|
Post by fsohoya on Sept 23, 2011 14:44:18 GMT -5
These arguments get a little circular, because Georgetown is on record as supporting football but without scholarships (a mixture of finances and "cultural" impact). Could it change if schools must commit to I-A to maintain standing in college basketball? Perhaps, perhsps not. Maybe Georgetown will be comfortable exiting the main stage as other schools have done over the years. To Bando's points: 1. " I'm pretty sure DC public schools have better game facilites than we do." In a I-A scenario, Georgetown would not be on-campus but lease FedEx Field and/or the next generation Redskins stadium (aka the Dan Snyder Dome). This is the argument being fought up at Villanova--none of their I-A plans have them playing on campus. 2. " Do you have an extra billion dollars lying around you want to commit to this? Because Georgetown doesn't!" It's foolish to assume college football is a billion dollar investment, it's more like $10-12 million annually. 3. "Any football tradition we had is lost. Students watch real college football in their dorms on Saturdays, they don't go down to the MSF". Perhsps they'll same the same one day about the lost basketball tradition, too. While I don't argue for I-A, I understand the scenarios where the networks will restrict major television exposure to a limited number of schools which could leave Georgetown to some sort of ESPN5 broadcasts. 4. " The band tried to become a scramble band once, and athletics killed it. You need music scholarships if you want a marching band." Most I-A private schools which do not offer music scholarships, and more than a few public schools, too. A scramble band screams "We don't have talent and aren't afraid to say so." and schools are getting away from this. Only two D-IA schools (Rice and Stanford) use this, even Virginia dropped its excuse of a "scramble band" years ago. (You want to see a real Ivy band, watch Cornell.) 5. " 6,000 students on campus is not enough to support FBS football. But Tulsa is half Georgetown's size and maintains it, as do Rice, Wake Forest, Tulane, and Duke, while TCU (slightly larger, but fewer grad students) Stanford, SMU, and even BC are within range of Georgetown's enrollment. These schools rely on community support to maintain it, not a campus base. 6. "Say we do get 40,000 people a game to watch football (low by FBS standards). How exactly are they getting to campus, with our tens of parking spaces and no public transportation?" See #1. Bottom line, Georgetown is under no obligation to push for I-A and there is not the drive to do so when I-AA football has traditionally been held in low esteem by students. Notwithstanding, not being included in I-A will be cause for some in the athletics world to seek to relegate Georgetown to a Holy Cross-level of basketball program, whether we as fans like it or not. Let's be realistic: four superconferences are not going to allow something like the RPI from taking away slots in the NCAA tournament (if there still is one) to their interests and not to supposedly inferior conferences and suppsedly inferior programs. If the 30 remaining conferences were slotted into play-in games for 15 autobids and four superconferences controlled all 45 at-large bids, you'd say that's unfair, but what is the NCAA going to about it? Nothing, especially if those four threaten to leave and start their own tournament and take the ten-figure TV contract with it. And for Georgetown, that's an entre to a world where Georgetown basketball is more about the good old days than a future, where Rev. Henle's "just make the NIT every few years or so" would be sadly prophetic. How many of those schools within GU's range actually make money on football? Probably not many. Then, how many are in BCS conferences, where we want and need to be if we're preparing for the Reign of the Superconferences? Fewer still. Next, how many are in major media markets with lots of other sports and entertainment to compete with? The number dwindles further. Finally, how many would essentially have to start from scratch? I just don't see how it is at all realistic to think the solution to our basketball program is to suddenly try to play BCS football.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Sept 23, 2011 15:03:12 GMT -5
I am certainly not sure that football is any kind of a solution, and definitely not in the 5-6 year short term; at the same time, a basketball-only conference at this point in time may be just as unrealistic. Where do we park the rest of our sports programs? What about the fact that a new conference would have no automatic NCAA bid for a number of years? If the BCS conferences monopolize the TV deals because of the football popularity, how does a minor TV contract help make money, attract recruits, even seem attractive to the schools that we would want to be a part of the new venture? Yet the alternative is to try to stay in a Big East conference that remains controlled by the football schools, and that would continually be the target of poachers from the super-conferences. We want aggressive action, but one false step could be the beginning of the end for any type of significance in the college bball world.
|
|
mapei
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,088
|
Post by mapei on Sept 23, 2011 15:07:45 GMT -5
I'm thinking more a non-football conference than a basketball-only conference.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Sept 23, 2011 15:17:50 GMT -5
A non-football conference with Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette, St. John's, maybe Notre Dame, Xavier, et al would be able to negotiate a good TV contract because basketball fans will want to watch those games.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,797
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Sept 23, 2011 15:21:34 GMT -5
How many of those schools within GU's range actually make money on football? Probably not many. Stanford, BC, Wake, Vandy, and Duke can cover football through TV contracts- i.e., the Big Ten Network returns $22 million/year to every member school, free and clear. Tulane and Tulsa, a lot less so. Does anyone think anymore that the Big East is going to get more in its next contract?
|
|
|
Post by hoyawatcher on Sept 23, 2011 15:53:21 GMT -5
Just for appx. numbers my guess is the BE would get $12-$14 M each +/- as a mixed FB and BB confernence and $7 or $8 M each as a BB only conference. Something like that. Point being if we are a BB only conference we may get a better deal than what the BE has now but if we stay as a mixed conference for as long as we can we are much better off.
|
|
CWS
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 272
|
Post by CWS on Sept 23, 2011 18:14:44 GMT -5
I attended the president’s faculty town hall yesterday (includes admin and staff) and a MCEF meeting today (main campus executive faculty).
