DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,752
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 27, 2005 19:08:24 GMT -5
According to the NCAA, about two-thirds of Div. I-A (mostly BCS schools) make money on football. BCS schools share, on average, over $14 million per conference in TV and bowl revenues versus as little as $180,000 in the Big West.
Notre Dame, for example, had football revenues of $38 million and the department turned a $12M surplus. An 0-11 Duke team in 2003 still made $4M more in revenue than it spent, thanks to TV and ACC shared bowl revenues.
Subtracting costs for all other sports, only 40% of the 117 I-A schools make an overall profit on athletics teams (a number of state schools have a rule that teams must break even, so these schools will enver turn a profit).
Only 10 of 123 Division I-AA schools turn a profit, mostly those from the HBCU's which make money on "classic" games like Grambling and Southern. Delaware also does well, in large part due to its 22,000 a game avg. football attendance.
BTW: For 2004 federal reporting, Georgetown reported less than $400K in revenue from football vs. $3 million for men's basketball. And both lost money.
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,132
|
Post by RBHoya on Apr 27, 2005 21:23:20 GMT -5
Not to take away from the flow of the thread here, but I'm just curious... can someone explain to me the need to have an 8 figure donation before we can even start collecting funds for a new convocation center/basketball stadium? It just seems like we could do a great deal to get the ball rolling ourselves, what with all this sentiment here. I think once its on the agenda and the University enables us to collect/pool/raise funds, we'll be ok. Maybe I'm wrong, because it certainly is large sum, but really, I think with some effort, we can get there. Thats why I dont understand why a huge donation is required to start.... because that just seems like a huge, unneccesary hurdle.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Apr 27, 2005 22:32:44 GMT -5
Not to take away from the flow of the thread here, but I'm just curious... can someone explain to me the need to have an 8 figure donation before we can even start collecting funds for a new convocation center/basketball stadium? It just seems like we could do a great deal to get the ball rolling ourselves, what with all this sentiment here. I think once its on the agenda and the University enables us to collect/pool/raise funds, we'll be ok. Maybe I'm wrong, because it certainly is large sum, but really, I think with some effort, we can get there. Thats why I dont understand why a huge donation is required to start.... because that just seems like a huge, unneccesary hurdle. The problem, as I understand it, is that the University administration would have to be the impetus behind any general fundraising campaign. Since the administration has failed to include renovation of McDonough on its ten-year-plan, there's not much hope. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it is also my understanding that someone tried to start an independent fundraising drive a while back and was stifled by GU. If the University won't take action, and the program's "financially less fortunate" supporters can't take action collectively, then its up to those with six figure+ bank accounts.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Apr 27, 2005 22:56:59 GMT -5
Austin- I suppose it's just a different way of looking at it. Some of the expenses don't vary much (travel). Some vary a lot (equipment, medical costs, NCAA revenue). The NCAA revenue thing is a big variance, and can be counted on as revenue arising from a new arena. We've made the dance once in 7 years, that's 3 shares in 7 years. Not too good. An actual home advantage would give us likely 1-2 games a year. That would have gotten us in in 2001-2, for maybe 1-2 more shares. That's significant. Especially with our conference situation being so up in the air in 5 years, it behooves GU to set up its future now. Schools like us are falling by the wayside in college athletics because our revenue streams are not enough to attract and keep top coaches, among other things. If 3 leaves and the NBE breaks up, then what? We are making ZERO revenue playing in a mauseleum we can't fill in a high-cost sport. Say adios to big-time hoops. The exceptions have been Gonzaga, which gets great attendance and is building a new arena (only game in town), Villanova (has a new on-campus arena), and potentially Saint Joes (plays in CBB's mecca, the Palestra), St. John's (on-campus arena and some games at MSG), Xavier (NICE on-campus arena), Marquette (Final 4 + building on-campus arena), DePaul (Chicago, plus rents a smaller arena). 