MAY 23, 2020 1:24 PM

Given the foreboding drip, drip, drip of news coming out of the Mid-American Conference — Bowling Green cutting baseball here, Akron dropping sports there, budgets slashing everywhere — more than a few readers have understandably asked the question.

Is there a better way?

More specifically ...

Is it time for schools in the MAC to have a real conversation about their place in the college football ecosystem?

Is it time for universities to stop throwing money they don’t have into an arms race they can’t sustain, and consider a cost-saving move from the highest level of Division I to the lower-stakes Football Championship Series?

If these questions seem unthinkable, so do the times, and, as the thinking goes, nothing should be off the table.

Not even a reckoning for the sport that is both the front porch and money pit of mid-major athletic departments.

To play devil’s advocate, the logic of dropping to what was formerly known as Division I-AA — where football programs can offer 63 scholarships compared to 85 in the FBS — is simple: Schools could shave millions of dollars from their football budget and have the opportunity to compete on a national level.

Whereas now the best Toledo and Bowling Green seasons are rewarded with nothing more than a trip to the Ambien Bowl, they could contend for championships in the FCS.

“Don’t you think it’s time?” one former BG athlete emailed.

“It’s a no brainer,” a professor in the MAC added.

Right?

Well, actually ...

“This is an absolute non-starter,” Toledo athletic director Mike O’Brien said. “Let me just put it this way. A large segment of our fans would be disappointed, and that’s an understatement.”

With that, we agreed to ... agree.

Let’s put this to bed right here.

To be sure, the financial crisis born of the coronavirus has forced all college athletic departments to reassess their spending, especially those outside the Power Five conferences.

And no expense is more out of control than football.

Evidence the boom over the past decade, including at our four area colleges.

In 2009, Ohio State and Michigan spent $31.7 million and $18.3 million on football, respectively. Toledo invested $5.5 million, Bowling Green $4.1 million.

By last year, as enormous TV contracts left the blue bloods with more money than they could burn, Ohio State was pouring $60.7 million into football while Michigan anted up $47.4 million. Toledo and Bowling Green spent $11.7 million and $7.8 million.

It was all obscene, but the difference, of course, is Ohio State and Michigan could afford this rate of growth. Toledo, Bowling Green, and every other heavily subsidized Group of Five program feigning to keep up could not.

I’ll state the obvious: It’s time the latter group draws a line in the gridiron dirt, if not begins to funnel some toothpaste back into the tube. (The MAC ending the practice of home teams staying in hotels the night before football games and reducing the size of travel rosters is a good start.)

Still, a move to a lower division is not the panacea some might believe.

Let us break down the three main arguments of the reform advocates:

■ 1. Dropping to the FCS would save mountains of money:

This isn’t necessarily true.

Sure, your expenses would go down, namely through fewer scholarships and lower coaching salaries. But the loss in revenue — not counting the value of brand exposure (do I have my administrator-speak correct?) — would offset the difference.

Toledo, for instance, received $4.9 million in football and basketball media distributions from the NCAA and MAC last year — three times the amount collected by a top FCS program like North Dakota State. The UT athletic department also generated $3.9 million in donations and $1.8 million in ticket sales, figures that would no doubt slump with a drop to a lower level of football.

Further, any move would hinder MAC schools from cashing in on guarantee games at power conference schools, which would be especially damaging for BG. The Falcons, for better or worse, offer themselves for slaughter twice per season, collecting about $2 million. FCS schools get about half the going rate for these games, if they can schedule them at all. (BG athletic director Bob Moosbrugger preferred not to touch the third rail of the FCS debate, but we’re told it is not a consideration.)

■ 2. The FCS is a purer form of football more in line with the academic mission of a university:

This might be the case in the Ivy League, where there are no athletic scholarships. But clear eyes are hardly the rule in the FCS, where there is no guarantee the pursuit of success will be any less blinding.

A little-known fact: Officials at James Madison University in Virginia — where student fees account for $39 million of its $52 million athletic budget — personally mug every student on their first day of school.

How does this compare to, say, Bowling Green?

BG leaned on $14 million in subsidies — including $12.9 million in student fees — to fund its $26 million athletic department last year. James Madison was one of 23 public FCS schools that required greater outside help, and, according to a review of data compiled by the Knight Commission, one of 10 athletic departments to bleed more than $20 million.

