I'm finally doing the family thing all day and now I have a chance to sit down address the points made by Senor Morado:
Purple Haize wrote:1. Money. Not just a classic song by Pink Floyd. This can be broken down to several different levels:
A. Scholarships - As of right now our scholarship dollars are "paper" money. The Ath Dept is alloted a certain amount of "dollars" for each sport to dole out to its athletes. We do not exchange money. Which seguiys into........
The word you are looking for is segue ... but no arguments as of yet.
Purple Haize wrote:B. We are a private institution. The majority of the schools listed (Even the Thundering TURD) are public universities and colleges. Funding takes on a whole new 'ball game" when dealing with public and land grant institutions. Very few private schools, ND and Miami popping to mind as notable exceptions, Stanford doesnt count, have top tier football teams. Why? MONEY
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, the majority of schools moving up are public institutions since there aren't a great number of booming private institutions with bigtime aspirations. Most already have made the move. We are a bit of a rarity in this regard. But privates have fared very nicely in recent years. Take a look at last year's final AP poll:
4. USC
16. BYU
17. Notre Dame
18. Wake Forest
20. Boston College
22. TCU
Purple Haize wrote: C. Budgets. Just to throw this out there: UK Basketball has over 1 million dollars set aside in their budget for recruiting, for BASKETBALL. The football number is higher. How successful have the Wildcats been?
Its an apples to oranges. No one is suggesting that we would be competing in the SEC. BYU and TCU would be more representative of what we anticipate doing eventually. The Horned Frogs have the highest football budget in the MWC with $12.1 annually. Boise State spends $4.5M. While these are big totals, they are not as crazy as you might think.
Purple Haize wrote:Does LU have the resources, and maybe a better question should be: In light of LU's mission would it be a proper use of those resources to field a team with that level of commitment. Remember that is just for recruiting, not travel, not salaries, not cutting a check to the University for scholarships, etc. If you believe the N and A LU athletics has lost somewhere between 4 and 7 million a year in the athletic department. How exactly is LU supposed to not only make up THAT shortfall, but than exceed it to that type of tune, for just one sport I might add?
Those are the primary reasons why we haven't made the move quite yet. Its a major challenge that will need to be overcome.
Purple Haize wrote: D. Alumni. I love A. (Invest the Rest) Williams. He has been a good FOP. BUT for LU to even begin to consider about thinking abou the possibility of MAYBE one day, start to dream about D1A, they will need about 35 donors his size.
You'd never know you work in sales these days with your free license in hyperbole.
Purple Haize wrote: E. Profitability. Take a look at just the schools who played in bowl games. Or if you want to be REAL thorough, take a look at schools in bowl games you think we could "compete" with. And if you want to be super duper pooper scooper thorough (like all of my students were) take a look at all the D1 football schools. How many made money?
Nobody is suggesting that going I-A would be a financial boon to the university. The goal of most I-A programs is to win and pay enough bills to cover their own costs and some of the non-revenues. Your ultimate goal is branding the university and creating an environment that appeals not only to potential students but fat-walleted alumni. For better or worse, many schools' academic perception by the public is based in large part by their athletic standing.
Purple Haize wrote:I love to use the illustration of the Purdue team with Drew Breese that went to the Rose Bowl. After all their expenses were taken out of their share of the money they netted approx 175 bucks. That would be $175.00. Not billion, no thousand, just hundreds. Re read C.
Leave my man Drew out of this discussion... particularly if you are going to add an 'e' to his surname. The revenues you are mentioning were strictly from the bowl guarantee money. The university scored millions more in merchandising and the number of applicants to the university shot up as well. Financially it was a overwhelming success based on the overall net income.
Purple Haize wrote:2. Conferences. THIS JUST IN: LU can play ND anytime we would like, agreeing of course that ND would like to play us. So if you are using THAT as an argument to go 1A, you can see that Jerry's dream is already a reality.
ND doesn't schedule I-AAs. Of course it is highly unlikely they would schedule us in South Bend if we were I-A either. But there would be a remote possibility of facing them in a bowl game that will never exist as long as we are FCS.
