OVC 2 teams - SoCon 1 team

[DungeonRealm]

Tell me this:

If school A only has 1 option (between football and basketball) available, money that is donated gets allocated by default essentially, where as if school B has a choice between the two then the money will get broken up as opposed to the default (only 1 choice) decision

In Mercer's case, who's to say that some of the money donated to football would not have gone to basketball instead if football was never a choice?
They could have hired better assistant coaches with better pay, increased their recruiting budget and expanded to more players scouted ect., and on and on
Maybe they would not have fallen off, seems possible

[FUBeAR]

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

I also answered your question, though I'm not sure it why it's relevant to the Football vs. Non-Football conversation how schools got in - either they had a great regular season AND lost a Conference Tournament Game OR they were good enough to win 3 - 5 games and win their Conference Tournament. Looks there were around 20 schools that were non-P5 Football that did (or almost did) that and about 20 schools that are non-Football that did the same. In other words, no discernible advantage for Non-Football vs. non-P5-Football schools.

[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

I also answered your question, though I'm not sure it why it's relevant to the Football vs. Non-Football conversation how schools got in - either they had a great regular season AND lost a Conference Tournament Game OR they were good enough to win 3 - 5 games and win their Conference Tournament. Looks there were around 20 schools that were non-P5 Football that did (or almost did) that and about 20 schools that are non-Football that did the same. In other words, no discernible advantage for Non-Football vs. non-P5-Football schools.

Its ok if we don't see eye to eye, I don't want to ramble for 2 or 3 more pages

We both agree not to add another school to SoCon that is basketball only, so truce for me

[DungeonRealm]

Actually, one more question, maybe someone knows a quick answer, out of the 353 DI basketball programs, how many of those don't have scholarship football?

[FUBeAR]

Tell me this:

If school A only has 1 option (between football and basketball) available, money that is donated gets allocated by default essentially, where as if school B has a choice between the two then the money will get broken up as opposed to the default (only 1 choice) decision

In Mercer's case, who's to say that some of the money donated to football would not have gone to basketball instead if football was never a choice?
They could have hired better assistant coaches with better pay, increased their recruiting budget and expanded to more players scouted ect., and on and on
Maybe they would not have fallen off, seems possible

Again - your assumption is that Athletics Fund Raising is a zero-sum game. It's just not.

I can prove that it's not. I am a small donor, but the amount is really not relevant for this discussion. If Furman decided to drop Football, the University and the Athletics Department would have received the last $ that they will EVER get from me. Do you think I'm alone in that opinion? I can assure you I am not and more than a few people that donate A LOT more than me feel exactly the same way. It's really that simple.

Also, your premise about how the start-up of Mercer Football was funded is, I believe, completely incorrect. The people who generously donated the funds to start Mercer Football were not going to donate that money to Mercer Basketball. Some of them may have donated to other major projects for the University instead of Football. They were inspired to donate to fund Football though. You may not have noticed, but Football is kind of a big deal on College Campuses in the Southeast and in Georgia, particularly.

False premises pretty much always lead to false conclusions.

[DungeonRealm]

Tell me this:

If school A only has 1 option (between football and basketball) available, money that is donated gets allocated by default essentially, where as if school B has a choice between the two then the money will get broken up as opposed to the default (only 1 choice) decision

In Mercer's case, who's to say that some of the money donated to football would not have gone to basketball instead if football was never a choice?
They could have hired better assistant coaches with better pay, increased their recruiting budget and expanded to more players scouted ect., and on and on
Maybe they would not have fallen off, seems possible

Again - your assumption is that Athletics Fund Raising is a zero-sum game. It's just not.

I can prove that it's not. I am a small donor, but the amount is really not relevant for this discussion. If Furman decided to drop Football, the University and the Athletics Department would have received the last $ that they will EVER get from me. Do you think I'm alone in that opinion? I can assure you I am not and more than a few people that donate A LOT more than me feel exactly the same way. It's really that simple.

Also, your premise about how the start-up of Mercer Football was funded is, I believe, completely incorrect. The people who generously donated the funds to start Mercer Football were not going to donate that money to Mercer Basketball. Some of them may have donated to other major projects for the University instead of Football. They were inspired to donate to fund Football though. You may not have noticed, but Football is kind of a big deal on College Campuses in the Southeast and in Georgia, particularly.

False premises pretty much always lead to false conclusions.

You can't say however that is the case all the time, I am sure there are plenty of instances where a donor has donated for basketball because it was their only choice available at some schools, even though they may like football more and would of given the money to football department if their school had such choice available

[DungeonRealm]

Actually, one more question, maybe someone knows a quick answer, out of the 353 DI basketball programs, how many of those don't have scholarship football?

