• 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!

Hofstra is dropping football

I've seen the stats, although I can't come up with them now, but Boise's market is four or five times the size of Missoula's -- and there's simply more money there than, perhaps, in all of Montana. There's no way Montana can support two MAJOR athletic programs and, no matter what others say, I am convinced the board of regents would never let UM move up without our Bobcat buddies.
 
And greater New York City was unable to support Hofstra Football? Are you guys hearing yourselves? I don't think economies of scale or population were the deciding factors for Hofstra. Yeah, it's in Hempstead, but that's basically New York, with no major college football team across the street stealing away fans. And it didn't make it.

Regardless, I'm sadened to see Hofstra fold. I Remember Montana playing them in the early 1990s when they weren't even I-AA. They were the Hofstra Flying Dutchmen. That was before the PC police got ahold of them and they became the Pride.
Their former coach, Joe Gardi used to tell this story about playing in Washington Griz and how raucous the crowd was, and how they were right on top of the visiting team. It was 1992 and Hofstra was in Missoula for an odd non-conference game one week before the end of the regular season. The Griz were on a four game win streak after losing just as many in a row. Gardi's club was on its way to a 50-6 loss. The Griz defense was kicking Hofstra's ass. Gardi had a lineman who kept getting whistled for false starts, so the coach shouted over his shoulder to a backup lineman to get in the game and do something.
As the coach recounted the story to the Missoulian during a return trip several years later, the fans were so loud the backup lineman couldn't hear him. When Gardi turned to get the players attention, he noticed that some Griz fan was resting a beer on the lineman's shoulder pads!!

RIP Dutchmen.
 
I do not think some of you who are talking about the money realize that by being in the FBS, you will have tons more national exposure which brings in $$$$. Why do you think schools like Boise St, Nevada, Hawaii, Tulsa, Ball State, Buffalo all play so many games on Tues/Wed/Thurs/Fri nights? Simple, they have a primetime, national audience (helps recruiting) and they get big time bucks. While those may not be ideal to fans who are accustomed to Saturday's at WaGriz, the money generated is well worth it.

In addition to that, the added revenue from bowl games is huge. I do not know if the WAC splits all the revenue amongst the schools (such as the ACC) but the WAC bowl tie-ins payout like this:

New Mexico Bowl: $750,000
Hawaii Bowl: $398,000
Humanitarian Bowl: $750,000

Possible BCS bowl: $17,000,000
 
And, even once there were lights installed (which is another big expense), I wonder just how many people would travel from the far points of Montana to a Tuesday or Wednesday night game? Not many, I fear, and you do need to remember that a large chunk of UM's fans are not here in Missoula.
 
jagur1 said:
griz5700 said:
I think the move up crowd falls into two categories, young and old. It seems that all my friends and everyone I talk to my age (mid 20's) thinks UM can compete at a higher level and are willing to fight through the growing pains. While the older crowd doesn't want to see the program take that dip and fall into mediocrity while they are in their golden years. This is obviously a broad generalization but something I have noticed.

Hmm that was random.


Silvertip is older than Mt Sentinel, and I think he's the biggest Ahole move up guy. Not all move up guys/gals are Aholes.

So, Jaguar the "biggest Ahole move up guy" eh? Based on what? You apparently are aware of my position on abandoning this leaking ship we call the BSC/FCS, but you didn't bother to share your own learned opinion of why college football's Holy Grail resides in Chattanooga. Do you have one? As the saying goes, Sonny (being as old as Mt Sentinel I can get away with that) Put up or shut up!
 
Sorry to see this happen to any program. Even more amazing is it takes something like this to get some of you to realize why the GRIZ need to consider other options.

Myself and a few others have been trying to get people to see this as a possibility of happening to BSC programs sooner than later. Reality is much nearer now, and time for weighing all options now. I hope this gets us all to realize the importance of supporting our GRIZ through thick and thin.
 
'68griz said:
And, even once there were lights installed (which is another big expense), I wonder just how many people would travel from the far points of Montana to a Tuesday or Wednesday night game? Not many, I fear, and you do need to remember that a large chunk of UM's fans are not here in Missoula.


