Xavier FCS Football???

[D-West & PO-Z]

The closest match that I can think of is Mt St Joesph’s, right here in the west side of Cincinnati. It’s got 1800 undergrads, it’s a private Catholic university, tuition averages 18K after student aid, and while it plays D3 ball, it’s very competitive at its level on a national basis. Their annual football budget is around 450K. It started the program in 2007, so it’s in its 15th year. I have no idea how they draw, but it hasn’t seem to be detrimental to the rest of their mens and womens programs. They are a non-athletic scholarship program too.

Thomas More also started football around the same time. Their mens and womens BB programs are both ranked in the top 5 preseason in NAIA this year and have been extremely competitive nationally at their level for several years. Their football budget is around 700k, but they also give out athletic scholarships. In fact, they left D3 and moved back to NAIA so they could give scholarships and play more schools in the area, thus cutting down on travel expenses.

I wonder how Xavier being division 1 in a big time conference in their other sports helps or hurts Xavier (if either) in this comparison?

[JTG]

Getting back to why Xavier didn't decide to do this a long time ago, I think it's because people just didn't understand how it would/could work, so they just decided that it wouldn't. The new president seems to think differently. She came from a private school that had football, so she knows how it can work, and that a lot of the reasons people come up with as to how it won't work just aren't valid reasons. That's my guess as to why it's happening now.



My answer is that I have no clue. Maybe they feel it isn't part of their culture. Maybe they don't fully understand how it can be beneficial. Maybe the benefits it can provide don't match the immediate needs or wishes of the school.

Now I have some questions...

-Why do all of the small private schools who do have football continue to have it?? If it's not ultimately a financial benefit for the school, then why would so many of them continue to do it?

-Why have so many schools decided to add it??

-Why have so many schools that have added it decided to not immediately cut it if it turned out to not work out for them?

-To better state the question above, why haven't there been any noticeable outcries from schools that recently added football about how doing so depleted resources for the rest of the athletics department and campus that are no longer available because of football??

You bring up some great points. I have long wondered how so many tiny schools can have football, and it seems to thrive, even places that draw maybe 900-1500 fans a game. It has to be the tuition vs expense argument. Maybe it's just a very well-kept secret. So why not X?

[xubrew]

I wonder how Xavier being division 1 in a big time conference in their other sports helps or hurts Xavier (if either) in this comparison?

Most D1 schools that have recently added football have done so because they felt the need to strengthen their foothold within D1. I believe there are only seven conferences that don't play football at any level (America East, A10, Big East, Big West, Horizon, MVC, Summit League, WCC). If you're not in one of those conferences, and you don't have football, you're going to feel like you're at a huge political disadvantage when it comes to your place within the conference. And even with that, several schools within the MVC, Summit League, and A10 field football teams. So, the schools who are adding football aren't really in the same boat that Xavier's in.

D1 non-scholarship football is a very limited scope. Most of those schools have actually had football for a very long time. There's the Ivy League, which isn't really applicable to Xavier either, and there's the PFL. Believe it or not, I think most of those schools have had football for over 100 years. So...it's not that they just added it. I think the better question to ask is why are they choosing to play non-scholarship football in the PFL?? The PFL is actually relatively new, and not all the teams have been in it for that long.

The answer is it helps with male enrollment, and it therefore makes money for the institution.

Here is something else that is undeniably true. You're not going to lose more than a million dollars on football if you're only spending a million dollars on it in the first place. I think nearly every small private school, who charges private school tuition, would happily spend a million dollars a year on ANYTHING that they felt would virtually guarantee them 100 tuition paying students a year. If it were a rec center, they'd do it. If it were an eSports club, they'd do it. If it were a foodcourt, they'd do it.

Football will guarantee them 100 students that would not otherwise be there. Are there other ways to attract students?? Sure. But football is definitely on the list.

And aside from all that, it doesn't COST the athletic department ANYTHING. That's why Butler, and Dayton, and Davidson (who's been to the playoffs) never even consider leaving the PFL. That's why when San Diego looked like they were going to implement scholarships and go to the Big Sky, they decided not to. The WCC is a better basketball conference, and the overall cost to football for the athletic dept. was zero.

