About 15 years ago, the brought football back to X as a club sport. I think it lasted 3 years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Printable View
About 15 years ago, the brought football back to X as a club sport. I think it lasted 3 years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Having done some recruiting for X in the late 90s early 2000s, I had some kids tell me that X not having football was a deal breaker.Quote:
Originally Posted by D-West & PO-Z
Could they use Corcoran field for football also?
Would like to see Jimmy Carter heads in the stands the first time the Fayers came down.
I have to believe that is true. The cat is certainly appears to be very much out of the bag.Quote:
Originally Posted by JTG
It's not just about male enrollment. You actually hit the nail on the head about this (see below).
Please allow me to go about it this way: how does a cynic see this opportunity?
1. We had club football already and that didn't work out (well, yeah, probably because it was "club" football).
2. This will take energy and focus away from our basketball program (I thought that way years ago; that's no longer a concern).
3. This is a money (tuition) grab (if the students/parents value this experience at a place like Xavier, then its "marked to market").
How does an optimist see this opportunity?
1. Football at this level, done well, provides multiple benefits to the institution.
2. This will be accomplished in a manner that ensures the basketball program will move forward successfully.
3. It will give the kids on campus the "fall experience" of having football.
This obviously isn't about navigating our way to FBS football or even FCS football. It's obviously non-scholly all the way, at least with respect to athletic scholarships. We aren't angling to do anything other than establish a successful NAIA program.
If you missed it before, then consider JTG's post again:
It has been tried elsewhere and has been successful. In Indy around 20-25 yrs ago Marian U, was little Marian College and most of the student body was girls. They decided to start NAIA football to get males to go to the school. It worked so well that male enrollment jumped, they had money to build a stadium, built a heck of a program that has won National Championships. The school started a Med School a few years ago. It has nothing to do with tv, or becoming Alabama or OSU. It's a student acquisition, retention, and student quality of life program.
I can't put it any better than that.
Xavier has been changing, mostly for the better and at an increasing pace since Father Hoff showed up. Just think about Xavier in 1990 versus 2000 versus now. We are 9 years out from our 200th Anniversary. We're going to look even better when we get there.
Sure, but were those kids instead going to Ohio State, UC and Kentucky, or were they going to Mt. St. Joe's?Quote:
Originally Posted by JTG
Yeah I get that, but what level of football? Any football? Or division 1, 80,000 fans in the stands football.Quote:
Originally Posted by JTG
I think a lot of kids who say X not having football is a deal breaker, wouldn't consider Pioneer League level football, the football they are talking about.
A few questions here:Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
1.) How in your view does FCS football provide multiple benefits to the school?
2.) What does this have anything to do with the success of our basketball program?
3.) What does Marian have anything to do with Xavier? Does Marian have a basketball team, one that has grown leaps and bounds and is in the Big East?
If this was the 70s when Xavier basketball was a blip on the radar, I could see the correlation. Otherwise, I don't think what happened at Marian has anything to do with Xavier.
I really think most of this stuff is nonsense. Guys don't go to Dayton or Villanova because they have a football team, I think that's complete nonsense. If they want to increase male enrollment and do it by adding 100 guys a year and it doesn't hurt the basketball program, go for it. I think there are much better ways to achieve the desired outcome but whatever floats their boat i guess.
Actually, club football got through a number of years with some entertaining games. Problem was the students had to pay to play; the number of players weren't sufficient to deal with injuries. I always enjoyed to attending games at Corcoran Field back in the days of Danny Abramowicz, Carroll Williams, Steve Bailey, Jim Louder, Denny Caponi and others. Autumns at Xavier have never been the same since football was dropped in 1973. I attended Xavier when football was dropped and even attempted to walk-on for what would have been my sophomore year. Always thought that dropping to Division 3 football as Dayton did back then would have been a better option.Quote:
Originally Posted by bjf123
I had hoped that club football might have morphed into non-scholarship football in the Pioneer Football League where schools like Butler and Dayton have played without harming their basketball programs. Villanova's football program certainly doesn't harm their basketball program (this even after Nova dropped their program only to re-start it very quickly). Schools adding football and /or restarting programs at various levels has been a growing trend:
National Football Foundation & College Hall of Fame
Last week the National Football Foundation & College Hall of Fame (NFF) highlighted that football remains strong on campuses across the country as the number of four-year colleges and universities from all NCAA divisions, the NAIA and independents offering football currently stands at 774. The total number includes one college football team that will take the field for the first time this season and six additional programs that will take to the gridiron in the coming years. (Media release courtesy of the National Football Foundation & College Hall of Fame.)
Since 1978 when the NCAA changed its method for tracking attendance figures, the number of schools playing NCAA football (FBS, FCS, DII and DIII) has steadily increased by 181 schools from 484 in 1978 to 665 in 2021. Adding NAIA and independent schools playing football and schools launching programs in the coming years, there are now 774 four-year colleges and universities offering students an opportunity to play college football...
