Grizzlies1982 said:
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Email from O'Day about the WAC, BSC & More.
- Thread starter Potomac Griz
- Start date
Grizzlies1982 said:
Reread the email:
"We are NOT guaranteed home playoff games. We have been extremely fortunate in the past. To put in perspective, we made about $100,000 for the three home playoff games last year – and sent another $1.1 million to the NCAA. A regular season home game nets between $400,000 and $1 million (Montana State, App State, etc.). Being in the WAC, we are allowed 12 games instead of 11 – and 13 when you play at Hawaii. So instead of $100,000 at max, we would be seeing additional dollars… at a minimum of $300,000."
It really baffles me that O'Day pretty much spelled out a large amount of what is going on within Griz athletics, yet so may continue to post without actually understanding its contents.
billings_poke
Well-known member
Interesting that the WAC and MWC have been encouraged to not schedule any FCS games according to Oday.
I must confess I have not seen that in the conference future schedules. I know Wyo and Air Force both want to start the season with an FCS team. Now Fresno and others try to not schedule FCS if they can avoid them. But the MWC has talked about going to a 9 game conference season when Nevada and Fresno join so that will reduce OOC to 3 games instead of 4.
Watch the Big 10 with its new 12 team schedule and how the Big 12 handles a 10 team conference to see how it will impact FCS games. If they both go to 9 games there will be fewer FCS/FBS games and Western FCS teams relying on that revenue will be scrambling.
It was a good article and points to some data that was new to me and new to the griz fans I showed it to at work.
I must confess I have not seen that in the conference future schedules. I know Wyo and Air Force both want to start the season with an FCS team. Now Fresno and others try to not schedule FCS if they can avoid them. But the MWC has talked about going to a 9 game conference season when Nevada and Fresno join so that will reduce OOC to 3 games instead of 4.
Watch the Big 10 with its new 12 team schedule and how the Big 12 handles a 10 team conference to see how it will impact FCS games. If they both go to 9 games there will be fewer FCS/FBS games and Western FCS teams relying on that revenue will be scrambling.
It was a good article and points to some data that was new to me and new to the griz fans I showed it to at work.
Grizzlies1982
Well-known member
Dexter & GoFor2, Yes we don't have any home playoff game guaranteed. Nor do we have any bowl bid. We have to win to get either. Reg. season home games generate far more money because we keep ALL the ticket sales vs. only keeping a portion of sales from the NCAA's playoff games. We have travel expense and get $0 ticket sales on the Championship game. Yet is playing in one worth it to you?
O'Day glosses over some facts on the "fun" of bowl games. About 1/4th to 1/3rd the schools attending bowl games LOSE money doing so. The lesser bowls require the schools to guarantee the bowl committee payments before they'll even invite their teams.
Yes, there are pros & cons everywhere you look. If we estimate on the high side, an additional regular season home game and no National Championship game may result in $750,000 extra for O'Day's budget. Yet I'm still not seeing where O'Day found the several million more needed each and every year. Flame me if you want, but calculate how much in additional revenue O'Day has identified. Then make your best guess how much of that remains without Boise, Fresno & Nevada. Let me know if you find it is an extra $5 million per year. If so I will apologize for my ignorance. :ugeek:
O'Day glosses over some facts on the "fun" of bowl games. About 1/4th to 1/3rd the schools attending bowl games LOSE money doing so. The lesser bowls require the schools to guarantee the bowl committee payments before they'll even invite their teams.
