(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Moving GNAC schools up could help the cost, and try and get the Big West Conference to restart football might help. The percentage can go down as expense will go down.

(02-14-2020 05:04 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  I doubt anything significant will change at this point, but we're going to see more of this in the coming years. There's a projected major dip in college enrollment coming mid-decade as the Great Recession resulted in fewer births, and we're going to see that 18 years later. Couple that with kids increasingly skeptical of taking on student debt, and we're in for a nice wallop of reduced enrollment. The hardest hit will be regional schools like EWU as well as less prestigious private schools. EWU may not change anything right now, but we're going to see athletics ended or downgraded at a number of schools in the next decade.

Well said, and all true.

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Good information, looks like many Big Sky schools are in the same sinking boat that EW is in. But so what? Just because D1 football is a financial disaster at other Big Sky schools doesn't mean it isn't at EW. It is, and that's really what matters to EW.

To me, the obvious comparison peers for EW aren't other Big Sky schools, it is the other directionals in Washington - CW and WW. They have their issues, but they seem to be doing better than EW, and they don't have D1 football.

(03-05-2021 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Good information, looks like many Big Sky schools are in the same sinking boat that EW is in. But so what? Just because D1 football is a financial disaster at other Big Sky schools doesn't mean it isn't at EW. It is, and that's really what matters to EW.

To me, the obvious comparison peers for EW aren't other Big Sky schools, it is the other directionals in Washington - CW and WW. They have their issues, but they seem to be doing better than EW, and they don't have D1 football.

Central Washington AD recently made comments about looking at D1 after dropping lots of money into renovations of facilities and growing their athletic department while drowning in a 3 team GNAC league and Western Washington has very anti athletics leadership currently.

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

There's not enough fundraising or ticket sales at most places; most athletic departments don't put nearly enough effort into getting donations from boosters and alumni.

Compare Montana to most of the other programs you listed above, let's take Eastern Washington as an example, though most FCS and a lot of G5 programs will have the same issues as EWU here:

Montana gets $8.2 million in university funds for its annual athletic budget. That amount is much lower in total dollars and percentage than nearly all the others because their athletic department's real revenue (ticket sales + donations + rights & licensing) is $14 million/year.

EWU gets $13.5 million/year in university funds, and generates $3.3 million/year in real revenue.

Montana's athletic department generates $6 million more per year in revenue than it takes from the university, while EWU's athletic department takes $10 million more from the university than they generate in athletic revenue.

Universities can spend their money how they want, as long as their stakeholders permit. But if there was ever to be a limit on subsidizing athletics with student fees and university funds, maybe it should be that the subsidy amount has to be less than the amount of real revenue collected by the athletic department.

(03-05-2021 10:46 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Good information, looks like many Big Sky schools are in the same sinking boat that EW is in. But so what? Just because D1 football is a financial disaster at other Big Sky schools doesn't mean it isn't at EW. It is, and that's really what matters to EW.

To me, the obvious comparison peers for EW aren't other Big Sky schools, it is the other directionals in Washington - CW and WW. They have their issues, but they seem to be doing better than EW, and they don't have D1 football.

Central Washington AD recently made comments about looking at D1 after dropping lots of money into renovations of facilities and growing their athletic department while drowning in a 3 team GNAC league and Western Washington has very anti athletics leadership currently.

ADs always wan to move up to a higher division because that means a bigger paycheck for themselves and more visibility in their profession. If I was an AD I'd want my school to soak its students for $8m more a year in fees and transfers to pay me more and boost my career too. Doesn't mean the school feels the same.

As for WW, I think they dropped football a good 10 years ago, and yet since then their enrollment has climbed and their academic standing has too. They seem to be the most thriving university of those three directionals.

WW is also the closest to Seattle (and Vancouver) which probably helps a lot

(03-05-2021 10:46 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Good information, looks like many Big Sky schools are in the same sinking boat that EW is in. But so what? Just because D1 football is a financial disaster at other Big Sky schools doesn't mean it isn't at EW. It is, and that's really what matters to EW.

To me, the obvious comparison peers for EW aren't other Big Sky schools, it is the other directionals in Washington - CW and WW. They have their issues, but they seem to be doing better than EW, and they don't have D1 football.

Central Washington AD recently made comments about looking at D1 after dropping lots of money into renovations of facilities and growing their athletic department while drowning in a 3 team GNAC league and Western Washington has very anti athletics leadership currently.

Central Washington will not be allowed to join D1 until they add another sport.

(03-05-2021 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

There's not enough fundraising or ticket sales at most places; most athletic departments don't put nearly enough effort into getting donations from boosters and alumni.

