What If the Big Sky Dropped to D2 in Football?

[RationalGriz]

I think something like this would be dictated more by the overall landscape of College football than and individual school. For example, what if the fallout of Covid is the viability of only a handful of schools being able to maintain football at the FCS level and the remaining having to either drop to D2 or drop football. For those 4-5 schools, a big part of the decision would be dictated by either finding other schools that they could join to remain FCS or follow the others to remain viable.

Wow, so your scenario is 97% of all FCS teams drop down or drop football altogether? That's realistic.

This scenario is for BSC teams, so not 97% of FCS schools. I also just threw this out as a possible scenario.

[RationalGriz]

I think something like this would be dictated more by the overall landscape of College football than and individual school. For example, what if the fallout of Covid is the viability of only a handful of schools being able to maintain football at the FCS level and the remaining having to either drop to D2 or drop football. For those 4-5 schools, a big part of the decision would be dictated by either finding other schools that they could join to remain FCS or follow the others to remain viable.

I think the conversation then becomes what group of 5 teams are better off moving to FCS though. Because the same conversations are going to be had at that level. Teams like San Jose State, NMSU, New Mexico, UNLV, Nevada etc. could all be looking at dropping down and a new BSC could be formed.

The power 5 could very well decide the NCAA is no longer a necessary evil and make their own college athletics group. They could include the American as well. The group of 5 may see teams fold or want to drop down so maybe the remaining FCS teams form a new division with the group of 5 and have a real playoff format still. It will be very interesting to see what happens with college football in the next couple years.

And this could very well be a possible scenario. Point is, I am not sure anyone can say for certain what the fallout will be, and D2 is one of the possibilities, probably not a high percentage, but possible.

[coloradocat]

Is football really what is sinking college athletic department budgets or is it the one sport keeping them afloat? It seems like all the other sports that don't generate income would be the problem.

[RationalGriz]

Is football really what is sinking college athletic department budgets or is it the one sport keeping them afloat? It seems like all the other sports that don't generate income would be the problem.

Both could be correct depending on which schools you are looking at.

[PapaG]

hahahahahahaha

Oh man what a post. Sure let's do it. Goodbye Bobcat Stadium. Adios awesome football upgrades. See ya donors. Ta ta 16,000+ enrollment. Shall I go on?

See, this is about what I expected. Short-sightedness. What does the future hold?

Not D2 sports at MSU.

Not saying that bleedingblue is spot on by any means but all that he said has some possibility at least if we dropped down to D2. Thinking that we should drop down to D2 sounds more shortsighted than anything else I've read here. Papa maybe you should let us in on your long range vision and plan for MSU as a D2 school.
I don't know but it wouldn't surprise me that if you floated that idea past president Cruzado she'd verbally if not physically beat you to a pulp, or she might just laugh you out of her office similar to what 95% of BN will do with your suggestion. lol. lol. hahahahaha!

I asked a question about the future of the Big Sky Conference. There is no way the lesser programs are going to be able to fund their programs, and especially Title IX mandates, with no students on campus or fans in attendance. Mock all you want, it’s called brainstorming and I’m not advocating it other than to point out it’s a money-saver.

[PapaG]

If others in the Big Sky can't make it maybe they should looking at going DII.

That’s literally the topic of the thread.

I’ve also brought up other options such as moving up to FBS or a medium “G5” subdivision for UM, MSU, Idaho, NDSU, SDSU, and Weber State joining Utah State, Boise, and a few other western programs.

[PapaG]

Is football really what is sinking college athletic department budgets or is it the one sport keeping them afloat? It seems like all the other sports that don't generate income would be the problem.

This thread, in part, is about Title IX mandated scholarships to sports that don’t make money and how that plays out for struggling athletic departments in the Big Sky. Cut the football total from 63 to 36 and a lot of Title IX money losers go away in terms of scholarships. Have some of you never been in a boardroom to try and come up with ideas to improve a business?

[coloradocat]

Is football really what is sinking college athletic department budgets or is it the one sport keeping them afloat? It seems like all the other sports that don't generate income would be the problem.

This thread, in part, is about Title IX mandated scholarships to sports that don’t make money and how that plays out for struggling athletic departments in the Big Sky. Cut the football total from 63 to 36 and a lot of Title IX money losers go away in terms of scholarships. Have some of you never been in a boardroom to try and come up with ideas to improve a business?

Settle down pops. This is why nobody likes you. If you want ideas go read the first response to your opening comment. Also, this thread (like all the others) is about whatever the most recent comment is. You of all people should know that it doesn't take much for a thread to take on a life of it's own.

