The Unravelling of College Football Starts With All These Empty Stadiums

[GGGG]

Let the greedy die.

So were Marquette and the other C7 schools "greedy" when they left the OBE?  Xavier, Butler and Creighton?

[brandx]

So were Marquette and the other C7 schools "greedy" when they left the OBE?  Xavier, Butler and Creighton?

There is a big difference between greed and survival.

From 2010 - 2013, driven by the football money tree greed, many Big East schools announced their departures. It was ONLY after this that the 7 schools that didn't sponsor football in D1 announced that they were leaving the conference..

[Tugg Speedman]

Bottom line ... other than the championship game (which is Monday) bowl game attendance is awful but TV ratings are good.  ESPN/ABC/Disney airs all but 4 of the 41 games.  ESPN Events actually runs 13 of the bowl games.

An idea of where this is going ... ESPN creates a few "football studios" in Orlando.  These are football fields specially designed for broadcasting games and have high school like stands for a few thousand.  All the games are played in an assembly line type of schedule and whoever is at Disneyworld in December/January can go to Epcot or these games.

Why TV networks are paying more to cover football games while attendance shrinks
Published: Jan 6, 2017 5:12 a.m. ET
By JASON NOTTE

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-tv-networks-are-paying-more-to-cover-football-games-while-attendance-shrinks-2017-01-06

We’ve just finished college football’s bowl season, and if its 41 bowl games have taught us nothing else, it’s that stadium attendance and quality opponents aren’t always prerequisites to a successful bowl game.

Consider the St. Petersburg Bowl (formerly the Beef O’Brady’s Bowl) that took place at 11 a.m. Eastern in St. Petersburg, Fla., on the Monday after Christmas. The setting was Tropicana Field, a baseball stadium that holds more than 40,000 fans. The game drew only 15,717 attendees and ended with 6-7 losing records for both Mississippi State and Miami of Ohio.

However, it garnered 2.045 million viewers for ESPN, which is close to what Comcast’s CMCSA, +0.40%  NBC managed for a rerun of “Hairspray Live” (2.45 million viewers) that night. Yes, a terrible bowl game that started at 8 a.m. on the West Coast put in a better prime-time performance than network shows that actually aired in prime time.

Of this year’s 41 bowl games, just four aren’t aired by ESPN, ABC or one of the associated networks in the Disney family. ESPN has the rights to so many bowls that its Charlotte-based offshoot, ESPN Events, outright runs 13 of them. Those 13 bowls average just shy of 2.07 million viewers per broadcast, but just 30,130 attendees per event.

 Jesse Lawrence, chief executive of ticket-resale and analysis site TicketIQ, points out that with the exception of the college football playoffs, championship game and occasional first-tier bowl game (such as the Rose Bowl or Orange Bowl), demand for bowl-game tickets is plummeting. The majority (21) of this year’s bowls had an average ticket price of $100 or less on ticket-resale sites. Ticket sellers were letting fans in the door of at least seven bowl games for $10 or less.

[GGGG]

There is a big difference between greed and survival.

From 2010 - 2013, driven by the football money tree greed, many Big East schools announced their departures. It was ONLY after this that the 7 schools that didn't sponsor football in D1 announced that they were leaving the conference..

The C7 would have survived just fine in the AAC.  They left the conference for a more lucrative TV deal.

It just depends on what side you are on how you view these things.  Pitt and Syracuse would have been dumb to stay in the BE.  They are in much better positions than UConn now is.  It's not "greed."  It's a smart business move.

[dgies9156]

I do think the lingering effects of the cost of higher education is going to have a negative impact on giving 20-30 years from now.

I've donated to Marquette for years and have been happy to do it.

It isn't the result of athletics, but the result of an educational commitment and philosophy that permeated the university in the 1970s and 1980s.

As to the question of younger alumni supporting the university in the future, it isn't just the young and it a long-term concern. It's here and now. As a donor, the question that has troubled me for some time is whether I am supporting  through my gift someone who could not afford Marquette or am I supporting Marquette's ability to raise tuition costs? The increase in the cost of education is WAY out of  proportion to any inflationary index in the past 40 years and shows no sign of stopping.

Candidly, Marquette was a tremendous influence on me and even now, almost 40 years later, I couldn't imagine having gone anywhere else. But the cost of Marquette today makes it out of reach for many middle and working class families. And, leaving someone $100,000 or more in debt for an education in which the starting salary out of college is $30,000 is, at best, bizarre.

[vogue65]

I've donated to Marquette for years and have been happy to do it.

It isn't the result of athletics, but the result of an educational commitment and philosophy that permeated the university in the 1970s and 1980s.

As to the question of younger alumni supporting the university in the future, it isn't just the young and it a long-term concern. It's here and now. As a donor, the question that has troubled me for some time is whether I am supporting  through my gift someone who could not afford Marquette or am I supporting Marquette's ability to raise tuition costs? The increase in the cost of education is WAY out of  proportion to any inflationary index in the past 40 years and shows no sign of stopping.