Consider, too: In 2018, Idaho became the first FBS school in years to drop to the FCS. Its athletics deficit has since grown.

A MAC school sliding down a level would be trading one money drain for another, only doing so out of sight.

Which bring us to the last point ...

■ 3. You could compete for national titles in the FCS:

Yes, you could (maybe), but would anyone care?

I’ll give you that the prospect of swapping the Dollar General Bowl for a five-round postseason tournament is enticing.

Hear out the above-mentioned MAC professor.

“I worked in I-AA before, and it was exciting. It was fun. You were playing for a championship,” said David Ridpath, a professor of sports management at Ohio University and a leading champion of reform in major college athletics. “The one thing that I tell my president and AD, and of course they don’t buy it, because they think our image as an institution is somehow influenced by being Division I football. ... But I honestly think if [Ohio] was competing in the 1-AA playoffs, we would get as big of crowds that we’re getting now, and we have pretty good attendance for the MAC.

“Why not go and play in a level that you can sustain and be competitive at? It’s not going to affect the university. People come to Ohio University for so many reasons. It’s not because of Division I football.”

We’ll meet him halfway.

While no one comes to Toledo or Bowling Green specifically for sports, I’m not buying that fans — at least the ones I know — would embrace a perceived punt on football. (OK, no one would notice at Akron or Kent State, but that’s another story.)

As much as we poke fun at attendance in the MAC, it’s not nothing, either (MACtion not included). Toledo averaged an announced 20,399 fans per game last year; BG averaged 15,295 fans. The top league in the FCS? The Missouri Valley Conference — which features three-time reigning national champion North Dakota State, South Dakota State, and Youngstown State — pulled in 8,928 fans per game.

More so, a move down would also mean next to no games on national TV and no visits from big-time programs. Count me among those who thinks it’s pretty cool that, since 2006, the Rockets have hosted eight power conference schools — including Miami — along with BYU and three other then-ranked name-brand programs (Fresno State, Boise State, and Cincinnati).

I’ll take Missouri or Colorado in a crowded Glass Bowl over a December playoff game against Illinois State in front of a few thousand fans any day.

“Look at how positive that is for our university and our community,” O’Brien said. “That’s really important as to the stature of being FBS.”

Now, is life in the MAC perfect? Or is the college football landscape ideal? Of course not, and perhaps these fraught times will accelerate foundational change.

There is a better way.

But dropping to the FCS isn’t it.

(05-24-2020 07:59 PM)San Giuseppe Jato Rocket Wrote:  MAY 23, 2020 1:24 PM

Given the foreboding drip, drip, drip of news coming out of the Mid-American Conference — Bowling Green cutting baseball here, Akron dropping sports there, budgets slashing everywhere — more than a few readers have understandably asked the question.

Is there a better way?

More specifically ...

Is it time for schools in the MAC to have a real conversation about their place in the college football ecosystem?

Is it time for universities to stop throwing money they don’t have into an arms race they can’t sustain, and consider a cost-saving move from the highest level of Division I to the lower-stakes Football Championship Series?

If these questions seem unthinkable, so do the times, and, as the thinking goes, nothing should be off the table.

Not even a reckoning for the sport that is both the front porch and money pit of mid-major athletic departments.

To play devil’s advocate, the logic of dropping to what was formerly known as Division I-AA — where football programs can offer 63 scholarships compared to 85 in the FBS — is simple: Schools could shave millions of dollars from their football budget and have the opportunity to compete on a national level.

Whereas now the best Toledo and Bowling Green seasons are rewarded with nothing more than a trip to the Ambien Bowl, they could contend for championships in the FCS.

“Don’t you think it’s time?” one former BG athlete emailed.

“It’s a no brainer,” a professor in the MAC added.

Right?

Well, actually ...

“This is an absolute non-starter,” Toledo athletic director Mike O’Brien said. “Let me just put it this way. A large segment of our fans would be disappointed, and that’s an understatement.”

With that, we agreed to ... agree.

Let’s put this to bed right here.

To be sure, the financial crisis born of the coronavirus has forced all college athletic departments to reassess their spending, especially those outside the Power Five conferences.