Yes, there are pros & cons everywhere you look. If we estimate on the high side, an additional regular season home game and no National Championship game may result in $750,000 extra for O'Day's budget. Yet I'm still not seeing where O'Day found the several million more needed each and every year. Flame me if you want, but calculate how much in additional revenue O'Day has identified. Then make your best guess how much of that remains without Boise, Fresno & Nevada. Let me know if you find it is an extra $5 million per year. If so I will apologize for my ignorance. :ugeek:
O'Day's just being a bit of an alarmist. He's overstating and exaggerating some things. By the way, I believe the playoff loss is $400,000, which is about what it's been in previous years. That is not a "ton" of money by ncaa standards. The playoffs are not in danger. Revenues are not "capped" at $13 milion. UM could increase revenues in various way, probably including student fees if done properly. He is overstating the Title IX risk. It is not really true that football breaks even, as for this calculation, he loads in a bunch of adminstrative and overhead costs (which are really not football expenses). I'm not aware that other schools do this, and there is no way that football costs $6.5 million. We may not be "guaranteed" home playoff games, but the fact is that UM has averaged about 8.5 home games in the past 10 or so years.
UM "lost" money going to Chatty because UM took way more than the allotted people. The athletic dept made the decision to take those extra people, and I have no problem with that. But don't claim that it's some big loss that couldn't have been avoided. I call BS to the statement that UM would have been in the MW now if it had gone to the WAC.
He's starting to do some marketing and spinning, as he has thought moving up might be a good idea for some time. He points out some of the budget issues, which are real, but they are small in comparison to the cost of moving up (and moving up in a way that would be competitive).
What he hasn't said is that it will cost UM multi-millions per year in additional annual operating budget to move up and many millions of additional facilties costs. And that at least some major donors are not supportive of moving up (especially to the WAC) and other business donors, especially not Missoula businesses, are not supportive of something that would significantly reduce the number of home games in Missoula. He's also not saying that the numbers show that the shortfall in revenues to costs for moving up is far greater than any shortfall that is occurring now. What should UM jump from a warm frying pan into the fire?
He's also not saying that the WAC is desperate, and fighting for it's survival.
He is admitting that the new president and board of regents, not the AD, will make this decision. O'Day is speaking for himself. He's not speaking for the decisionmakers.
UM "lost" money going to Chatty because UM took way more than the allotted people. The athletic dept made the decision to take those extra people, and I have no problem with that. But don't claim that it's some big loss that couldn't have been avoided. I call BS to the statement that UM would have been in the MW now if it had gone to the WAC.
He's starting to do some marketing and spinning, as he has thought moving up might be a good idea for some time. He points out some of the budget issues, which are real, but they are small in comparison to the cost of moving up (and moving up in a way that would be competitive).
What he hasn't said is that it will cost UM multi-millions per year in additional annual operating budget to move up and many millions of additional facilties costs. And that at least some major donors are not supportive of moving up (especially to the WAC) and other business donors, especially not Missoula businesses, are not supportive of something that would significantly reduce the number of home games in Missoula. He's also not saying that the numbers show that the shortfall in revenues to costs for moving up is far greater than any shortfall that is occurring now. What should UM jump from a warm frying pan into the fire?
He's also not saying that the WAC is desperate, and fighting for it's survival.
He is admitting that the new president and board of regents, not the AD, will make this decision. O'Day is speaking for himself. He's not speaking for the decisionmakers.
OrgonGriz
Well-known member
Powerful email by Jim for sure. I also find it intersting that this just happens to leak out days after the trip to Dallas and days before the new Pres takes over. Also it sounds as if some of the information from the study has been supplied to UM as per the quates from the facilty. I think UM has all the information it really needs and they are just wanting for the power to be to change guard. I see this as we need the WAC as much as they need us. Also that bullship on the BSC voting 8-1 in favor of home teams getting 60% tv moeny is *ucked up..
Grizzlies1982 said:
Don't you think Texas would bring a few more fans with them than Western State? This is a point I've tried to make before. I know it's simplistic and doesn't consider everything, but say Texas brings 16k peeps with them -> much higher demand for tickets -> more revenue via higher prices or, if feasible for other games, increased capacity.
Thanks for posting that email. I've listened to Jim speak twice in the last year and he said pretty much what was said in the email. I'm glad it was posted on here, because when I posted on here about the revenue numbers, I was told I was using fantasy math.
One thing I didn't see in the email, although I might have missed it is the fact that when I listened to Jim speak he talked about the "fee" to leave a conference. I can't remember the amount it was but it was several hundred grand. He talked about how many conferences are starting to pay that buy out fee to the conferences the team is leaving to get the team to come to their conference.