Candidly, Marquette was a tremendous influence on me and even now, almost 40 years later, I couldn't imagine having gone anywhere else. But the cost of Marquette today makes it out of reach for many middle and working class families. And, leaving someone $100,000 or more in debt for an education in which the starting salary out of college is $30,000 is, at best, bizarre.

Well said, I  favor the Jesuit home and missions as well as my high school brothers.   I  could never have afforded college if it were not for the blue collar, working class, culture at Marquette in the 60's. 

The tuition was substantially below east coast institutions and the opportunity for work in Milwaukee,  while a student, was very good.  I'm proud that I  worked as a night shift spray painter at Allis Chalmers, a moving man for Boulevard Mayflower, and at the Jesuit refectory, among many jobs.  Kids today won't cut grass, shovel snow, or carry a golf bag, I  get it.  Now for the hate mail, oh well, it is what it is.

But this is 2017 and the young people are looking for a tourist experience at college.  Fun and games for all, posh living accommodations, and a marketable skill set.   To be competitive we need Olympic sports and even crew, please.

[brandx]

The C7 would have survived just fine in the AAC.  They left the conference for a more lucrative TV deal.

It just depends on what side you are on how you view these things.  Pitt and Syracuse would have been dumb to stay in the BE.  They are in much better positions than UConn now is.  It's not "greed."  It's a smart business move.

Of course it is. So is cutting wages and benefits arbitrarily. Would you be defending those as well.

I realize this is moving the goalposts and that's not my point here. Just comparing greed and survival.

[dgies9156]

But this is 2017 and the young people are looking for a tourist experience at college.  Fun and games for all, posh living accommodations, and a marketable skill set.   To be competitive we need Olympic sports and even crew, please.

Very well said. When my children looked at colleges, my daughter saw Iowa State and Iowa. The amount of money both poured into recreational facilities, a stadium sized HD television overlooking a hot tub. Give me a break.

I lived in McCormick and Tower. College was what you made of it. It wasn't about excellent food (for God's sake, we had Saga and el rauncho) but we endured because we were getting something more important than the same accouterments my parents had in their home. We received an education, made relationships, explored and met people from worlds we had never experienced before and, for many, probably haven't since. We were blistered by Dr. Beach ("I'm dictating... it would behoove you to take a note"); intentionally misgraded by Professor ____, in hopes we would discover it and advocate; and, sat through endless boring lectures that may have meant nothing at the time but somehow stuck with us and mean something significant today.

That is what Marquette was about. And, it was affordable.

[Tugg Speedman]

Very well said. When my children looked at colleges, my daughter saw Iowa State and Iowa. The amount of money both poured into recreational facilities, a stadium sized HD television overlooking a hot tub. Give me a break.

I lived in McCormick and Tower. College was what you made of it. It wasn't about excellent food (for God's sake, we had Saga and el rauncho) but we endured because we were getting something more important than the same accouterments my parents had in their home. We received an education, made relationships, explored and met people from worlds we had never experienced before and, for many, probably haven't since. We were blistered by Dr. Beach ("I'm dictating... it would behoove you to take a note"); intentionally misgraded by Professor ____, in hopes we would discover it and advocate; and, sat through endless boring lectures that may have meant nothing at the time but somehow stuck with us and mean something significant today.

That is what Marquette was about. And, it was affordable.

Curmudgeon

[dgies9156]

Curmudgeon

My children would agree with you!

The people who work for me probably would agree with you.

My wife most certainly would agree with you!

[GGGG]

I have said this before, but colleges and universities COULD try to take the "value" approach.  Bare bones residence halls, small student fees with no athletics, limited course of studies options, etc.

The problem is that the marketplace hasn't supported that model. 

[manny31]

I think many of these issues will be resolved fairly shortly. Cheap money is one key aspect that has allowed these situations to exist. Interest rates are going up and carrying 100k in student debt isn't so easy to service any longer.

[MUBurrow]

On the one hand, I wholeheartedly agree that spending is out of control for things that don't enhance the level of education - including athletics, residence halls, etc.  Those costs, in turn, are passed on to students who, with the aid of ultra-available federal financing, haven't blinked at paying the bills that are rising at an unsustainable level. But I also think that simply explaining this as "Blergh, students today want a vacation! In my day, college looked like the soviet bloc and I worked three jobs!" is an unsympathetic and lazy analysis of the situation, and one that's going to lead to perilous macroeconomic results down the road.

Today's economy absolutely requires post-high school education to obtain middle class income. So the moment they graduate high school, kids know they're going to have spend money they don't have. To make up that gap, student loans are readily available (but already aren't that cheap - 4.29% for undergrads last year, which is not particularly cheap money in this economy).  The basically inelastic demand for the highest quality education possible, coupled with the availability of financing, has totally removed any incentive for colleges to pay any attention to their own spending.