And no expense is more out of control than football.

Evidence the boom over the past decade, including at our four area colleges.

In 2009, Ohio State and Michigan spent $31.7 million and $18.3 million on football, respectively. Toledo invested $5.5 million, Bowling Green $4.1 million.

By last year, as enormous TV contracts left the blue bloods with more money than they could burn, Ohio State was pouring $60.7 million into football while Michigan anted up $47.4 million. Toledo and Bowling Green spent $11.7 million and $7.8 million.

It was all obscene, but the difference, of course, is Ohio State and Michigan could afford this rate of growth. Toledo, Bowling Green, and every other heavily subsidized Group of Five program feigning to keep up could not.

I’ll state the obvious: It’s time the latter group draws a line in the gridiron dirt, if not begins to funnel some toothpaste back into the tube. (The MAC ending the practice of home teams staying in hotels the night before football games and reducing the size of travel rosters is a good start.)

Still, a move to a lower division is not the panacea some might believe.

Let us break down the three main arguments of the reform advocates:

■ 1. Dropping to the FCS would save mountains of money:

This isn’t necessarily true.

Sure, your expenses would go down, namely through fewer scholarships and lower coaching salaries. But the loss in revenue — not counting the value of brand exposure (do I have my administrator-speak correct?) — would offset the difference.

Toledo, for instance, received $4.9 million in football and basketball media distributions from the NCAA and MAC last year — three times the amount collected by a top FCS program like North Dakota State. The UT athletic department also generated $3.9 million in donations and $1.8 million in ticket sales, figures that would no doubt slump with a drop to a lower level of football.

Further, any move would hinder MAC schools from cashing in on guarantee games at power conference schools, which would be especially damaging for BG. The Falcons, for better or worse, offer themselves for slaughter twice per season, collecting about $2 million. FCS schools get about half the going rate for these games, if they can schedule them at all. (BG athletic director Bob Moosbrugger preferred not to touch the third rail of the FCS debate, but we’re told it is not a consideration.)

■ 2. The FCS is a purer form of football more in line with the academic mission of a university:

This might be the case in the Ivy League, where there are no athletic scholarships. But clear eyes are hardly the rule in the FCS, where there is no guarantee the pursuit of success will be any less blinding.

A little-known fact: Officials at James Madison University in Virginia — where student fees account for $39 million of its $52 million athletic budget — personally mug every student on their first day of school.

How does this compare to, say, Bowling Green?

BG leaned on $14 million in subsidies — including $12.9 million in student fees — to fund its $26 million athletic department last year. James Madison was one of 23 public FCS schools that required greater outside help, and, according to a review of data compiled by the Knight Commission, one of 10 athletic departments to bleed more than $20 million.

Consider, too: In 2018, Idaho became the first FBS school in years to drop to the FCS. Its athletics deficit has since grown.

A MAC school sliding down a level would be trading one money drain for another, only doing so out of sight.

Which bring us to the last point ...

■ 3. You could compete for national titles in the FCS:

Yes, you could (maybe), but would anyone care?

I’ll give you that the prospect of swapping the Dollar General Bowl for a five-round postseason tournament is enticing.

Hear out the above-mentioned MAC professor.

“I worked in I-AA before, and it was exciting. It was fun. You were playing for a championship,” said David Ridpath, a professor of sports management at Ohio University and a leading champion of reform in major college athletics. “The one thing that I tell my president and AD, and of course they don’t buy it, because they think our image as an institution is somehow influenced by being Division I football. ... But I honestly think if [Ohio] was competing in the 1-AA playoffs, we would get as big of crowds that we’re getting now, and we have pretty good attendance for the MAC.

“Why not go and play in a level that you can sustain and be competitive at? It’s not going to affect the university. People come to Ohio University for so many reasons. It’s not because of Division I football.”

We’ll meet him halfway.

While no one comes to Toledo or Bowling Green specifically for sports, I’m not buying that fans — at least the ones I know — would embrace a perceived punt on football. (OK, no one would notice at Akron or Kent State, but that’s another story.)