Well, 75% of UM's stadium capacity is made up of season ticket holders, so a slight drop in attendance for one game wouldn't mean much loss of $. I think such a Thursday night game would have an atmosphere similar to a first or second round playoff game. It might not be full capacity, but probably the loudest and most electric atmosphere of the season. It's obvious that Griz fans are thirsty for national exposure and recognition. They show quick highlights of the Griz on sportscenter and six threads pop up on egriz, for pete's sake.
 
GD, two things:
1) You mention Thursday night, and I think that would be different than Tuesday or Wednesday. People might be able to fit in a three-day weekend, say, once a year. But, Tuesdays and Wednesdays don't lend themselves to that kind of decrease in the work week to allow travel to the game.
2) Yes, 75% of UM's stadium may well be made up of season ticket holders, but, as I said previously, a goodly chunk of those season ticket holders are not from Missoula. I'm only guessing, of course, but I could foresee X number of those season ticket holders opting NOT to get season tickets anymore if it meant they'd always have to miss a game, because it was scheduled in the middle of the week.
I don't know. I'm not a fan of moving up, although I believe it probably is inevitable in the near future and that it would be a good idea for UM to be prepared for that. For now, I just think UM has a good thing going, and I see no reason to mess with it. JMO.
 
DiscoGriz said:
Let me guess your not originaly from MT are you.griz 57
I bet many UM grads and supporters are originally from Montana..what difference does that Make? Are you hinting that one has to be "originally from Montana" to want to see UM a national power, no matter the level?
 
Hmm, I wonder what this will do to CAA at-larges in the future? The top teams will now have to play each other more often instead of just beating up on the cellar-dwellers and they could end up with less impressive records.
 
Interesting take on Hofstra and Northeastern dropping football from a guy who writes exclusively about northeast football:
http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2009/12/northeast-football-endangered-species.html

Just a snippet:
It's amazing to me how presidents cite the same, old, tired reasons for dropping football: expenses, lack of support, blah blah blah, sometimes with a little Title IX thrown in for balance.

When you boil down to it, though, they are all just pathetic excuses. Both Hofstra and Northeastern are big enough to support football, and could sponsor it if they wanted to - if not in a CAA that threatens to stretch from Orono, Maine to Georgia, in a Patriot League that is in a much smaller geographic area. But the truth is their presidents just didn't want football, and let it die. It didn't matter that they were in the best FCS conference there is right now: they just didn't want it. Period.
 
First Northeastern, now Hofstra. If about 20 more teams drop football it will help take care of that "east coast bias."
 
Griz Growler said:
garizzalies said:
Idaho is more convenient b/c its more realistic. Missoula is more akin to Moscow than Boise. Our market looks more like those that have failed (see ReMax's post) than those that have thrived. Reno, Fresno, Boise are big markets. Missoula, Moscow, Laramie are not. The average 18yro stud has probably heard of the formers and not the latters. People assume we could consistently win but i think we would be at a huge disadvantage due to our small market. Name me one "small" market school that consistently wins at the FBS level. There probably is one or two but they are the exception, not the norm.
Boise is not that bigger of a market than Missoula, I don't think. Boise has a population of like 300,000 I'm guessing. Missoula is like 100,000 with surrounding areas i.e. Frenchtown, Bonner, Lolo, etc.
You're right, you are guessing. The Boise metropolitan area has a pop. of just under 600,000. In normal math that is 6 times greater than Missoula area.
 
GrizLA said:
DiscoGriz said:
Let me guess your not originaly from MT are you.griz 57
I bet many UM grads and supporters are originally from Montana..what difference does that Make? Are you hinting that one has to be "originally from Montana" to want to see UM a national power, no matter the level?
No, what i am saying is the people that are not originally from mt are for the move up.UM will never be a national power in the fbs.
 
DoubleNicks said:
Hmm, I wonder what this will do to CAA at-larges in the future? The top teams will now have to play each other more often instead of just beating up on the cellar-dwellers and they could end up with less impressive records.


Old Dominion is joining the CAA in 2011 and Georgia State in 2012.
 
garizzalies said:
Idaho is more convenient b/c its more realistic. Missoula is more akin to Moscow than Boise. Our market looks more like those that have failed (see ReMax's post) than those that have thrived. Reno, Fresno, Boise are big markets. Missoula, Moscow, Laramie are not. The average 18yro stud has probably heard of the formers and not the latters. People assume we could consistently win but i think we would be at a huge disadvantage due to our small market. Name me one "small" market school that consistently wins at the FBS level. There probably is one or two but they are the exception, not the norm.