[iaafan]

If others in the Big Sky can't make it maybe they should looking at going DII.

That’s literally the topic of the thread.

I’ve also brought up other options such as moving up to FBS or a medium “G5” subdivision for UM, MSU, Idaho, NDSU, SDSU, and Weber State joining Utah State, Boise, and a few other western programs.

No, the topic is literally "What if the Big Sky Dropped to D2 in Football?" I highly doubt the Big Sky is going to drop to D2 football as a whole. The Big Sky and all conferences work closely with the presidents of their member schools and don't make any moves without their consent. The Big Sky as it is now composed for football will not be dropping down.

At a minimum, the president of MSU is NOT going to be any part of dropping down to D2. Period. Therefore, if others in the Big Sky can't make it maybe they should look at going DII.

[Cataholic]

Is football really what is sinking college athletic department budgets or is it the one sport keeping them afloat? It seems like all the other sports that don't generate income would be the problem.

This thread, in part, is about Title IX mandated scholarships to sports that don’t make money and how that plays out for struggling athletic departments in the Big Sky. Cut the football total from 63 to 36 and a lot of Title IX money losers go away in terms of scholarships. Have some of you never been in a boardroom to try and come up with ideas to improve a business?

Settle down pops. This is why nobody likes you. If you want ideas go read the first response to your opening comment. Also, this thread (like all the others) is about whatever the most recent comment is. You of all people should know that it doesn't take much for a thread to take on a life of it's own.

[CelticCat]

Short story, if the Big Sky drops down, MSU and UM find a new conference within minutes. I'd bet the MVFC would take both schools in a heartbeat and figure out the scheduling later.

Or we form a new conference with those poised to survive long term, which would be Weber, UC Davis, Poly, Idaho, maybe Sac State... not sure who else. Dixie State maybe.

[Montanabob]

Short story, if the Big Sky drops down, MSU and UM find a new conference within minutes. I'd bet the MVFC would take both schools in a heartbeat and figure out the scheduling later.

Or we form a new conference with those poised to survive long term, which would be Weber, UC Davis, Poly, Idaho, maybe Sac State... not sure who else. Dixie State maybe.

I wouldn't count on the Cali schools keeping football.

[onceacat]

I'm under the impression that 98% of FCS football programs lose money every single year.

Its like the old saying "If you just lose a little bit on each sale you can make it up in volume".

Other than a couple really lucky (good?) ones, athletics including Football & mens BB are giant money sucking vacuums. Which makes the whole thread kind of weird.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/file ... 180123.pdf

[allcat]

I'm under the impression that 98% of FCS football programs lose money every single year.

Its like the old saying "If you just lose a little bit on each sale you can make it up in volume".

Other than a couple really lucky (good?) ones, athletics including Football & mens BB are giant money sucking vacuums. Which makes the whole thread kind of weird.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/file ... 180123.pdf

You don't get to see the real books. It is govermental accounting. Explaning governmental accounting to average people is like a physicist explaining quantum mechanics.

[Cataholic]

I'm under the impression that 98% of FCS football programs lose money every single year.

Its like the old saying "If you just lose a little bit on each sale you can make it up in volume".

Other than a couple really lucky (good?) ones, athletics including Football & mens BB are giant money sucking vacuums. Which makes the whole thread kind of weird.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/file ... 180123.pdf

You don't get to see the real books. It is govermental accounting. Explaning governmental accounting to average people is like a physicist explaining quantum mechanics.

I have been wondering about this and hope someone can provide a description of the accounting. With my oldest in college, it seemed as though the scholarship process was very subjective. For example, Carrol advertises a $35,000 tuition, but the scholarship was significant bringing their cost closer to other Montana schools. Scholarships were also available with the other schools, but no where near the percentage of what Carrol offered. It seemed like a marketing ploy to make the school more attractive.

I wonder if schools benefit directly from the athletic programs in a similar manner. For example, if you have 65 scholarships with football, does the football program actually write a check for tuition to the school for those 65 kids? With FCS football, there is another 35 kids that pay their own fees (rough number not factoring in partials, etc). If that is the case, then the university actually benefits from the football program with 100 paid tuition fees. If you eliminate the program, the school would be hurt financially as they would lose 100 paid tuition fees. Is that how it works?

[allcat]

I'm under the impression that 98% of FCS football programs lose money every single year.

Its like the old saying "If you just lose a little bit on each sale you can make it up in volume".