1) The president’s town hall didn’t reveal a whole lot more than what you can get through reading “the Hoya.” Most of what was new to me was more on the academic side (funding for different academic concerns). At the MCEF meeting Bart Moore spoke to us about the capital campaign. 2) I was pleased that at both meetings, a faculty member raised a question about the Big East turmoil (I tend to think most faculty don’t care about BB, but I probably am wrong or at least exaggerate the disconnect). DeGioia expressed his confidence that we can get through this and end up in a really good position (not sure what was the basis of his optimism, but he seemed sincere). I hadn’t known it, but he was the point-person for the big east meetings during Healy’s and O’Donovan’s tenure, so he’s been at this a while. Bart Moore was impressive. He seemed (to me) to have a strong expertise, competency in fundraising, in addition to bringing a sophisticated understanding of the issues Gtown confronts (including its less than ideal history in fundraising endeavors). I learned a good bit about the do’s and don’ts of fundraising in his short, 30 minute overview. He was straightforward, candid about things that could go wrong (e.g., vulnerabilities to present market jitters). It was refreshing; with Langley I always felt I was getting a cheerleading ‘sell’ – never sure what was real. In responding to the question about the Big East, Bart didn’t seem to think it would affect overall fundraising too much, but recognized it could soften fundraising for the new training facility, especially if it were perceived that the future is unstable. The new training facility is the main ‘bricks and mortar’ project for the new capital campaign; the campaign will focus a good bit on raising the endowment. As I've said before, I sense that there is a serious resolve to make the training facility happen. In the course of Q&A Bart noted that there is no university that has a bigger gap between endowment and ranking, i.e., between where the school's endowment ranks (in our case 62) and where it is ranked in US News (22). 3) A couple of times at one or other of the meetings, a faculty said something like “If we were serious about […insert issue: being a research university; about the sciences; about making Gtown affordable to all students; attracting the best faculty…], we would […insert dramatic description of how many more oodles of dollars we would spend].” It was a reminder of how many worthy causes around the university are the object of fervent pleading, outrage, begging, etc. (and, of course, we can add investing in athletics to the list of worthy causes). I’m glad it’s above my pay-grade to figure out how to prioritize those appeals. 4) JTIII and AD Reed were at the faculty town hall (as I said, staff and administrators are also invited; the town halls happen every semester). I think JTIII was the only coach there; he attends these things pretty regularly. I’m not sure why he attends (they’re not that informative), but I’d like to imagine that he’s publicly expressing his commitment to the overall educational enterprise, that what they do in McDonough is connected to what happens in the classroom, that taking time out of his busy schedule for a (not too eventful) faculty meeting is worth his time. I love that. 5) The faculty just received an email from the university registrar, about ticket packages for the season (an 8 game plan and a 5 game one). Good price, I think.
|
|
|
Post by glidehoyas (Inactive) on Sept 23, 2011 18:52:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Sept 23, 2011 19:23:31 GMT -5
I'm thinking more a non-football conference than a basketball-only conference. will all of the other schools we join with have the same programs we do? What if they only have a few? Not a neat package.
|
|
HoyaSC
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 514
|
Post by HoyaSC on Sept 23, 2011 21:15:00 GMT -5
Let's see.....
Small private school, great academics, urban setting, no current athletic tradition, small endowment, terrible facilities. But surrounded by fertile recruiting area. Hires a brilliant, intimidating head coach who's not afraid to take chances. Coach inspires fear in national media and team develops a "bad boy" image. Recruits start to take notice. Plays in pro team's arena far from campus. Wins a few big games. Starts snagging big time recruits. Wins a national championship. Puts big stars in the pros. Now has a national tradition based on success from the late 1970s to early 1980s.
Sound familiar?
Of course, I am talking about the Miami Hurricanes.
Football at GU isn't impossible.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Sept 23, 2011 21:24:55 GMT -5
I'm thinking more a non-football conference than a basketball-only conference. will all of the other schools we join with have the same programs we do? What if they only have a few? Not a neat package. You are trying to make up problems. We are talking about 7 or 8 current members of the Big East who already participate in everything except football plus two or three similar colleges, Xavier, Dayton, Butler. They probably are a better fit than ECU and are not nearly as far away as Houston or UCF which would be very expensive trips for baseball or softball or soccer or volleyball or other sports.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Sept 23, 2011 21:45:12 GMT -5
Miami went to Bowls throughout the 50s and 60s Lou Saban recruited all over the country and brought in Jim Kelly from football rich Pa. along with Otis Anderson from West Palm and some others from Pahokhee and the Big Lake. Schellenberger won big with Saban players and set the table well when Schellenberger left for the USFL and Jimmy Jones came in.