This Boise vs. Missoula argument as a basis for measuring fan support needs to be put to rest. I don't know how wide of an area the Broncos draw from but I've sat in WaGriz next to people from Plentywood, Sidney, Spokane and Salmon - and that represents a huge geographical footprint with a total base population in excess of well over a million people. The UM athletic department stated a few years back that 60% of season ticket holders come from outside the Missoula metro area. The Griz are far more than Missoula's or even just Montana's team.
 
Re/MaxGriz said:
Noles & Griz said:
Idaho is a more convenient answer for the people who do not want to move up, they'd rather ignore the possibilities of success. That is unless those who do not want to move up think the Montana athletic department is as poor as Idaho's and will not do what it takes to be successful.

While I usually stay on the sideline with this discussion it should be pointed out that I believe Boise runs an athletic budget that's about $11,000,000 higher than the UMs. Where would we make up those costs to be at that level?

Adding more sports won't, most added sports will probably not increase revenues but decrease it.

Moving up is probably something that will have to be done at some point, but just to say, "Hey look, Boise can do it!" isn't telling the whole story. Boise did it b/c they had the financial ability to do so. We could aslo point out that Idaho, W. Kentucky, and Marshall to name a few have really had very limited success if any at all at the next level.

In addition to the additional revenue from bowl games, being in the WAC also gives more money from the NCAA tournaments in all sports as they consistently put more than 1 team in almost all NCAA sanctioned tournaments, where as the BSC usually only has 1.

Western Kentucky is a bad example, as they are only in year 2 of being in FBS, Marshall has absolutely had success in FBS, having been to several bowl games since the move up and have won at least 2-3 conference championships. In addition to that, they are on the Big East "shortlist" for potential additions to the conference.
 
Noles & Griz said:
Re/MaxGriz said:
While I usually stay on the sideline with this discussion it should be pointed out that I believe Boise runs an athletic budget that's about $11,000,000 higher than the UMs. Where would we make up those costs to be at that level?

Adding more sports won't, most added sports will probably not increase revenues but decrease it.

Moving up is probably something that will have to be done at some point, but just to say, "Hey look, Boise can do it!" isn't telling the whole story. Boise did it b/c they had the financial ability to do so. We could aslo point out that Idaho, W. Kentucky, and Marshall to name a few have really had very limited success if any at all at the next level.

In addition to the additional revenue from bowl games, being in the WAC also gives more money from the NCAA tournaments in all sports as they consistently put more than 1 team in almost all NCAA sanctioned tournaments, where as the BSC usually only has 1.

Western Kentucky is a bad example, as they are only in year 2 of being in FBS, Marshall has absolutely had success in FBS, having been to several bowl games since the move up and have won at least 2-3 conference championships. In addition to that, they are on the Big East "shortlist" for potential additions to the conference.

Have you looked into Marshall this year. Dead in the water. 2/3 attendance, need a new coach, Once the Mo stops in Marshall it will take years to get it going again if ever. IMO they tried and gave it a good run buy in the end they failed and aren't going to make it.
 
Silvertip said:
garizzalies said:
Idaho is more convenient b/c its more realistic. Missoula is more akin to Moscow than Boise. Our market looks more like those that have failed (see ReMax's post) than those that have thrived. Reno, Fresno, Boise are big markets. Missoula, Moscow, Laramie are not. The average 18yro stud has probably heard of the formers and not the latters. People assume we could consistently win but i think we would be at a huge disadvantage due to our small market. Name me one "small" market school that consistently wins at the FBS level. There probably is one or two but they are the exception, not the norm.

This Boise vs. Missoula argument as a basis for measuring fan support needs to be put to rest. I don't know how wide of an area the Broncos draw from but I've sat in WaGriz next to people from Plentywood, Sidney, Spokane and Salmon - and that represents a huge geographical footprint with a total base population in excess of well over a million people. The UM athletic department stated a few years back that 60% of season ticket holders come from outside the Missoula metro area. The Griz are far more than Missoula's or even just Montana's team.

In addition to that, I'd like to throw out there BCS conference schools such as Iowa State (Ames metro area has 86,000 people) or Oregon State (Corvallis area has 76,000 people) or Washington State (Pullman has 27,000 people). These are just a few examples of smaller areas that have high profile, successful athletic programs. The population of Missoula is a terrible argument.
 
Back
Top