Compare Montana to most of the other programs you listed above, let's take Eastern Washington as an example, though most FCS and a lot of G5 programs will have the same issues as EWU here:

Montana gets $8.2 million in university funds for its annual athletic budget. That amount is much lower in total dollars and percentage than nearly all the others because their athletic department's real revenue (ticket sales + donations + rights & licensing) is $14 million/year.

EWU gets $13.5 million/year in university funds, and generates $3.3 million/year in real revenue.

Montana's athletic department generates $6 million more per year in revenue than it takes from the university, while EWU's athletic department takes $10 million more from the university than they generate in athletic revenue.

Universities can spend their money how they want, as long as their stakeholders permit. But if there was ever to be a limit on subsidizing athletics with student fees and university funds, maybe it should be that the subsidy amount has to be less than the amount of real revenue collected by the athletic department.

EWU's bread and butter is their football team. After that? They are screwed if they drop it.

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Every situation is different. Sac State has a 30k enrollment and the 11th highest athletics fee of all CSU campuses. We're no where near the situation EWU is in and can easily withstand this issue. I'd be more worried for Hornet athletics if we cut some of our sports. We haven't...yet.

Key things to note: 1) that article is pre-China Virus so I'm sure everyone is worse off than they were a year ago. 2) No telling how coming off a BSC title in football would have impacted revenue via ticket sales, donations, etc. 3) We sponsor more sports than every other BSC member, most of which sponsor the D1 minimum.

Here was my take on the deficit we faced:
"· They completely whiffed on the big picture perspective of this issue. Based on the UBAC website, the projected University budget for FY20 is $356.9M. The $2.6M athletics deficit is 0.73% of the University budget, but approximately 10% of the athletics budget (based on the $25.8M FY18 number from the Federal EADA reports). I’m not belittling $2.6M, but in the grand scheme of things the deficit is not even a drop in the bucket for the University. That said, it does need to be reduced if not completely eliminated."

(03-05-2021 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  There's not enough fundraising or ticket sales at most places; most athletic departments don't put nearly enough effort into getting donations from boosters and alumni.

Compare Montana to most of the other programs you listed above, let's take Eastern Washington as an example, though most FCS and a lot of G5 programs will have the same issues as EWU here:

Montana gets $8.2 million in university funds for its annual athletic budget. That amount is much lower in total dollars and percentage than nearly all the others because their athletic department's real revenue (ticket sales + donations + rights & licensing) is $14 million/year.

EWU gets $13.5 million/year in university funds, and generates $3.3 million/year in real revenue.

Montana's athletic department generates $6 million more per year in revenue than it takes from the university, while EWU's athletic department takes $10 million more from the university than they generate in athletic revenue.

Universities can spend their money how they want, as long as their stakeholders permit. But if there was ever to be a limit on subsidizing athletics with student fees and university funds, maybe it should be that the subsidy amount has to be less than the amount of real revenue collected by the athletic department.

In 2018-2019, EWU got $13.5 million and generated $4.9 million in revenue. In a typical year, they are probably good for about $5 to $6 million in revenue, with about 90% of that from football & basketball. There is only one Big Sky school that qualifies under your suggestion that " maybe it should be that the subsidy amount has to be less than the amount of real revenue collected by the athletic department." That would be Montana, although Montana State is close. The other eight Big Sky members are in the same boat with EWU. There were about 150 schools in the 2018-2019 list of schools that did not meet your suggested standard.
https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

EWU hired the Pictor Group, an athletic consulting group, to help them with the decision on athletics. They produced a 75 page report:
https://www.ewu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2...eb2021.pdf

"A decision to remain at the Division I-FCS level will require a reinvestment of institutional revenues. It will also require targeted efforts and accountability to increase financial support from donors and corporate partners, and identification of other revenue-producing opportunities through athletics."

"If EWU were to decide to reclassify its athletics program to a lower NCAA division, there will be measurable cost savings, but also a significant loss of revenue and a noticeable decline in visibility of the athletics program. Campus and community pride could also be diminished. The PICTOR Group’s review has shown that it is highly unusual for a Division I institution to reclassify its athletics program to Division II or III."

They also cited the declining enrollment as a weakness and fundraising as an opportunity.
Fundraising: "Currently, Eastern athletics falls well below the Big Sky median in fundraising. Eastern athletics must make fundraising a priority to compensate for the reduction of and the reliance on institutional funds."

My conclusion is that a school that has been at the D1 level for 38 years is not going to drop down to a lower level, especially since it has been shown that they are operating fiscally in a manner that is similar to 8 of the 11 Big Sky schools. They need to do a better job of fundraising and keep the expenses under control.

(03-05-2021 01:37 PM)AZcats Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 10:46 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Good information, looks like many Big Sky schools are in the same sinking boat that EW is in. But so what? Just because D1 football is a financial disaster at other Big Sky schools doesn't mean it isn't at EW. It is, and that's really what matters to EW.