I honestly don't see the correlation other than a small private school, even back in the late 50s or early 60s they cost themselves the Orange Bowl by being on probation
|
|
|
Post by fsohoya on Sept 23, 2011 22:10:11 GMT -5
Let's see..... Small private school, great academics, urban setting, no current athletic tradition, small endowment, terrible facilities. But surrounded by fertile recruiting area. Hires a brilliant, intimidating head coach who's not afraid to take chances. Coach inspires fear in national media and team develops a "bad boy" image. Recruits start to take notice. Plays in pro team's arena far from campus. Wins a few big games. Starts snagging big time recruits. Wins a national championship. Puts big stars in the pros. Now has a national tradition based on success from the late 1970s to early 1980s. Sound familiar? Of course, I am talking about the Miami Hurricanes. Football at GU isn't impossible. I appreciate your optimism, but "The U" has a very long history of football success, and is also somewhat bigger than GU in enrollment terms. Most important, though, if you were a big-time football star, would you rather be in South Beach, or New South?
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,797
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Sept 23, 2011 22:43:47 GMT -5
Miami went to Bowls throughout the 50s and 60s Lou Saban recruited all over the country and brought in Jim Kelly from football rich Pa. along with Otis Anderson from West Palm and some others from Pahokhee and the Big Lake. Schellenberger won big with Saban players and set the table well when Schellenberger left for the USFL and Jimmy Jones came in. Miami's bowl record until Schnellenberger arrived: 1935 Orange: Lost to Bucknell, 26-0 1946 Orange: Beat Holy Cross 13-6 1951 Orange: Lost to Clemson, 15-14 1952 Gator: Defeated Clemson, 14-0 1961 Liberty: Lost to Syracuse, 15-14 1962 Gotham: Lost to Nebraska, 36-34 1966 Liberty: Defeated VPI, 14-7 1967 Bluebonnet: Lost to Colorado, 31-21
|
|
nychoya3
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,674
|
Post by nychoya3 on Sept 23, 2011 23:19:34 GMT -5
I don't see the Administration looking at the Miami example as a "how to." I'm guessing it's more like a cautionary tale.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Sept 24, 2011 6:15:05 GMT -5
will all of the other schools we join with have the same programs we do? What if they only have a few? Not a neat package. You are trying to make up problems. We are talking about 7 or 8 current members of the Big East who already participate in everything except football plus two or three similar colleges, Xavier, Dayton, Butler. They probably are a better fit than ECU and are not nearly as far away as Houston or UCF which would be very expensive trips for baseball or softball or soccer or volleyball or other sports. I am just thinking out loud. We do not own the big east name so we lose an auto bid for a number of years. And we do not know how the other schools' programs fit with ours. I am not saying it would not work or is not worth pursuing, just that it is not as simple as just putting together a bball conference.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Sept 24, 2011 9:37:22 GMT -5
It is not a new conference. It is the old conference without football.
|
|
|
Post by Ranch Dressing on Sept 24, 2011 10:15:31 GMT -5
Flip the current dynamic on its ear where football BCS conference are controlling everything by joining with BE hoops schools to jettison the football schools to Big 12/SEC/B10/ACC, retain Big East, add a few more teams, and move forward in a new hoops only architecture without looking back.
|
|
|
Post by bigelephant on Sept 24, 2011 10:27:09 GMT -5
Flip the current dynamic on its ear where football BCS conference are controlling everything by joining with BE hoops schools to jettison the football schools to Big 12/SEC/B10/ACC, retain Big East, add a few more teams, and move forward in a new hoops only architecture without looking back. . You are beginning to make sense to me. Maybe that is the best option. The problem is who knows. Football does add some prestige even tho we don't do or want to do FB. Maybe your scheme is 2nd best as it stands now.
|
|
mfk24
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,759
|
Post by mfk24 on Sept 24, 2011 11:02:48 GMT -5
Flip the current dynamic on its ear where football BCS conference are controlling everything by joining with BE hoops schools to jettison the football schools to Big 12/SEC/B10/ACC, retain Big East, add a few more teams, and move forward in a new hoops only architecture without looking back. . You are beginning to make sense to me. Maybe that is the best option. The problem is who knows. Football does add some prestige even tho we don't do or want to do FB. Maybe your scheme is 2nd best as it stands now. It has nothing to do with prestige and everything to do with money. The money just isn't out there to secure a TV deal for a non-football conference. ESPN is making bank as it is, I don't see them offering a non-football conference any money, they've already got Duke, UNC, 'Cuse, Pitt, UMD, etc. on their network. CBS already covers ACC hopes which is now arguably the better bball conference anyway. TNT covers the NBA which probably precludes them from being able to cover college hoops as well. If you happen to own a TV network, or know someone who does, then by all means, draft some sort of contract that will get the bball teams an equal payday and we'll be good to go.
|
|