7. Out of how many? Schools like us, SHU, PC are on the brink of irrelevance. We have to take the years of bounty we have coming with the NBE and 3 and convert that into investing in our future. All the successful peer schools are doing the same. The unsuccessful ones have their heads in the sand like us. Bottom line: College hoops is changing, has been for 15 years. It's more expensive now, and requires the fanbase that football brings unless you can make your program into its own high-revenue sport. If we don't realize that, we get left on the scrapheap of hoops history. YB, I think you make some good points here. However, I'm still not ready to accept your "what if" scenario as something that is likely to occur. I'm also skeptical of the statment that running a basketball program costs more now than it did in 1983. While college basketball has become a much larger sport in the sense it has added fans and exposure, I can't see how that makes it more expensive. What are the increased costs? If there are increased costs why aren't they cancelled out by increased TV revenue? (I mean, CB is on ESPN almost every night, especially this season with the hockey lockout.) Your point that our "basketball strategy" most resembles PC/SHU seems correct to me. We are lucky that we have something they don't: a Thompson on the sidelines. The arena question is larger than the economic question we've been debating if one takes the position that an on-campus arena directly affects recruiting, fan support, alumni support, winning close games. While I think saying there's a direct link between those things and an on-campus arena may be an exaggeration, it's hard to argue there's no effect at all. One final point: It may be that we're having this discussion too soon. The program appears to be on the up-and-up, and there's no reason to believe a winning record over the next few seasons won't translate into a) a return to prominence b) creating administration enthusiasm/greater alumni support for investing in the program. The admin may just be waiting to see what JTIII can do with the program before plunking down $40M on a convocation center. This doesn't seem out of the question considering Gonzaga is just now getting a nice arena. While that strategy seems very risky to me, I wouldn't be surpised if that's the strategy Jack has chosen.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Apr 28, 2005 0:58:07 GMT -5
I'm also skeptical of the statment that running a basketball program costs more now than it did in 1983. ... If there are increased costs why aren't they cancelled out by increased TV revenue? I have no inside info on college hoops costs, but... that won't stop me from posting about it! Nothing costs remotely what it did in 1983. WHy should a college basketball program? Coaches, assistants and staff must cost at least twice as much as 22 years ago. PRobably 3 times as much. Costs of scholarships are up as much as costs of tuition room and board... how much is that in the last 22 years? More than double that's for sure. Probably 4 times as much. Travel costs the same??? I don't think so. Recruiting is even more extensive and intensive than back in the day. Far more trips to many more places, coaches staying on the road to visit HS tourney's, AAU events, and so forth. And airfares, hotels, rental cars, meals, everything costs at least twice what it did in '83. Remember MOTEL 6? It was originally called MOTEL 6 because it cost $6 a night. Can you imagine? What about insurance, medical insurance, liability insurance. Year round training, weight and resistance training, nutrition, tutors, you name it. How about the costs of renting the MCI center? Has to be a lot more than the Cap center. TV revenue... hoops is on every night. Exactly. In '83, the BIG EAST was a big deal and had a highly valuable hoops contract. It was much more in demand precisely because the airwaves were NOT deluged with hoops, thus diluting the product. And the BE was huge, with GU and SJU leading the way. How many times were we on TV this year? To me, it seems very clear that it has to cost FAR more to run a hoops program than it did in '83. Double would be a very conservative estimate.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Apr 28, 2005 7:52:00 GMT -5
RB,
Regarding the need for a large donation to kick-start fundraising....you're absolutely right, this needs to be on the University's formal fundraising agenda for a fundraising effort to be successful: the University has the logistical wherewithal (addresses, knowledge on giving history, ability to provide legitimacy and appropriate stewardship to donors, etc.) to support such an effort, and a private group operating outside the auspices and institutional control of the University is an NCAA-rules risk. Much of this string has been spent discussing the best way to put this on the University's screen. Note that a large donation in advance isn't a prerequisite to it getting on the radar screen necessarily; rather, the University needs to be convinced that this is something the school needs and that there's enough interest out there to raise the necessary funds.
Once it's on the University's radar screen, they'll look for a handful of large, large gifts to kick-start fundraising...doing it that way (rather than the March of Dimes method) has proven, over and over again, to be the only consistent way to fundraise for facilities in this country. The simple reason is that askng for smaller gifts often allows people able to give more to give less, and the smaller gifts simply can't hope to add up to enough on their own. Simply do the math: look at the number of donors to the Hoop Club or to Athletics overall. If you keep in mind that the money these people give needs to be maintained and that the money for the facility is extra...it's simply unrealistic that a broad-based effort would work.
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Apr 28, 2005 8:18:27 GMT -5
In addition, once the drive starts for cash, the ANC and non-basketball supporting faculty start to oppose so you want to have a strong effort out of the gates just to deal with the headaches associated with dealing with the city, neighbors & faculty. The only other item I would add is that support for the hoops squad simply isn't that great.