As much as we poke fun at attendance in the MAC, it’s not nothing, either (MACtion not included). Toledo averaged an announced 20,399 fans per game last year; BG averaged 15,295 fans. The top league in the FCS? The Missouri Valley Conference — which features three-time reigning national champion North Dakota State, South Dakota State, and Youngstown State — pulled in 8,928 fans per game.

More so, a move down would also mean next to no games on national TV and no visits from big-time programs. Count me among those who thinks it’s pretty cool that, since 2006, the Rockets have hosted eight power conference schools — including Miami — along with BYU and three other then-ranked name-brand programs (Fresno State, Boise State, and Cincinnati).

I’ll take Missouri or Colorado in a crowded Glass Bowl over a December playoff game against Illinois State in front of a few thousand fans any day.

“Look at how positive that is for our university and our community,” O’Brien said. “That’s really important as to the stature of being FBS.”

Now, is life in the MAC perfect? Or is the college football landscape ideal? Of course not, and perhaps these fraught times will accelerate foundational change.

There is a better way.

But dropping to the FCS isn’t it.

Pretty well thought out written article. Only variance from the facts would be stated bgsu attendance of 15,000 + average... Having Toledo visit the Doyt last October possibly boosted them to a 10,000 average...
15,200 - no flipping way !!!

Toledo definitely shouldn't drop down....BG probably should.

Take other teams in the MAC in this article and it does make sense for some to drop down. Some MAC programs really need to have a hard look and determine if FBS is worth it.

(05-24-2020 08:36 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  

(05-24-2020 07:59 PM)San Giuseppe Jato Rocket Wrote:  MAY 23, 2020 1:24 PM

Given the foreboding drip, drip, drip of news coming out of the Mid-American Conference — Bowling Green cutting baseball here, Akron dropping sports there, budgets slashing everywhere — more than a few readers have understandably asked the question.

Is there a better way?

More specifically ...

Is it time for schools in the MAC to have a real conversation about their place in the college football ecosystem?

Is it time for universities to stop throwing money they don’t have into an arms race they can’t sustain, and consider a cost-saving move from the highest level of Division I to the lower-stakes Football Championship Series?

If these questions seem unthinkable, so do the times, and, as the thinking goes, nothing should be off the table.

Not even a reckoning for the sport that is both the front porch and money pit of mid-major athletic departments.

To play devil’s advocate, the logic of dropping to what was formerly known as Division I-AA — where football programs can offer 63 scholarships compared to 85 in the FBS — is simple: Schools could shave millions of dollars from their football budget and have the opportunity to compete on a national level.

Whereas now the best Toledo and Bowling Green seasons are rewarded with nothing more than a trip to the Ambien Bowl, they could contend for championships in the FCS.

“Don’t you think it’s time?” one former BG athlete emailed.

“It’s a no brainer,” a professor in the MAC added.

Right?

Well, actually ...

“This is an absolute non-starter,” Toledo athletic director Mike O’Brien said. “Let me just put it this way. A large segment of our fans would be disappointed, and that’s an understatement.”

With that, we agreed to ... agree.

Let’s put this to bed right here.

To be sure, the financial crisis born of the coronavirus has forced all college athletic departments to reassess their spending, especially those outside the Power Five conferences.

And no expense is more out of control than football.

Evidence the boom over the past decade, including at our four area colleges.

In 2009, Ohio State and Michigan spent $31.7 million and $18.3 million on football, respectively. Toledo invested $5.5 million, Bowling Green $4.1 million.

By last year, as enormous TV contracts left the blue bloods with more money than they could burn, Ohio State was pouring $60.7 million into football while Michigan anted up $47.4 million. Toledo and Bowling Green spent $11.7 million and $7.8 million.

It was all obscene, but the difference, of course, is Ohio State and Michigan could afford this rate of growth. Toledo, Bowling Green, and every other heavily subsidized Group of Five program feigning to keep up could not.

I’ll state the obvious: It’s time the latter group draws a line in the gridiron dirt, if not begins to funnel some toothpaste back into the tube. (The MAC ending the practice of home teams staying in hotels the night before football games and reducing the size of travel rosters is a good start.)

Still, a move to a lower division is not the panacea some might believe.

Let us break down the three main arguments of the reform advocates:

■ 1. Dropping to the FCS would save mountains of money:

This isn’t necessarily true.