If you're a graduating senior, and the entire US World & News report Top 200 has built a bunch of crap you don't want, and is now charging you 10% more than 3 years ago to pay for it, are you supposed to not go there? Then you drop down to #s 200-400 in the rankings, who have all increased their tuition 8% in the past 3 years, and don't have the alumni networks and job opportunities of 1-200 - so though a bit cheaper now, is that a better investment? Point being, a majority of students taking out these college loans aren't doing it without considering the economics, and to simply attribute them en masse to the vanity and laziness of an entire generation doesn't really tell the story.

[forgetful]

I have said this before, but colleges and universities COULD try to take the "value" approach.  Bare bones residence halls, small student fees with no athletics, limited course of studies options, etc.

The problem is that the marketplace hasn't supported that model.

The problem is initial startup costs and getting elite students to buy into such a model.

[Tugg Speedman]

Part 4 ....

Football Is Forever: The Money-Losing Drug These Schools Can’t Quit
Clear eyes, full hearts, can’t let go.
by Eben Novy-Williams  January 6, 2017, 4:00 AM CST

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-01-06/football-is-forever-the-money-losing-drug-these-schools-can-t-quit

Quite possibly forever. Once a school fields a top-division football team, it’s nearly impossible to reverse the commitment. UMass is one of 10 schools to join the FBS since 2009, and most are struggling financially. In theory, they have alternatives—drop down to the Football Championship Subdivision (FCS), known until 2006 as Division I-AA, or cut football entirely. Neither is a panacea, as the University of Idaho and the University of Alabama at Birmingham are learning.

On December 2, 2014, UAB president Ray Watts told Blazers football players and coaches that football no longer made financial sense for the school. The program was ending. The meeting started off tense and went downhill. Players cried, pleaded and insulted Watts, telling him this would be the worst decision of his life. Some walked out, and eventually Watts did the same. After he made a public statement, Watts faced an angry mob outside the stadium. A police escort accompanied him to his car.

[Tugg Speedman]

Part 5 ...

College Football Teams Are Risky and Expensive—and Schools Keep Adding Them
Universities still think the sport’s benefits outweigh the costs.
by Eben Novy-Williams
January 6, 2017, 11:00 AM CST

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-01-06/college-football-teams-are-risky-and-expensive-and-schools-keep-adding-them

At many schools, the costs of football are starting to challenge the benefits. It’s expensive, it doesn’t always make money, many academic faculty resent it, and the ongoing debate over health risks and players’ labor rights put universities in an awkward position.

Taken together, football could look like the kind of hassle a university president might try to avoid.

Yet few do. In the past eight years, 57 colleges and universities have started an NCAA football program. The University of Alabama, at Birmingham, restored its team to the Football Bowl Subdivision. Another 11 joined the Football Championship Subdivision (formerly known as Division I-AA), and the rest are competing at lower levels—Divisions II or III. For all but UAB, there’s little money to be made from TV or ticket sales.

In the past decade, annual football expenses at a typical FCS school have increased from less than $2 million to $3.5 million. In the same period, revenue has expanded from $430,000 to $1 million. Middle-of-the-road FCS programs—a division that includes University of Maine, Colgate, Portland State—are losing millions on football altogether.

In spite of all this, East Tennessee State University still decided to add football in 2015. The team costs about $4 million to field, one-quarter of the overall department budget. Encouraged by the school’s president, students approved a $125 fee that would cover $2.8 million of the football team’s costs. “That was the only way we could do it,” said Richard Sander, originally a consultant on the football revival and later hired as the school’s athletic director.

[GGGG]

Part 4 ....

Football Is Forever: The Money-Losing Drug These Schools Can’t Quit
Clear eyes, full hearts, can’t let go.
by Eben Novy-Williams  January 6, 2017, 4:00 AM CST

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-01-06/football-is-forever-the-money-losing-drug-these-schools-can-t-quit

Quite possibly forever. Once a school fields a top-division football team, it’s nearly impossible to reverse the commitment. UMass is one of 10 schools to join the FBS since 2009, and most are struggling financially. In theory, they have alternatives—drop down to the Football Championship Subdivision (FCS), known until 2006 as Division I-AA, or cut football entirely. Neither is a panacea, as the University of Idaho and the University of Alabama at Birmingham are learning.

On December 2, 2014, UAB president Ray Watts told Blazers football players and coaches that football no longer made financial sense for the school. The program was ending. The meeting started off tense and went downhill. Players cried, pleaded and insulted Watts, telling him this would be the worst decision of his life. Some walked out, and eventually Watts did the same. After he made a public statement, Watts faced an angry mob outside the stadium. A police escort accompanied him to his car.

I do believe Idaho is dropping back down to FCS after years of futility at the FBS level.  They had been playing in the WAC, but that conference dropped football.  They then joined, along with NMSU, the Sun Belt as football only members.  However they were booted from that conference.  They are going to become a full sports member of the Big Sky - they conference they left when they decided to join FBS and where they have their non-football sports curently.

I believe New Mexico State is going to be an FBS independent.