Let's be honest. Ask some old alums, 30 years plus, about how excited they are to see our hoops team thrive. They may say it is nice to see but they don't necessarily want to open up their wallets. Support for the team has never been comparable to large state schools and drawing a better comparison, it has never been comparable to Notre Dame football. This is another storied program from a private school but their alums live & die with that team. There are maybe 100 people that consistently post here and outside of that you had a good student turn out this year. I am just trying to be the realist here. The angle really needs to be that a convocation center is necessary and the by product of that is the hoops.
|
|
YB
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,494
|
Post by YB on Apr 28, 2005 8:43:53 GMT -5
Well, to be sure there are lots of reasons for the CC other than hoops.... graduation, speakers, cultural events, other sports, conferences, convocations, etc etc.
The costs of hoops programs have gone up appreciably since 1983... travel is much higher, more advanced weight training and other equipment (video, eg), coaches salaries (this is a BIG one), and for us, home arena rent (also a big one).
Waiting for a Thompson to resurrect things is exactly how we got INTO this mess in the first place. During the 80s, when we could have easily gotten the donations for the arena, they were content to let JT2 drive the thing instead of setting themselves up for a more sustainable future. This gave us.... Esherick! Ta-da!
We do need a more organized effort to prevail on the U. to make this a priority. This was a central theme of my Rally last year, and tho I'm glad we got 3, this was lost in the shuffle.
This is crucial. D1 sports are no longer a proposition where you can not have football and still automatically thrive or even survive. This is why the FB BE schools are so willing to throw GU, SHU etc. to the wayside. And when they do- WHEN- we must be prepared. And that means being planning NOW. We must convert our bball program to being a higher-revenue proposition. This means building the CC, so we can KEEP JT3 and make the investments we need to survive against the big boys.
The point ColumbiaHeights made about the older alums not really caring is true. This has to come from us, it is incumbent upon us (the classes of '78 onward) to start this moving.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
Member is Online
|
Post by the_way on Apr 28, 2005 8:54:06 GMT -5
Is this thread ever going to end. Everybody is saying the same thing, and spitting out inaccurate numbers. Unless a large 8-figure amount of money falls out of the sky, the chances of getting an on-campus arena in the near future are as likely as George "Dubya" Bush becoming a liberal.
|
|
hoyahoyasaxa
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Sead Dizdarezvic doesn't write term papers. The words rearrange themselves out of fear.
Posts: 464
|
Post by hoyahoyasaxa on Apr 28, 2005 9:11:56 GMT -5
Is this thread ever going to end. Everybody is saying the same thing, and spitting out inaccurate numbers. Unless a large 8-figure amount of money falls out of the sky, the chances of getting an on-campus arena in the near future are as likely as George "Dubya" Bush becoming a liberal. If you don't like this thread, don't read it and don't post on it.
|
|
|
Post by JohnJacquesLayup on Apr 28, 2005 10:17:28 GMT -5
If you don't like this thread, don't read it and don't post on it. Right! If you don't like someting, ignore it! For me this includes Duke, Hockey, George W., Mushrooms . . .
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,132
|
Post by RBHoya on Apr 28, 2005 10:22:52 GMT -5
Ok, so just for clarification.... Which comes first, the donation, or the commitment? Is it:
A) the University commits to the building of an on-campus Convocation Center/Basketball arena, and then they hunt for a handful of large donations before they move foward....
OR
B) some philanthropic donor comes to the university with an 8 figure or so donation, and he/she gives it on the pretext that the University will build the arena. With the 8 figure original donation in place, the University publicly commits to the building of the arena, and begins to seek other large donations to cover the balance of the costs.
As for older alums who don't give.... it's fortunate (edit: UNFORTUNATE, is what I meant), but I guess something we have to live with, right? It's a shame that other private schools who are of comparable academic stature (Notre Dame, Duke, BC, etc.) are not at all in the same boat as we are. I just kinda feel like, "what do they have that we don't have?". But I guess its a number of things--football facilities and competetive football programs, better contribution from alumni, better basketball facilities already in place (can be traced to the previous two) etc. I guess there is no easy answer as to how to get GU on track, but I'll be damned if big time sports become irrelevant here and we continue to drop in the College rankings. We're better than that.
|
|
|
Post by JohnJacquesLayup on Apr 28, 2005 10:30:46 GMT -5
I guess there is no easy answer as to how to get GU on track, but I'll be damned if big time sports become irrelevant here and we continue to drop in the College rankings. We're better than that. I think GU just showed us there is the determination to get the team back on track with the move to JTIII. I think we're taking a "one step at a time" approach, and the coach is the first step. Is the immediate funding of a campus arena the next step in elevating the program? I don't think it has to be. We all know there are schools with excellent facilities and an underachieving program. Edit: I am in favor of an on campus arena, but I'm still not convinced of the IMMEDIATE necessity for it.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 28, 2005 10:51:56 GMT -5
JJL,
By immediate, what do you mean? Because by the time fundraising is done and the thing is built, even if we start, the very earliest I could see it done is 5 years, and 10 years is much more realistic.