Sure, your expenses would go down, namely through fewer scholarships and lower coaching salaries. But the loss in revenue — not counting the value of brand exposure (do I have my administrator-speak correct?) — would offset the difference.

Toledo, for instance, received $4.9 million in football and basketball media distributions from the NCAA and MAC last year — three times the amount collected by a top FCS program like North Dakota State. The UT athletic department also generated $3.9 million in donations and $1.8 million in ticket sales, figures that would no doubt slump with a drop to a lower level of football.

Further, any move would hinder MAC schools from cashing in on guarantee games at power conference schools, which would be especially damaging for BG. The Falcons, for better or worse, offer themselves for slaughter twice per season, collecting about $2 million. FCS schools get about half the going rate for these games, if they can schedule them at all. (BG athletic director Bob Moosbrugger preferred not to touch the third rail of the FCS debate, but we’re told it is not a consideration.)

■ 2. The FCS is a purer form of football more in line with the academic mission of a university:

This might be the case in the Ivy League, where there are no athletic scholarships. But clear eyes are hardly the rule in the FCS, where there is no guarantee the pursuit of success will be any less blinding.

A little-known fact: Officials at James Madison University in Virginia — where student fees account for $39 million of its $52 million athletic budget — personally mug every student on their first day of school.

How does this compare to, say, Bowling Green?

BG leaned on $14 million in subsidies — including $12.9 million in student fees — to fund its $26 million athletic department last year. James Madison was one of 23 public FCS schools that required greater outside help, and, according to a review of data compiled by the Knight Commission, one of 10 athletic departments to bleed more than $20 million.

Consider, too: In 2018, Idaho became the first FBS school in years to drop to the FCS. Its athletics deficit has since grown.

A MAC school sliding down a level would be trading one money drain for another, only doing so out of sight.

Which bring us to the last point ...

■ 3. You could compete for national titles in the FCS:

Yes, you could (maybe), but would anyone care?

I’ll give you that the prospect of swapping the Dollar General Bowl for a five-round postseason tournament is enticing.

Hear out the above-mentioned MAC professor.

“I worked in I-AA before, and it was exciting. It was fun. You were playing for a championship,” said David Ridpath, a professor of sports management at Ohio University and a leading champion of reform in major college athletics. “The one thing that I tell my president and AD, and of course they don’t buy it, because they think our image as an institution is somehow influenced by being Division I football. ... But I honestly think if [Ohio] was competing in the 1-AA playoffs, we would get as big of crowds that we’re getting now, and we have pretty good attendance for the MAC.

“Why not go and play in a level that you can sustain and be competitive at? It’s not going to affect the university. People come to Ohio University for so many reasons. It’s not because of Division I football.”

We’ll meet him halfway.

While no one comes to Toledo or Bowling Green specifically for sports, I’m not buying that fans — at least the ones I know — would embrace a perceived punt on football. (OK, no one would notice at Akron or Kent State, but that’s another story.)

As much as we poke fun at attendance in the MAC, it’s not nothing, either (MACtion not included). Toledo averaged an announced 20,399 fans per game last year; BG averaged 15,295 fans. The top league in the FCS? The Missouri Valley Conference — which features three-time reigning national champion North Dakota State, South Dakota State, and Youngstown State — pulled in 8,928 fans per game.

More so, a move down would also mean next to no games on national TV and no visits from big-time programs. Count me among those who thinks it’s pretty cool that, since 2006, the Rockets have hosted eight power conference schools — including Miami — along with BYU and three other then-ranked name-brand programs (Fresno State, Boise State, and Cincinnati).

I’ll take Missouri or Colorado in a crowded Glass Bowl over a December playoff game against Illinois State in front of a few thousand fans any day.

“Look at how positive that is for our university and our community,” O’Brien said. “That’s really important as to the stature of being FBS.”

Now, is life in the MAC perfect? Or is the college football landscape ideal? Of course not, and perhaps these fraught times will accelerate foundational change.

There is a better way.

But dropping to the FCS isn’t it.

Pretty well thought out written article. Only variance from the facts would be stated bgsu attendance of 15,000 + average... Having Toledo visit the Doyt last October possibly boosted them to a 10,000 average...
15,200 - no flipping way !!!