Other than a couple really lucky (good?) ones, athletics including Football & mens BB are giant money sucking vacuums. Which makes the whole thread kind of weird.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/file ... 180123.pdf

You don't get to see the real books. It is govermental accounting. Explaning governmental accounting to average people is like a physicist explaining quantum mechanics.

I have been wondering about this and hope someone can provide a description of the accounting. With my oldest in college, it seemed as though the scholarship process was very subjective. For example, Carrol advertises a $35,000 tuition, but the scholarship was significant bringing their cost closer to other Montana schools. Scholarships were also available with the other schools, but no where near the percentage of what Carrol offered. It seemed like a marketing ploy to make the school more attractive.

I wonder if schools benefit directly from the athletic programs in a similar manner. For example, if you have 65 scholarships with football, does the football program actually write a check for tuition to the school for those 65 kids? With FCS football, there is another 35 kids that pay their own fees (rough number not factoring in partials, etc). If that is the case, then the university actually benefits from the football program with 100 paid tuition fees. If you eliminate the program, the school would be hurt financially as they would lose 100 paid tuition fees. Is that how it works?

It is actually called fund accounting. They do make athletics pay for the schooling, by taking money from one fund and putting it in another. They could have a fund called money we hide from everything else. You would never get to see this fund. They can say look at athletics, see how much it costs. You are already paying for teaching salaries, so the extra scholarship does not cost anymore. While Waded can see the whole picture, they will only show you what they want you to see. I wish I were a better writer to be able to describe this. The Carroll thing I know nothing about, they are not governmental and do have good sized endowments.

[onceacat]

I'm under the impression that 98% of FCS football programs lose money every single year.

Its like the old saying "If you just lose a little bit on each sale you can make it up in volume".

Other than a couple really lucky (good?) ones, athletics including Football & mens BB are giant money sucking vacuums. Which makes the whole thread kind of weird.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/file ... 180123.pdf

You don't get to see the real books. It is govermental accounting. Explaning governmental accounting to average people is like a physicist explaining quantum mechanics.

I have been wondering about this and hope someone can provide a description of the accounting. With my oldest in college, it seemed as though the scholarship process was very subjective. For example, Carrol advertises a $35,000 tuition, but the scholarship was significant bringing their cost closer to other Montana schools. Scholarships were also available with the other schools, but no where near the percentage of what Carrol offered. It seemed like a marketing ploy to make the school more attractive.

I wonder if schools benefit directly from the athletic programs in a similar manner. For example, if you have 65 scholarships with football, does the football program actually write a check for tuition to the school for those 65 kids? With FCS football, there is another 35 kids that pay their own fees (rough number not factoring in partials, etc). If that is the case, then the university actually benefits from the football program with 100 paid tuition fees. If you eliminate the program, the school would be hurt financially as they would lose 100 paid tuition fees. Is that how it works?

It is actually called fund accounting. They do make athletics pay for the schooling, by taking money from one fund and putting it in another. They could have a fund called money we hide from everything else. You would never get to see this fund. They can say look at athletics, see how much it costs. You are already paying for teaching salaries, so the extra scholarship does not cost anymore. While Waded can see the whole picture, they will only show you what they want you to see. I wish I were a better writer to be able to describe this. The Carroll thing I know nothing about, they are not governmental and do have good sized endowments.

You could convince me (pretty easily) that football at UM & MSU turn a profit & subsidize other sports. It passes the eye test.

Is there another program in the BSC that even comes close? I find it hard to believe that Idaho can even pay the power bills on the Kibbie dome at 6800 tickets per game.

I get that about University accounting. But it seems like a stretch to think football helps the P&L of many athletic departments. If I’m wrong, I’d love to know.

[allcat]

I'm under the impression that 98% of FCS football programs lose money every single year.

Its like the old saying "If you just lose a little bit on each sale you can make it up in volume".

Other than a couple really lucky (good?) ones, athletics including Football & mens BB are giant money sucking vacuums. Which makes the whole thread kind of weird.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/file ... 180123.pdf

You don't get to see the real books. It is govermental accounting. Explaning governmental accounting to average people is like a physicist explaining quantum mechanics.

I have been wondering about this and hope someone can provide a description of the accounting. With my oldest in college, it seemed as though the scholarship process was very subjective. For example, Carrol advertises a $35,000 tuition, but the scholarship was significant bringing their cost closer to other Montana schools. Scholarships were also available with the other schools, but no where near the percentage of what Carrol offered. It seemed like a marketing ploy to make the school more attractive.

