, it's because they have done a better job raising funds for their basketball program and/or their athletics department and/or their university than Furman has.

I guess you are making the assumption that Furman Football donors, if Furman dropped Football, would just move their donations to Basketball enabling the Basketball budget to increase. I would contend that many (maybe most) Football donors would, instead, withhold their donations to Furman (overall) AND some basketball donors, who are also BIG Football Fans just might reduce or withhold their givings altogether as well. Maybe I'm wrong...but that's sure not a risk I'd want to take if I were sitting in Mike Buddie's seat.

[DungeonRealm]

UCF
Temple
Nevada
Houston
All at large with football. There are more that would have gotten bids but got auto bids.

Correct, so 0 FCS football schools represented in the At-Large pool and only 1 outside the American conference

[FUBeAR]

Gonzaga
Marquette
VCU
Seton Hall
Belmont
St. John's

Those are at large bids

Did any school with scholarship football outside P5 football schools get an at large bid?

Yes - 4 of them...Houston, Nevada, Temple, and UCF...

So I guess we should add those 4 to the other 15 I mentioned and we have 19 non-P5 Football schools making or 'on the cusp of making' the NCAA Tourney and 15 non-football schools that did make it. To be fair, I guess we should add UNCG, Hofstra, and Lipscomb to the non-football schools that made/almost made it....so 19 to 18....still, pretty much a wash.