Unless an uberdonor steps up and gives the lump sum. But still...
|
|
YB
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,494
|
Post by YB on Apr 28, 2005 10:59:59 GMT -5
RB had it hit on the head: Commitment or Big donor, which is first. GU has been saying Big donor, or else it's 20 years off.
I don't think people feel comfy giving unless they're asked. That's just me.
Enough people are mistrusting of GU's financial management (and with good reason) that they want to see a plan or something before they'll give.
Short answer: Likely, political will and cash will have to be simultaneous.
|
|
|
Post by JohnJacquesLayup on Apr 28, 2005 11:04:33 GMT -5
JJL, By immediate, what do you mean? Because by the time fundraising is done and the thing is built, even if we start, the very earliest I could see it done is 5 years, and 10 years is much more realistic. Unless an uberdonor steps up and gives the lump sum. But still... By immediate I'm trying to acknowledge the number of current projects for sports and academics on the University's plate already. The biggest issues for the basketball team in my mind are the coach and the quality of recruits. Once the program is stable and has established a winning trend, I think it's safe to assume the donors and widespread support for an on campus facility will be there.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 28, 2005 11:36:18 GMT -5
By immediate I'm trying to acknowledge the number of current projects for sports and academics on the University's plate already. The biggest issues for the basketball team in my mind are the coach and the quality of recruits. Once the program is stable and has established a winning trend, I think it's safe to assume the donors and widespread support for an on campus facility will be there. I doubt that's safe to assume, since we went to three FF in four years and still have nothing. I wonder how long we will keep our coach when we're playing in a souped up A-10, an empty MCI and a 75 year old practice facility. I know the University has other priorities, and I've argued the same as you. But something needs to START now, if only for III to sell. Hell, if Brick or DeGioia would just come out and say -- we're finishing the Arts, Business and MSF structures and the next two priorities will be a science building and the Convocation Center, then I'd donate more to existing projects so we could get to the convocation center. And our coach would be content, the 08-09 recruits would have something to look forward to, etc.
|
|
YB
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,494
|
Post by YB on Apr 28, 2005 11:59:34 GMT -5
Completely agree, SF. We had 3 FFs in 4 years and nothing was done then, and donors did not line up because the U did not ask them to. The program's long term future was never planned for, never taken care of.
Now is the time. We are on an upswing, and finally have something we can sell. But the time is now- not when we lost 3 because we're playing SHU and PC three times a year and have a 75 year old practice facility and play in an empty MCI. The times have changed and will change further. We MUST adjust to that. We will adjust or the program will die.
|
|
|
Post by Lockdownhoya on Apr 28, 2005 12:00:59 GMT -5
I agree that if it didn't happen after the 1982-85 run then it probably will not happen anytime in the near future.
The BZA will be a problem and will most likely side with the ANC and the wealthy/influential georgetown residents who will stand up against anything that has the potential of bringing the unwashed masses into their part of the District. Unless we can get the President of the BZA a new girlfriend, which appeared to have swayed his vote in favor of expanding a certain private school in Cleveland Park
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Apr 28, 2005 12:17:35 GMT -5
Here is a list of players I would think could donate from six figures up to 7 +. each. All of them benefited from G'town and then we could get corporate. I also point out known problems with each:
Ewing (lost money in divorce probably) Mourning (does a lot of charity work already) Mutombo (does a lot of charity work already) Iverson J. Williams Sleepy Floyd (not sure how much he would have made in the league pre-ridiculous contract days) David Wingate (see above) Jahidi White JT II (why not, but probably lost some in divorce) Don Reid (didn't play in league too long) R. Williams O. Harrington M. Sweetney B. Bowman (we are talking a long term project here so assume he is a leaguer) J. Green (same as above)
That is 15 guys right there who could probably get a 10 million plus starting fund going depending on their feelings about the university & program. Who am I missing and does anyone think this is realistic?
|
|