My full question here being what is the percent of schools in all of DI basketball that don't have scholarship football
And what is the percent that are in NCAA's and NIT fields that don't have scholarship football
(Taking out the P5 schools, as we know they are making major profit in football to contribute to other parts of the athletic department, that non-P5 football programs are not)

[DungeonRealm]

At quick glance of the NIT, of the 32 teams, take out the 9 P5 schools that are making bank off their football program
You are left with 23 teams
Of those 23 teams, 15 of those teams don't have scholarship football and only 8 do, 65%

[FUBeAR]

Actually, one more question, maybe someone knows a quick answer, out of the 353 DI basketball programs, how many of those don't have scholarship football?

Of those 353 Teams, 256 Schools also have Football Teams. Of those 256, 24 are non-scholarship (that includes the PFL (11), the Ivy's (8), the Service Academies (3), Georgetown (which is in the Patriot League, but doesn't give Football Scholarships)(1), and Fairleigh Dickinson (which has a D3 Team)(1).

So...I guess you could say the answer to your (real) question is 97 + 24 = 121 vs. 256-65 P5 Teams = 191...and 191 is 58% more than 121...so there 'should be' 58% more non-P5 Football Teams making/almost making the Tourney than non-Football Teams. OK - so 'should be' 30 non-P5 Football vs. 20 Non-Football...or so, if all things are equal. That's a pretty good argument...'your' best argument yet of showing an advantage to Schools that don't have football.

Still not enough to sway FUBeAR though. Too many other 'discoveries' in my research today telling me that not having Football has no real upside for Basketball. Sorry....Good effort though. I like it!

[FUBeAR]

At quick glance of the NIT, of the 32 teams, take out the 9 P5 schools that are making bank off their football program
You are left with 23 teams
Of those 23 teams, 15 of those teams don't have scholarship football and only 8 do, 65%

True - but 'flip' Harvard (where money just doesn't matter & all athletes (and most students) are essentially on scholarships) and San Diego (who has always 'played right at' or been found to be across the line of giving Football scholarships) and it's 13-10....pretty close.

[DungeonRealm]

Actually, one more question, maybe someone knows a quick answer, out of the 353 DI basketball programs, how many of those don't have scholarship football?

Of those 353 Teams, 256 Schools also have Football Teams. Of those 256, 24 are non-scholarship (that includes the PFL (11), the Ivy's (8), the Service Academies (3), Georgetown (which is in the Patriot League, but doesn't give Football Scholarships)(1), and Fairleigh Dickinson (which has a D3 Team)(1).

So...I guess you could say the answer to your (real) question is 97 + 24 = 121 vs. 256-65 P5 Teams = 191...and 191 is 58% more than 121...so there 'should be' 58% more non-P5 Football Teams making/almost making the Tourney than non-Football Teams. OK - so 'should be' 30 non-P5 Football vs. 20 Non-Football...or so, if all things are equal. That's a pretty good argument...'your' best argument yet of showing an advantage to Schools that don't have football.

Still not enough to sway FUBeAR though. Too many other 'discoveries' in my research today telling me that not having Football has no real upside for Basketball. Sorry....Good effort though. I like it!

All in good fun my man!

[Affirm]

Tell me this:

If school A only has 1 option (between football and basketball) available, money that is donated gets allocated by default essentially, where as if school B has a choice between the two then the money will get broken up as opposed to the default (only 1 choice) decision

In Mercer's case, who's to say that some of the money donated to football would not have gone to basketball instead if football was never a choice?
They could have hired better assistant coaches with better pay, increased their recruiting budget and expanded to more players scouted ect., and on and on
Maybe they would not have fallen off, seems possible

Again - your assumption is that Athletics Fund Raising is a zero-sum game. It's just not.

I can prove that it's not. I am a small donor, but the amount is really not relevant for this discussion. If Furman decided to drop Football, the University and the Athletics Department would have received the last $ that they will EVER get from me. Do you think I'm alone in that opinion? I can assure you I am not and more than a few people that donate A LOT more than me feel exactly the same way. It's really that simple.

Also, your premise about how the start-up of Mercer Football was funded is, I believe, completely incorrect. The people who generously donated the funds to start Mercer Football were not going to donate that money to Mercer Basketball. Some of them may have donated to other major projects for the University instead of Football. They were inspired to donate to fund Football though. You may not have noticed, but Football is kind of a big deal on College Campuses in the Southeast and in Georgia, particularly.

False premises pretty much always lead to false conclusions.

Please be a “big” donor and not a “small” donor. I don’t mean relative to other donors. I mean relative to your ability and desire to support college athletics and relative to what amounts, if any, that you donate to other schools. Furman needs your support at any level. We need your continuing input on UFFP. Thank you for ALL of your contributions.