To me, the obvious comparison peers for EW aren't other Big Sky schools, it is the other directionals in Washington - CW and WW. They have their issues, but they seem to be doing better than EW, and they don't have D1 football.

Central Washington AD recently made comments about looking at D1 after dropping lots of money into renovations of facilities and growing their athletic department while drowning in a 3 team GNAC league and Western Washington has very anti athletics leadership currently.

Central Washington will not be allowed to join D1 until they add another sport.

That was also brought up and acknowledged in the interview.

(03-05-2021 01:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 10:46 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Good information, looks like many Big Sky schools are in the same sinking boat that EW is in. But so what? Just because D1 football is a financial disaster at other Big Sky schools doesn't mean it isn't at EW. It is, and that's really what matters to EW.

To me, the obvious comparison peers for EW aren't other Big Sky schools, it is the other directionals in Washington - CW and WW. They have their issues, but they seem to be doing better than EW, and they don't have D1 football.

Central Washington AD recently made comments about looking at D1 after dropping lots of money into renovations of facilities and growing their athletic department while drowning in a 3 team GNAC league and Western Washington has very anti athletics leadership currently.

ADs always wan to move up to a higher division because that means a bigger paycheck for themselves and more visibility in their profession. If I was an AD I'd want my school to soak its students for $8m more a year in fees and transfers to pay me more and boost my career too. Doesn't mean the school feels the same.

As for WW, I think they dropped football a good 10 years ago, and yet since then their enrollment has climbed and their academic standing has too. They seem to be the most thriving university of those three directionals.

Central 84% is more selective than Western 90% has been recently in admittance. Also I don't think any AD goes public unless it's being talked about within the schools higher ups. Ppl commute from Ellensburg to Seattle area for work on the regular.

Would the WAC or Big Sky entertain a CWU upgrade?

(03-05-2021 07:16 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 01:37 PM)AZcats Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 10:46 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Good information, looks like many Big Sky schools are in the same sinking boat that EW is in. But so what? Just because D1 football is a financial disaster at other Big Sky schools doesn't mean it isn't at EW. It is, and that's really what matters to EW.

To me, the obvious comparison peers for EW aren't other Big Sky schools, it is the other directionals in Washington - CW and WW. They have their issues, but they seem to be doing better than EW, and they don't have D1 football.

Central Washington AD recently made comments about looking at D1 after dropping lots of money into renovations of facilities and growing their athletic department while drowning in a 3 team GNAC league and Western Washington has very anti athletics leadership currently.

Central Washington will not be allowed to join D1 until they add another sport.

That was also brought up and acknowledged in the interview.

When was this interview and what is the link? He is putting himself in a "Actions speak louder than words" situation. He can SAY "D1" all he wants but nothing is going to happen until he takes ACTION. Central Washington has not added a sport in over a decade, maybe two decades.

(03-05-2021 11:42 PM)AZcats Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 07:16 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 01:37 PM)AZcats Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 10:46 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Good information, looks like many Big Sky schools are in the same sinking boat that EW is in. But so what? Just because D1 football is a financial disaster at other Big Sky schools doesn't mean it isn't at EW. It is, and that's really what matters to EW.

To me, the obvious comparison peers for EW aren't other Big Sky schools, it is the other directionals in Washington - CW and WW. They have their issues, but they seem to be doing better than EW, and they don't have D1 football.

Central Washington AD recently made comments about looking at D1 after dropping lots of money into renovations of facilities and growing their athletic department while drowning in a 3 team GNAC league and Western Washington has very anti athletics leadership currently.

Central Washington will not be allowed to join D1 until they add another sport.

That was also brought up and acknowledged in the interview.

When was this interview and what is the link? He is putting himself in a "Actions speak louder than words" situation. He can SAY "D1" all he wants but nothing is going to happen until he takes ACTION. Central Washington has not added a sport in over a decade, maybe two decades.

They already have some club sports that can easily turned to varsity without much cost. Two sports are not an NCAA sports. MW Rugby and rodeo.
Club sports.
MW golf
mw lax
mw tennis
men's volleyball
wrestling
equestrian
men's soccer
mw swimming
mw water polo

CWU's baseball team could be affiliates to the WAC.

(03-05-2021 02:25 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

There's not enough fundraising or ticket sales at most places; most athletic departments don't put nearly enough effort into getting donations from boosters and alumni.

Compare Montana to most of the other programs you listed above, let's take Eastern Washington as an example, though most FCS and a lot of G5 programs will have the same issues as EWU here:

Montana gets $8.2 million in university funds for its annual athletic budget. That amount is much lower in total dollars and percentage than nearly all the others because their athletic department's real revenue (ticket sales + donations + rights & licensing) is $14 million/year.