BG had 5 of 6 home games on Saturdays.

Smart piece. Also: Bowling Green isn't going anywhere. We are just five years removed from a MAC East championship threepeat that included two conference titles. This is a historically good program. Scot Loeffler will get it back on track. Indeed, there is evidence he is already making progress.

The real FB crisis is not in the MAC. It's in the P5 and they are risking a massive loss of revenue streams.

The only way the P5 can guarantee increased revenue streams in this environment is by expanding the playoff which will lead to greater access by the G5.

Bowl system of the future may not be conference driven as much ESPN driven with them placing team in bowl. Every conference champ in a New Year's bowl game.

If the MAC can just hang in for the next 3-4 years there is going to be a pot of gold on the other side of the rainbow.

(05-25-2020 07:07 AM)cmufanatic Wrote:  Take other teams in the MAC in this article and it does make sense for some to drop down. Some MAC programs really need to have a hard look and determine if FBS is worth it.

With what Eastern Michigan is doing now in FB and how competitive Akron's BB has been the last 15-20 years the traditional "deadwood" arguments don't apply.

Especially that the MAC is no longer "too big" when the average D1 conference has 11.3 members today.

The bottom line, as referenced in the OP, is that dropping to FCS would not save any money and could even do the opposite.

The whole concept is a non-starter.

I'd never watch college football again including NIU if MAC drops to FCS

(05-25-2020 02:06 PM)ColinApocalypse Wrote:  The bottom line, as referenced in the OP, is that dropping to FCS would not save any money and could even do the opposite.

The whole concept is a non-starter.

Agree. Why ruin the MAC for nothing or no gain.

It doesn't make sense for any MAC program to drop.

MAC programs can schedule 2 buy games and those games are currently going for ~1.3 million per game. 2 x 1.3 = 2.6 million
MAC TV deal pays 833k
CFP poll paid the MAC 16 million in 2019. Split 12 ways that's 1.33 million per team.

That's $4.76 million just between those 3 revenue streams. You still have ticket sales, donations, concessions, parking, MAC licensing, etc. Toledo spending 11.7 million on football probably isn't coming close to breaking even, but Bowling Green spending $7.8 million probably isn't that far off. All these programs have fat they could trim out of their football budgets as well. It's the administrative costs and olympic sports that are really bleeding the budgets

(05-24-2020 07:59 PM)San Giuseppe Jato Rocket Wrote:  MAY 23, 2020 1:24 PM

Given the foreboding drip, drip, drip of news coming out of the Mid-American Conference — Bowling Green cutting baseball here, Akron dropping sports there, budgets slashing everywhere — more than a few readers have understandably asked the question.

Is there a better way?

More specifically ...

Is it time for schools in the MAC to have a real conversation about their place in the college football ecosystem?

Is it time for universities to stop throwing money they don’t have into an arms race they can’t sustain, and consider a cost-saving move from the highest level of Division I to the lower-stakes Football Championship Series?

If these questions seem unthinkable, so do the times, and, as the thinking goes, nothing should be off the table.

Not even a reckoning for the sport that is both the front porch and money pit of mid-major athletic departments.

To play devil’s advocate, the logic of dropping to what was formerly known as Division I-AA — where football programs can offer 63 scholarships compared to 85 in the FBS — is simple: Schools could shave millions of dollars from their football budget and have the opportunity to compete on a national level.

Whereas now the best Toledo and Bowling Green seasons are rewarded with nothing more than a trip to the Ambien Bowl, they could contend for championships in the FCS.

“Don’t you think it’s time?” one former BG athlete emailed.

“It’s a no brainer,” a professor in the MAC added.

Right?

Well, actually ...

“This is an absolute non-starter,” Toledo athletic director Mike O’Brien said. “Let me just put it this way. A large segment of our fans would be disappointed, and that’s an understatement.”

With that, we agreed to ... agree.

Let’s put this to bed right here.

To be sure, the financial crisis born of the coronavirus has forced all college athletic departments to reassess their spending, especially those outside the Power Five conferences.

And no expense is more out of control than football.

Evidence the boom over the past decade, including at our four area colleges.