”No other sport contributes more to the vibrancy of a college campus than football, and we are very pleased to highlight those schools that have added our great game,” said NFF President & CEO Steve Hatchell. “University and college presidents clearly see the value of having programs on their campuses, and we applaud them for understanding the role football can play in the educational experience of all their students.”
The rationale for adding football varies at each institution, and all of the decision makers, who helped develop a plan for launching a program, explain that an in-depth study played a critical role in finding the right level of play and the proper financial balance. Small colleges may cite increasing enrollment and addressing gender imbalances while larger universities might highlight the role of football in raising the institutionÂ’s profile and its ability to attract research grants. All mention creating a more vibrant on-campus community and connecting with alumni.
“With more than one million high school students playing football, there is plenty of room for expansion of the game at the collegiate level,” said NFF Chairman Archie Manning. “Many of these colleges clearly recognize that football can play an important role in encouraging students to continue their educations by enticing them to enroll.”
According to a 2015 study of five small universities published in College Planning & Management by Virginia Wesleyan University President Dr. Scott Miller and former Carlow University (PA) President Dr. Marylouise Fennell, adding sports teams and facilities, especially football and marching bands, can fuel an enrollment boost. The study found that each of the five institutions experienced a six-year increase of 26 percent or more, with one school doubling its enrollment during that period...
You can read more of this story at: https://footballfoundation.org/news/...-football.aspx
I have no idea how the numbers would work for Xavier especially with Title IX considerations but an argument can be made that non-scholarship football doesn't impact legislation and/or female club sports even out the athletic.opportunities.
I fully support the administration exploring the pros and cons of non-scholarship football. It would certainly fill an autumn void that exists on Victory Parkway and I believe basketball success wouldn't be undermined. I would love to see it happen.
FWIW: I am just a little more than a year out from chemo and beam radiation for thyroid cancer. Today I had CT scans of my chest, neck and abdomen. Reads just in: All show me clear of cancer consistent with July PETSCAN at MD Anderson which showed no evidence of cancer.
Scheduled to head to Houston again in January for another PETSCAN. I am blessed!
Finally: Musketeer Madness noted this past summer that Steve Thomas turned 80. Can somebody get his jersey hanging at Cintas?
His 30 ppg. average without a three-point shot in 1964 is one remarkable basketball feat. He was that good!
I don't understand this. The gap between where Xavier is now vs. what it would need to be to provide substantial and difference making revenue is cavernous. What other school the size of Xavier uses football to supplement other things?
There would be zero interest in Xavier football, except by the weekend warriors hanging on to play "college" football. There is Father Hoff vision and then there is this. This is dumb.
This feels like someone trying to sell me on the streetcar.
sorry for repost
I think that many here would be surprised that some Xavier grads on this board are fans of other school’s football teams, including schools in the Cincinnati area. I’d certainly plan to attend if X started playing football again. If X had never dropped football I would probably be a season ticket holder for them. Instead I’m a season ticket holder for someone else. That doesn’t mean that we are any less of a Xavier fan. It only means that we had to go elsewhere to fill a void that Xavier dropping football created. But to each there own. I’m not telling anyone that they should be a college football fan. I’m just saying that some of us are and that I personally would like to be a XAVIER college FOOTBALL fan.
Go Cocks ??
Most people on here are probably fans of other school's football teams. Don't think that would surprise anyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by XUGRAD80
I really enjoy college football and go to probably 4-6 games a year encompassing a couple of different teams.. but that's big time power 5 football.. If X had a football team, I'd probably look things up to see how they are doing like I do the soccer teams, but you'd never find me at a game of theirs because its barely above high school football. Like you said though, to each their own. My assumption would be attendance around what Dayton's is which is about 3k...whoope do.
I actually think this may be one of the least surprising things.Quote:
Originally Posted by XUGRAD80
It probably depends. Were they fans or players?Quote:
Originally Posted by GoMuskies
Football at the FCS level typically doesn't drain a lot of resources. That's even more true for football at the PFL level. The people that are against football for whatever reason probably don't need to worry. It's not going to compromise basketball. I can't imagine that ANYTHING would ever be prioritized away from basketball and toward a PFL non-scholarship football program.
The last school to win a D1 national championship in basketball that did not play football at any level was Marquette. In 1977.
I believe there are only four schools in the entire history of D1 basketball that won a national championship without playing football at any level at the time they won it. That's San Francisco in 1955 and 1956, Loyola in 1963, and Marquette in 1977. That's it.
Villanova has football. Georgetown has football. Butler has football. These are top tier national brands and programs when it comes to basketball. I assure you NOTHING at ANY of those schools is being diverted from basketball to support football. Football has about the same priority as women's soccer.