Purple Haize wrote:While several schools were thrown out as possibilities, who says they are interested in moving? Wouldn't you think joining a "new" conference with LU as a charter member would be a step down to schools playing in Conference USA, MAC or trying to get into the Big East. There is no magic want that will persuade the other 1AA teams on the list to make the jump. In fact, I am positive that several have no desire to do so.
The conference issue would be a prerequisite to making the move under nearly every scenario imaginable right now. The most likely scenario would have a number of top tier I-AA schools in our region making the move together to form a new league. The administrators at a number of the likely candidates have publicly mentioned that they have given the idea some thought but don't feel it is right for them at this time. If they were to collectively make move it could be done in a fashion that would keep them from breaking the bank by keeping travel costs down for non-revenue sports.
Why would ECU leave C-USA? Perhaps if they were rebuffed by the Big East once again and had a viable option to lower their ridiculous travel budgets in C-USA. Marshall, Temple et al might have their own reasons.
Purple Haize wrote:3. Location. Yes Huntington and Lynchvegas are roughly the same size (from the waist up I assume) but that is not a rational argument. What else is there in Wva? You have the Mountaineers and......................................hog tossing at Uncle Billy's every Thursday. Marshall has a HUGE base of support (Even a MOVIE for crying out loud) So to have another D1 football school at the opposite end of the state makes sense. We are right between UVA and VT. THAT is where the draw is. Huntington did not have that. People who lived in Huntington BLED the THundering Turd. How many Lynchburgians do the same for The Flamers?
I agree that comparisons to Huntington aren't that significant. But considering the Commonwealth's lack of professional franchises I believe there is plenty of room for a lower priced option to the ACC boys that have priced the average fan out of the market. Again I remind you that we wouldn't be competing with UVa or Tech under the proposed guidelines for a move up.
Purple Haize wrote:4. Eligibility.
Our attendance must maintain roughly the same number of people that are here for the homecoming game, over a several year period. I will not jot down the numbers, go to NCAA.org and looke em up yourself. Suffice it to say that roughly 1/3 of the population of Lynchburg would have to come to our home games every time. Consistently.
First off, the NCAA hasn't enforced the attendance rule up to this point and I doubt they would start anytime soon. But for the record ...
NCAA Division I-A Criteria wrote:Football Bowl Subdivision teams have to meet minimum attendance requirements (average 15,000 people in actual or paid attendance per home game), which must be met once in a rolling two-year period.
NCAA.org
Purple Haize wrote:Our stadium would need a nice sized overhall to accomodate such a dramatic increase.
This will happen.
Purple Haize wrote:And don't start comparing LU to the Ivies or to Duke. They were grandfathered in. (For Pete's sake they played the ROSE BOWL at Duke!!)
I'm not sure where you are going with this. The Ivies are I-AA.
Purple Haize wrote:Parking. Enough said
We build a garage.
Purple Haize wrote:Financial Stability. While I have never doubted LU's ability to "massage" budgets, payroll or attendance figures, this will be a tough one for LU.
Purple Haize wrote:5. Miscellaneous. What type of revenue streams will we have? If our stadium only holds 40k, how can that possibly bring in enough money to sustain the program, let alone the department? Will it come from concessions? (Nope, not unless we re work our deal with Sodexho, which they may not be too happy about) Parking? Please. Souvenier/Liscensing? Best bet yet, if we can ever figure out what our logo(s) officially are.
I guess this falls into the theory that if you throw enough against a wall something might stick.
Purple Haize wrote:Just b/c Jerry Dremt it doesn't mean it is prudent. IMHO, that is not a sound reason to make this type of decision. Sure I will now be called a heretic and several will think I am just adding square footage to my Lake of Fire Townhome with a great view, but stop and think about it. Jerry had a LOT of ideas. Some great (LU) some not so great (Heritage USA take over).
I actually agree with your premise that Jerry's wish shouldn't be our only reasoning for making the move. But I believe many of the reasons why it was important to him remain valid beyond his passing. I was around for the Heritage USA takeover as you put it and the whole ordeal has been completely misconstrued over the years. But I'd rather not chase anymore rabbits in this epistle.
Purple Haize wrote:Well those are just a few minor things that IMHO we might awt to want to think about.
I agree that many of your points have validity. But any major move such as this has obstacles to overcome and potential pitfalls. But the potential for reward is so great that it deserves string consideration.