In 2009, Ohio State and Michigan spent $31.7 million and $18.3 million on football, respectively. Toledo invested $5.5 million, Bowling Green $4.1 million.

By last year, as enormous TV contracts left the blue bloods with more money than they could burn, Ohio State was pouring $60.7 million into football while Michigan anted up $47.4 million. Toledo and Bowling Green spent $11.7 million and $7.8 million.

It was all obscene, but the difference, of course, is Ohio State and Michigan could afford this rate of growth. Toledo, Bowling Green, and every other heavily subsidized Group of Five program feigning to keep up could not.

I’ll state the obvious: It’s time the latter group draws a line in the gridiron dirt, if not begins to funnel some toothpaste back into the tube. (The MAC ending the practice of home teams staying in hotels the night before football games and reducing the size of travel rosters is a good start.)

Still, a move to a lower division is not the panacea some might believe.

Let us break down the three main arguments of the reform advocates:

■ 1. Dropping to the FCS would save mountains of money:

This isn’t necessarily true.

Sure, your expenses would go down, namely through fewer scholarships and lower coaching salaries. But the loss in revenue — not counting the value of brand exposure (do I have my administrator-speak correct?) — would offset the difference.

Toledo, for instance, received $4.9 million in football and basketball media distributions from the NCAA and MAC last year — three times the amount collected by a top FCS program like North Dakota State. The UT athletic department also generated $3.9 million in donations and $1.8 million in ticket sales, figures that would no doubt slump with a drop to a lower level of football.

Further, any move would hinder MAC schools from cashing in on guarantee games at power conference schools, which would be especially damaging for BG. The Falcons, for better or worse, offer themselves for slaughter twice per season, collecting about $2 million. FCS schools get about half the going rate for these games, if they can schedule them at all. (BG athletic director Bob Moosbrugger preferred not to touch the third rail of the FCS debate, but we’re told it is not a consideration.)

■ 2. The FCS is a purer form of football more in line with the academic mission of a university:

This might be the case in the Ivy League, where there are no athletic scholarships. But clear eyes are hardly the rule in the FCS, where there is no guarantee the pursuit of success will be any less blinding.

A little-known fact: Officials at James Madison University in Virginia — where student fees account for $39 million of its $52 million athletic budget — personally mug every student on their first day of school.

How does this compare to, say, Bowling Green?

BG leaned on $14 million in subsidies — including $12.9 million in student fees — to fund its $26 million athletic department last year. James Madison was one of 23 public FCS schools that required greater outside help, and, according to a review of data compiled by the Knight Commission, one of 10 athletic departments to bleed more than $20 million.

Consider, too: In 2018, Idaho became the first FBS school in years to drop to the FCS. Its athletics deficit has since grown.

A MAC school sliding down a level would be trading one money drain for another, only doing so out of sight.

Which bring us to the last point ...

■ 3. You could compete for national titles in the FCS:

Yes, you could (maybe), but would anyone care?

I’ll give you that the prospect of swapping the Dollar General Bowl for a five-round postseason tournament is enticing.

Hear out the above-mentioned MAC professor.

“I worked in I-AA before, and it was exciting. It was fun. You were playing for a championship,” said David Ridpath, a professor of sports management at Ohio University and a leading champion of reform in major college athletics. “The one thing that I tell my president and AD, and of course they don’t buy it, because they think our image as an institution is somehow influenced by being Division I football. ... But I honestly think if [Ohio] was competing in the 1-AA playoffs, we would get as big of crowds that we’re getting now, and we have pretty good attendance for the MAC.

“Why not go and play in a level that you can sustain and be competitive at? It’s not going to affect the university. People come to Ohio University for so many reasons. It’s not because of Division I football.”

We’ll meet him halfway.

While no one comes to Toledo or Bowling Green specifically for sports, I’m not buying that fans — at least the ones I know — would embrace a perceived punt on football. (OK, no one would notice at Akron or Kent State, but that’s another story.)

As much as we poke fun at attendance in the MAC, it’s not nothing, either (MACtion not included). Toledo averaged an announced 20,399 fans per game last year; BG averaged 15,295 fans. The top league in the FCS? The Missouri Valley Conference — which features three-time reigning national champion North Dakota State, South Dakota State, and Youngstown State — pulled in 8,928 fans per game.