One thing I didn't see in the email, although I might have missed it is the fact that when I listened to Jim speak he talked about the "fee" to leave a conference. I can't remember the amount it was but it was several hundred grand. He talked about how many conferences are starting to pay that buy out fee to the conferences the team is leaving to get the team to come to their conference.
Blgs Griz Fan
Well-known member
I have never been a fan of moving up until now. This e mail shed a whole new light on the issue. I have a better understanding now of just how complicated the issue is and how carefully it is being considered.
George Ferguson
Well-known member
The e-mail was flat out incredible in its candor.
I'm one of the strong stay in the FCS guys, and having been a Griz fan since the early 1990's I do not understand why so may fans clamor for "We want national respect, national recognition, nobody respects the FCS". Who is nobody? and why do fans care what they think? I've yet to hear one Griz player or coach since 1991 actually say publicly that they don't like how that "nobody" doesn't respect them. If they don't care, why should the fans? other than ego and Boise State envy, i just don't get it.
Having said that, I've been assuming the day when Montana moves on from the Big Sky would come and it really does look like it's here now. I don't like the possible WAC that Montana is joining, but it is what it is. And there are some things in the near future I wonder if Griz Nation can handle, like NOT being bowl eligible for many years, and those home and away scenarios O'Day referred to still not being a reality for some time. I believe there will be a process to endure, it will not be "We are here now, so Texas or Michigan do a 2-for-1 with us starting in 2012 or 2013."
Boise's home schedule from 1996-2004 looked like this, including conference games: 96 (Cent. Mich, Portland State, Eastern Washington, Northwestern State, Utah State, North Texas); 97 (Northridge, Weber State, NMSU, L. Tech, Nevada); 98 (Northridge, Wazzu, Portland State, N. Texas, Weber, Utah State, Idaho); 99 (S. Utah, New Mexico, Eastern Washington, Nevada, Ark. State, NMSU), 2000 (N. Iowa, Eastern Washington, N. Texas, Utah State, Idaho); 2001 (Wazzu, UTEP, Tulsa, Nevada, S.J. State, C. Michigan); 2002 (Idaho, Utah State, Hawaii, Fresno St., Rice, La. Tech); 2003 (Idaho State, Wyoming, Tulsa, S.J. State, UTEP, Nevada). Finally, in 2004, Oregon State and BYU both came to Boise. In that time, the Broncos played money games at Arizona State, Wisconsin, UCLA, Arkansas twice, South Carolina, Oregon State and BYU, with only OSU and BYU making return trips to Boise in 2004 and 2007. And in all those nonconference road games, Boise lost. Point is, there was a process and a lot of growing pains for Boise, and I think people, especially in this era of bandwagon mentality i.e Boise and Gonzaga hoops, tend to forget those steps that were taken to get to the Fiesta Bowl wins, ect. My question has always been, will Griz fans endure those steps? O'Day asked the same in his e-mail. During those growing pains, and not being eligible for ANY bowl game, will UM be able to recruit the type of player needed to take the next step? Will they be able to win players they go head-to-head with Boise State or the Pac 10? People assume Matt Miller would have stayed if Montana was a DI? Why? Did he say publicly the competition Montana plays in the BSC wasn't good enough for him, or could it have been the team he chose to play for was better than MT and he actually wanted to be a Bronco, versus wanting to be a Griz but thinking he was too good for the FCS.
Like O'Day said, there is much to consider, but the sad reality is, while everyone who wants to move up says that better competition is the primary reason of the "fans", no one knows if that better competion will come in the form they think it will. How does anyone know if Montana will ever reach the point where Nebraska or USC would ever have it in their interest to schedule MT in a way that would get them to Wash/Griz. The answer is, we don't. The only thing fans know for sure is that San Jose State, Idaho, New Mexico State and Utah State, along with now Texas State and UT-SA will be the conference games. Does anyone REALLY believe with a straight face that the MAJORITY (not egriz) will care more about those games than they do the current rivals with EWU, MSU and Weber? Maybe 20 years from now when it's the norm, yes, but in the first 10, there's no way.