EWU gets $13.5 million/year in university funds, and generates $3.3 million/year in real revenue.

Montana's athletic department generates $6 million more per year in revenue than it takes from the university, while EWU's athletic department takes $10 million more from the university than they generate in athletic revenue.

Universities can spend their money how they want, as long as their stakeholders permit. But if there was ever to be a limit on subsidizing athletics with student fees and university funds, maybe it should be that the subsidy amount has to be less than the amount of real revenue collected by the athletic department.

EWU's bread and butter is their football team. After that? They are screwed if they drop it.

If football is EW's bread and butter, then it is stale bread and moldy butter. Because their football costs the school a lot of money and attendance and fan support is paltry.

(03-05-2021 05:57 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  "A decision to remain at the Division I-FCS level will require a reinvestment of institutional revenues. It will also require targeted efforts and accountability to increase financial support from donors and corporate partners, and identification of other revenue-producing opportunities through athletics."

"If EWU were to decide to reclassify its athletics program to a lower NCAA division, there will be measurable cost savings, but also a significant loss of revenue and a noticeable decline in visibility of the athletics program. Campus and community pride could also be diminished. The PICTOR Group’s review has shown that it is highly unusual for a Division I institution to reclassify its athletics program to Division II or III."

I wonder if EW has the additional institutional resources to invest in football, or if there is more money to be shaken from corporate and other donors.

I also wonder if campus/community pride hinges on playing FCS vs D2 football. CW and WW play D2 football, or no football. Do they have less pride in their campus than EW has in theirs? I don't know.

(03-05-2021 11:42 PM)AZcats Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 07:16 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 01:37 PM)AZcats Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 10:46 AM)Lopes87 Wrote:  

(03-05-2021 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Good information, looks like many Big Sky schools are in the same sinking boat that EW is in. But so what? Just because D1 football is a financial disaster at other Big Sky schools doesn't mean it isn't at EW. It is, and that's really what matters to EW.

To me, the obvious comparison peers for EW aren't other Big Sky schools, it is the other directionals in Washington - CW and WW. They have their issues, but they seem to be doing better than EW, and they don't have D1 football.

Central Washington AD recently made comments about looking at D1 after dropping lots of money into renovations of facilities and growing their athletic department while drowning in a 3 team GNAC league and Western Washington has very anti athletics leadership currently.

Central Washington will not be allowed to join D1 until they add another sport.

That was also brought up and acknowledged in the interview.

When was this interview and what is the link? He is putting himself in a "Actions speak louder than words" situation. He can SAY "D1" all he wants but nothing is going to happen until he takes ACTION. Central Washington has not added a sport in over a decade, maybe two decades.

If was in the last week on the local sports radio show. You are more than welcome to go hunt it down yourself.

(03-05-2021 01:46 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 10:49 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(03-04-2021 05:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  D2 is not working well for CW, but it's working better for them than FCS is for EW. That's the issue here. EW doesn't have any good choices, so we choosing among the lesser of evils.

FCS at EW is a financial disaster. The red turf was a cheap Boise-mimicking gimmick 15 years ago and remains one now, wasted money.

The fact that they are struggling financially despite recent football success speaks volumes. They simply cannot afford FCS football. How are they going to "struggle through it"? Where is new money going to come from?

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a list of Big Sky schools and their subsidy percentage:
Sacramento State - 87.46%
Northern Arizona - 80.67%
Montana - 34.21%
Montana State - 50.40%
Idaho - 64.83%
Eastern Washington - 73.38%
Northern Colorado - 71.87%
Southern Utah - 78.39%
Weber State - 64.78%
Portland State - 75.21%
Idaho State - 65.48%

EWU is right in the middle of the conference in subsidy percentage. They are not doing anything differently than the rest of the conference and most of the schools are struggling. As an example, there is still a debate at Portland State about dropping football:
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...swers.html

Sacramento State is still running deficits:
https://statehornet.com/2019/12/athletic...t-deficit/

It is easy to find these stories at every school in the Big Sky and this is happening all over the country. Where is the new money coming from? From the same old sources, either the state or fundraising. There will need to be expense reductions. It is a tough environment all over the country, but do you see any D1 football programs not named Savannah State dropping down to D2?

Moving GNAC schools up could help the cost, and try and get the Big West Conference to restart football might help. The percentage can go down as expense will go down.

"Hi Central Washington, this is Eastern Washington. Look, we're losing money by the bucketload. Can you do us a favor, and spend more money on athletics to join our money-hemmoraghing classification? That way, our school will save a trivial amount on travel expenses, and we'll each sell 50 extra tickets to each others' games once a year. Of course, given the price of our tickets, that won't be enough to pay a work-study kid to check tickets at the door, but pretty please?"