As far as what does it do for Xavier?? I don't know. If you don't like football, I guess it doesn't do anything for you. But at worst it's a zero sum game. If they model it the way most non-scholarship programs are modeled, it won't siphon anything away from basketball, or the any other part of the athletic department, or for that matter any other part of the campus.
UD and Butler. How's that for depressing.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoMuskies
Jesus, I hope they were planning to PLAY football.Quote:
Originally Posted by JTG
Responses:Quote:
Originally Posted by Xville
1. It increases male enrollment and it provides on-campus activity in the fall, primarily. IF it can be done well and successfully, then it simply adds to the Xavier experience. No one is expecting tailgates at the level of Ole Miss and meaningful athletic revenue of any kind. But what if they pull it off well? What if Xavier ends up putting a program in place that attracts a following and creates some fun on campus on Saturday afternoons in the fall? This is NOT a "panacea play"; it can be a nice rounding out of offerings. I think people who can visualize it working well see the potential behind it, without believing that it can or would be any form of homerun for the school.
2. It has nothing to do with a successful basketball program. Xavier has a nationally recognized basketball program. The only thing that this could possibly have to do with Xavier's basketball program has to do with the question of whether or not pursuing football at this level would in any way harm Xavier's ongoing efforts with its basketball program. I don't believe there was one person in a leadership position at Xavier, say 10 years ago, that would have thought that pursuing football at the FCS level was a good idea. Things have transpired that allow X to now think differently about this opportunity.
3. Marian is one example of a small school that put football in place at a certain level, nurtured it and built it up, and ended up being better off as a consequence of that decision. I'm not comparing Marian to Xavier. There is no comparison. The point JTG made - a point that remains spot on - is that the addition of a football program, if well managed, to a university can add overall value to that university. Marian's success at football is the point. One can argue the amount of value it could possibly add. I certainly get that. But our Big East conference mate Villanova certainly continues to stay the course with its FCS program. They aren't dropping their program.
Guys don't go to Dayton or Villanova because they have a football team, I think that's complete nonsense. - - Actually, guys that play football that go to VD or Nova do go to those schools because of the availability of football at those schools. That's the fundamental point with all this.
Thanks for your responses, I certainly appreciate it. The reason I asked question 2 is because you said something to the effect that it would further the basketball team/program. I fail to see that, and in response to Dayton and Nova, you're correct...I failed to say that people outside of the ones actually playing football. However, it seems I might be wrong in that regard as well based off of JTG's response, which is astounding to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
The rest, ok I can see your perspective. I'm not against Xavier having football. I just kind of shrug my shoulders at it, and don't think it really adds anything of value. However, colleges have being adding nothing of value for years and tuition keeps rising so I guess this is just par for the course.
If it is being done to attract 100 more male students who want to play football in college, that makes sense. Attracting 100 more students doesnt seem like a huge impact to me on its face, but maybe it is given Xavier's current enrollment numbers, and the fact that these kids still pay tuition.
Being a draw for non football playing students? Not sure I see that.
Don't have a dog in the fight either way, however.
Isn't that the rugby team's job?Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
Ha! Okay. White flag. No football tailgate is EVER going to compete with a post-game rugby party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel Cooley XU'81
We have another fall sport that in most other countries would fill the void till basketball.
Football by another name.
Xavier has expanded greatly since I graduated and now being in the Big East with an on campus arena, the school and basketball program are in good shape.
Xavier would be smart to at least look into starting lower level non scholarship football to add another facet to campus and campus life. I imagine that tearing down Schmitt, the Armory and the O’Connor sports center and “redoing” or rebuilding that side of campus is part of their larger plans. Having a football team to potentially attract 3000 attendees for 5 games per year would help.
I don’t see much of a downside to it.
Honestly don’t know if football will help or hurt. With that said, we have come such a long way as a university since 1973 as others have pointed out.
We are loosely a national brand (in basketball) and actually have students from all 50 states. Think about it, we barely got mentions from the local media back in the day. Boy have times changed.
in the fewest amount of words possible, I simply dont see how the benefits of adding a football program could outweigh the costs.
Not sure why administration would even spend any time on this.
A few seasons in I had a neck injury. That is when I discovered the party had been starting without me with kegs in the stands! Post-game is great, and even better if you get an early start!Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
BTW - living in Cincinnati in the summer wearing a neck brace in a house with no AC and the windows painted shut is no treat!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MHettel
I’m not sure who this would actually appeal to. My son could have played college football with a scholarship at some smaller schools. It was a Groucho Marx thing, he was not impressed by the schools that were impressed with him. College was paid for, so there was no compelling reason to play. He was ready to start his adult life.
Are there really kids who love it so much you can build a team of them? If that is a yes, good for them. I just don’t see the draw, but what do I know?
.