I'm one of the strong stay in the FCS guys, and having been a Griz fan since the early 1990's I do not understand why so may fans clamor for "We want national respect, national recognition, nobody respects the FCS". Who is nobody? and why do fans care what they think? I've yet to hear one Griz player or coach since 1991 actually say publicly that they don't like how that "nobody" doesn't respect them. If they don't care, why should the fans? other than ego and Boise State envy, i just don't get it.
Having said that, I've been assuming the day when Montana moves on from the Big Sky would come and it really does look like it's here now. I don't like the possible WAC that Montana is joining, but it is what it is. And there are some things in the near future I wonder if Griz Nation can handle, like NOT being bowl eligible for many years, and those home and away scenarios O'Day referred to still not being a reality for some time. I believe there will be a process to endure, it will not be "We are here now, so Texas or Michigan do a 2-for-1 with us starting in 2012 or 2013."
Boise's home schedule from 1996-2004 looked like this, including conference games: 96 (Cent. Mich, Portland State, Eastern Washington, Northwestern State, Utah State, North Texas); 97 (Northridge, Weber State, NMSU, L. Tech, Nevada); 98 (Northridge, Wazzu, Portland State, N. Texas, Weber, Utah State, Idaho); 99 (S. Utah, New Mexico, Eastern Washington, Nevada, Ark. State, NMSU), 2000 (N. Iowa, Eastern Washington, N. Texas, Utah State, Idaho); 2001 (Wazzu, UTEP, Tulsa, Nevada, S.J. State, C. Michigan); 2002 (Idaho, Utah State, Hawaii, Fresno St., Rice, La. Tech); 2003 (Idaho State, Wyoming, Tulsa, S.J. State, UTEP, Nevada). Finally, in 2004, Oregon State and BYU both came to Boise. In that time, the Broncos played money games at Arizona State, Wisconsin, UCLA, Arkansas twice, South Carolina, Oregon State and BYU, with only OSU and BYU making return trips to Boise in 2004 and 2007. And in all those nonconference road games, Boise lost. Point is, there was a process and a lot of growing pains for Boise, and I think people, especially in this era of bandwagon mentality i.e Boise and Gonzaga hoops, tend to forget those steps that were taken to get to the Fiesta Bowl wins, ect. My question has always been, will Griz fans endure those steps? O'Day asked the same in his e-mail. During those growing pains, and not being eligible for ANY bowl game, will UM be able to recruit the type of player needed to take the next step? Will they be able to win players they go head-to-head with Boise State or the Pac 10? People assume Matt Miller would have stayed if Montana was a DI? Why? Did he say publicly the competition Montana plays in the BSC wasn't good enough for him, or could it have been the team he chose to play for was better than MT and he actually wanted to be a Bronco, versus wanting to be a Griz but thinking he was too good for the FCS.
Like O'Day said, there is much to consider, but the sad reality is, while everyone who wants to move up says that better competition is the primary reason of the "fans", no one knows if that better competion will come in the form they think it will. How does anyone know if Montana will ever reach the point where Nebraska or USC would ever have it in their interest to schedule MT in a way that would get them to Wash/Griz. The answer is, we don't. The only thing fans know for sure is that San Jose State, Idaho, New Mexico State and Utah State, along with now Texas State and UT-SA will be the conference games. Does anyone REALLY believe with a straight face that the MAJORITY (not egriz) will care more about those games than they do the current rivals with EWU, MSU and Weber? Maybe 20 years from now when it's the norm, yes, but in the first 10, there's no way.
I have been waiting all afternoon for Player to put his spin on it. Glad he finally showed.
grizindabox said:
Did you think I hadn't already seen most of O'Day's email chain, hadn't seen other and different communication with O'Day since he came back from Texas, and hadn't communicated with him today? Jeez, I hope you don't think I'm a slacker, and not following the issue of the day.