I wonder if schools benefit directly from the athletic programs in a similar manner. For example, if you have 65 scholarships with football, does the football program actually write a check for tuition to the school for those 65 kids? With FCS football, there is another 35 kids that pay their own fees (rough number not factoring in partials, etc). If that is the case, then the university actually benefits from the football program with 100 paid tuition fees. If you eliminate the program, the school would be hurt financially as they would lose 100 paid tuition fees. Is that how it works?

It is actually called fund accounting. They do make athletics pay for the schooling, by taking money from one fund and putting it in another. They could have a fund called money we hide from everything else. You would never get to see this fund. They can say look at athletics, see how much it costs. You are already paying for teaching salaries, so the extra scholarship does not cost anymore. While Waded can see the whole picture, they will only show you what they want you to see. I wish I were a better writer to be able to describe this. The Carroll thing I know nothing about, they are not governmental and do have good sized endowments.

You could convince me (pretty easily) that football at UM & MSU turn a profit & subsidize other sports. It passes the eye test.

Is there another program in the BSC that even comes close? I find it hard to believe that Idaho can even pay the power bills on the Kibbie dome at 6800 tickets per game.

I get that about University accounting. But it seems like a stretch to think football helps the P&L of many athletic departments. If I’m wrong, I’d love to know.

You have to also think of sports as part of the advertising budget. How often do you see articles about really good academics. During the sports seasons you get multiple articles per week. This has really helped Waded to raise the money for the business school and engineering. Some people also will contribute to the endowment but never to athletics even though it was athletics that lead them to think about their contributions.

[CelticCat]

I'm under the impression that 98% of FCS football programs lose money every single year.

Its like the old saying "If you just lose a little bit on each sale you can make it up in volume".

Other than a couple really lucky (good?) ones, athletics including Football & mens BB are giant money sucking vacuums. Which makes the whole thread kind of weird.

https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/file ... 180123.pdf

You don't get to see the real books. It is govermental accounting. Explaning governmental accounting to average people is like a physicist explaining quantum mechanics.

I have been wondering about this and hope someone can provide a description of the accounting. With my oldest in college, it seemed as though the scholarship process was very subjective. For example, Carrol advertises a $35,000 tuition, but the scholarship was significant bringing their cost closer to other Montana schools. Scholarships were also available with the other schools, but no where near the percentage of what Carrol offered. It seemed like a marketing ploy to make the school more attractive.

I wonder if schools benefit directly from the athletic programs in a similar manner. For example, if you have 65 scholarships with football, does the football program actually write a check for tuition to the school for those 65 kids? With FCS football, there is another 35 kids that pay their own fees (rough number not factoring in partials, etc). If that is the case, then the university actually benefits from the football program with 100 paid tuition fees. If you eliminate the program, the school would be hurt financially as they would lose 100 paid tuition fees. Is that how it works?

It is actually called fund accounting. They do make athletics pay for the schooling, by taking money from one fund and putting it in another. They could have a fund called money we hide from everything else. You would never get to see this fund. They can say look at athletics, see how much it costs. You are already paying for teaching salaries, so the extra scholarship does not cost anymore. While Waded can see the whole picture, they will only show you what they want you to see. I wish I were a better writer to be able to describe this. The Carroll thing I know nothing about, they are not governmental and do have good sized endowments.

You could convince me (pretty easily) that football at UM & MSU turn a profit & subsidize other sports. It passes the eye test.

Is there another program in the BSC that even comes close? I find it hard to believe that Idaho can even pay the power bills on the Kibbie dome at 6800 tickets per game.

I get that about University accounting. But it seems like a stretch to think football helps the P&L of many athletic departments. If I’m wrong, I’d love to know.

You have to also think of sports as part of the advertising budget. How often do you see articles about really good academics. During the sports seasons you get multiple articles per week. This has really helped Waded to raise the money for the business school and engineering. Some people also will contribute to the endowment but never to athletics even though it was athletics that lead them to think about their contributions.

Unfortunately advertising is often the first thing to go in business when there is a budget issue, which is always short-sighted.

[Cat Grad]

...and what if the Power 5 schools went their own way and left all the podunk schools behind? One can only assume they'll take all the NCAA monies with them that they've been dividing (not equitably mind you) with those token mid-majors in that farce they call the NCAA Basketball Tournament...

That would be like watching Class AA, Class A, Class B and Class C. All the dots on a map community schools ten to thirty miles apart or like eastern Montana more than a few miles away in the same enrollment level... Really special to see a high school (like Baker) travel to another high school (like Eureka) for a damn quarterfinal playoff football game! It's really special to watch the AA basketball team buses, boys and girls, pass each other as they play the regular season...

BUT! Don't consolidate any of these damn schools out here. The communities will lose their identities without their high schools...