Just curious, how much do you think it generally costs?? Remember, this is the Pioneer Football League.Quote:
Originally Posted by MHettel
Just for shits and giggles, here is the makeup of the Pioneer League along with stadium capacity:
San Diego (6,000)
St. Thomas-Minnesota (5,000)
Drake (14,550)
Valparaiso (5,000)
Butler (7,500)
Dayton (11,000)
Marist (5,000)
Morehead (10,000)
Davidson (4,700)
Presbyterian (6,500)
Stetson (6,000)
Another question that would arise is where would you build a new stadium that would also likely come with a track and field setup? The T&F program has always been at or near the bottom of the Big East and facilities has to be a major reason for that. Women's basketball is the only other program that has been consistently awful since joining the Big East.
Every other sport has had varying degrees of success - baseball has been one example and we're likely going to see both men's and women's soccer make the NCAA Tournament simultaneously for the first time.
Some budgets from Pop wet League Schools.Quote:
Originally Posted by xubrew
Morehead State University Men's Football
On the money side of things, the Morehead State University football program brought home $1,082,756 in revenue and paid out $1,082,756 in total expenses.
The 116 players of the UDayton men's football team are led by a head coach and 9 assistant coaches. The team has an academic progress rate of 945, which is a measure of how well they do in the classroom. The football program at UDayton made $221,136 in revenue and spend $1,301,281 in expenses.
With an excellent academic progress rate of 989, the team has shown that they take there time in the classroom seriously. The Butler football program paid out $1,252,259 in expenses while making $1,244,835 in total revenue. That's not such good news since it means the program lost money to the tune of $-7,424.
On the money side of things, the Davidson football program brought home $1,772,393 in revenue and paid out $1,538,608 in total expenses. This means the program turned a profit, making $233,785 for the school.
There are 96 players on the Valpo men's football team, and they are led by one head coach and 10 assistant coaches. As an interesting note on their academic performance, the team's APR is 956. Valpo brought in $1,243,116 in revenue from its football program while paying out $1,158,267 in expenses.
There are 93 players on the USD men’s football team, and they are led by one head coach and 12 assistant coaches. The team has an excellent academic progress rate of 977 - proof that they don’t ignore the importance of getting a good education. The football program at USD made $1,554,246 in revenue and spend $1,554,246 in expenses. Even though this means that the program didn’t make any money, at least it wasn’t in the red.
A terrible MVC program with scholarships and no fan support for comparison:
The football program at Indiana State made $4,370,196 in revenue and spend $4,184,677 in expenses. This equates to a net profit of $185,519 for the program. That's definitely a big plus
I’d think that Mt ST. Joes and Thomas More, both in the Cincinnati area, would be fair comparisons. Both programs have done well in the D3 and NAIA and have raised the exposure of both schools. Rosters are heavily made up of Cincinnati and NKY area players. Since both are private universities like X, getting financial numbers from those institutions can be difficult. I would imagine that using a local high school stadium would be the plan, not building a new one on the Xavier campus.
https://www.springfieldnewssun.com/s...outputType=amp
So this is extremely old but it’s the latest I could find without really digging in.
My guess is that nowadays dayton is losing a million a season on football. If Xavier wants the equivalent of high school football I guess knock yourself out, but I think getting the basketball program to respectable year in and year out can also get another 100 guys to enroll without the added expense.
I’m having a really hard time seeing how this would benefit the university. I’d like to see some feasibility studies on this and see what they come up with.
So it essentially costs about a million dollars a year. Give or take.Quote:
Originally Posted by ballyhoohoo
The revenues and expenses that schools submit in the EADA Reports are often misleading if you don’t know how the reporting works. For instance, money given to the athletic department from the school is reported as athletics revenue even though the school is technically spending money. Scholarships are reported as both revenue and an expense. Since a school is basically writing themselves a check, the money they make from cashing the check is reported as revenue. The money they spend writing the check is an expense. But for PFL football, there are no scholarships, so the expenses are pretty accurate.
Here’s what IS NOT reported in the EADA. Tuition. It’s not going to the athletic dept so it’s not considered revenue, but it is going to the institution. Xavier’s tuition is listed at over $42,000 a year. A roster of 100 players would make over $4 million a year in tuition dollars for the school.
And, there you have it! That’s how the benefits of PFL football can be worth the cost for a private school.
Nick - congrats on your success with fighting cancer.
Whoa! I’m not sure where that came from, but I’d like to echo that.Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
The ATHLETIC DEPT is probably spending a million on football, but the institution is making three or four times that just off of the tuition that all of the players collectively pay. The school therefore has no problem giving the athletic department the million bucks they need to cover the expenses. They’re not losing money on football. Not really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xville
I understand what you are saying. Let’s say for shits n giggles average student pays 35000 after aid etc so that’s 3.5 mil… a positive of 2.5. My guess is that if it was a net 2.5, Xavier would have done this a long time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by xubrew