More so, a move down would also mean next to no games on national TV and no visits from big-time programs. Count me among those who thinks it’s pretty cool that, since 2006, the Rockets have hosted eight power conference schools — including Miami — along with BYU and three other then-ranked name-brand programs (Fresno State, Boise State, and Cincinnati).

I’ll take Missouri or Colorado in a crowded Glass Bowl over a December playoff game against Illinois State in front of a few thousand fans any day.

“Look at how positive that is for our university and our community,” O’Brien said. “That’s really important as to the stature of being FBS.”

Now, is life in the MAC perfect? Or is the college football landscape ideal? Of course not, and perhaps these fraught times will accelerate foundational change.

There is a better way.

But dropping to the FCS isn’t it.

The problem with all of this is the understandment the D1 template stays the same: playoff format stays the same, conference skeds stay the same; non-con skeds (and payouts$$$) stay the same and right on down the line.

But if there are changes, significant changes, that affect the trickle down in terms of $$$ and non-con opportunity to MAC level programs, then saying the drop down scenario is a non-starter really doesn't wash.

Be careful ... nothing and nobody is bulletproof!!!!

(05-26-2020 07:48 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  It's the administrative costs and olympic sports that are really bleeding the budgets

The Olympic Sports are to a certain degree a cost of playing Division 1 Basketball and FBS football, but it's up to the University whether the prospective benefit in promoting the school in some niche is worth running Olympic sports above the bare minimum required to meet Div1/FBS requirements and to have enough women on scholarship to meet the TitleIX financial costs of all of those FB scholarship.

It's like Akron and Kent's Baseball team. Baseball is an expansive sport in the northern states, with all of the travel across the Sunbelt for two to four weeks at the start of the season.

Akron cut baseball, there was an outcry, supporters of baseball wanted to bring it back, they worked out a plan and it was kind of, "if what you want is Akron players in Akron uniforms playing baseball, they is the minimum required to make that happen", supporters of baseball raised enough money to do the facilities major maintenance that was part of the cost that Akron didn't believe it could afford to pay, they are bringing baseball back.

But Akron supporters shouldn't be holding their breath for Akron to be appearing in the CWS anytime soon. And if they aren't happy with performance and want more baseball players on scholarship, "here's the form to donate to endow an athletic scholarship for baseball".

Perhaps it is time confereces stop mandating what sports they have to have. Financially times are changing and conferences must allow adaptation.

Dear cmufanatic,
I disagree. One basic reason for mandating sports in a conference, is scheduling. If one allowed members to chose what sports they individually wanted to maintain, scheduling could become a nightmare. It could go so far that members might as well be independents.
One can already see with several members of the MAC having dropped various minor sports, the schedules that have to be maintained, or the bringing in of associate members to have any semblance of schedules.

The MAC only requires football, mens/women's hoops, and volleyball. That doesn't seem to be the problem. The NCAA requiring 16 sports to compete in FBS is the bigger problem.

(05-27-2020 01:26 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  The MAC only requires football, mens/women's hoops, and volleyball. That doesn't seem to be the problem. The NCAA requiring 16 sports to compete in FBS is the bigger problem.

And of those four, the NCAA requires mens/womens hoops to be Division 1.

I don't know when baseball was dropped as a requirement, but clearly that fight had been fought before the current crisis came over the horizon.

(05-28-2020 08:42 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 01:26 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  The MAC only requires football, mens/women's hoops, and volleyball. That doesn't seem to be the problem. The NCAA requiring 16 sports to compete in FBS is the bigger problem.

And of those four, the NCAA requires mens/womens hoops to be Division 1.

I don't know when baseball was dropped as a requirement, but clearly that fight had been fought before the current crisis came over the horizon.

Even if it wasn't a requirement, all 12 MAC schools would likely sponsor those 4 sports. I don't see the MAC requiring its members fielding teams for those 4 sports being an actual issue.

Eliminating baseball as a requirement was good as it's one of the most expensive olympic sports to run (assuming you're properly funding it) as a northern school. I'm pretty sure it was dropped as a requirement when Akron decided to drop its program. Obviously Akron would have had the conversation with the other MAC schools prior to doing it. Buffalo followed suit a year or two later.