[Masterofreality]

Most D1 schools that have recently added football have done so because they felt the need to strengthen their foothold within D1. I believe there are only seven conferences that don't play football at any level (America East, A10, Big East, Big West, Horizon, MVC, Summit League, WCC). If you're not in one of those conferences, and you don't have football, you're going to feel like you're at a huge political disadvantage when it comes to your place within the conference. And even with that, several schools within the MVC, Summit League, and A10 field football teams. So, the schools who are adding football aren't really in the same boat that Xavier's in.

D1 non-scholarship football is a very limited scope. Most of those schools have actually had football for a very long time. There's the Ivy League, which isn't really applicable to Xavier either, and there's the PFL. Believe it or not, I think most of those schools have had football for over 100 years. So...it's not that they just added it. I think the better question to ask is why are they choosing to play non-scholarship football in the PFL?? The PFL is actually relatively new, and not all the teams have been in it for that long.

The answer is it helps with male enrollment, and it therefore makes money for the institution.

Here is something else that is undeniably true. You're not going to lose more than a million dollars on football if you're only spending a million dollars on it in the first place. I think nearly every small private school, who charges private school tuition, would happily spend a million dollars a year on ANYTHING that they felt would virtually guarantee them 100 tuition paying students a year. If it were a rec center, they'd do it. If it were an eSports club, they'd do it. If it were a foodcourt, they'd do it.

Football will guarantee them 100 students that would not otherwise be there. Are there other ways to attract students?? Sure. But football is definitely on the list.

And aside from all that, it doesn't COST the athletic department ANYTHING. That's why Butler, and Dayton, and Davidson (who's been to the playoffs) never even consider leaving the PFL. That's why when San Diego looked like they were going to implement scholarships and go to the Big Sky, they decided not to. The WCC is a better basketball conference, and the overall cost to football for the athletic dept. was zero.

This is great stuff. Thanks for the insight Brew!

[XUGRAD80]

They are sure as heck spending more than a million dollars on the new practice gym and other capital improvements to Cintas.

[XU '11]

And aside from all that, it doesn't COST the athletic department ANYTHING. That's why Butler, and Dayton, and Davidson (who's been to the playoffs) never even consider leaving the PFL. That's why when San Diego looked like they were going to implement scholarships and go to the Big Sky, they decided not to. The WCC is a better basketball conference, and the overall cost to football for the athletic dept. was zero.

This just isn't true. Sure, it doesn't cost as much as scholarship football but it isn't free. Even if we say the university will take the increased tuition payments and pay for the $1.5mil football budget...

The athletic director will spend time worrying about football instead of the existing sports. We will need additional athletic trainers and athletic training space. We will need more support staff in every area -- compliance, academic support, sports information, strength and conditioning -- and bigger spaces to accommodate the 100 additional student athletes.

And the biggest issue: if we add 100 male student athletes, we'd need to add about 130 female student athletes to stay in Title IX compliance (since the university is currently about 57% female). So we'd go from supporting about 330 student athletes to a whopping 550. This is a terrible idea.

[paulxu]

Do the Title IX requirements come into play if it's non-scholarship football?

[XUGRAD80]

Do the Title IX requirements come into play if it's non-scholarship football?

I don’t think so….

“Under Title IX, an educational institution must provide male and female athletes with equal access to financial aid. This means that funds allocated to athletic scholarships must be proportionate to the participation of male and female athletes.”

[XU '11]

Do the Title IX requirements come into play if it's non-scholarship football?

Yes. There are three aspects to Title IX compliance:

An institution must meet all of the following requirements in order to be in compliance with Title IX:

(1) For participation requirements, institutions officials must meet one of the following three tests. An institution may:
• Provide participation opportunities for women and men that are substantially proportionate to their respective rates of enrollment of full-time undergraduate students;
• Demonstrate a history and continuing practice of program expansion for the underrepresented sex;
• Fully and effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex; and,

(2) Female and male student-athletes must receive athletics scholarship dollars proportional to their participation; and,

(3) Equal treatment of female and male student-athletes in the eleven provisions as mentioned above.

https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2014/1/2...tions.aspx#how

So it is true that non-scholarship football doesn't affect the scholarship piece. But if you lose the proportional opportunities aspect, it's really hard to demonstrate the other two participation options while adding a men's sport.

[JTG]

This just isn't true. Sure, it doesn't cost as much as scholarship football but it isn't free. Even if we say the university will take the increased tuition payments and pay for the $1.5mil football budget...

The athletic director will spend time worrying about football instead of the existing sports. We will need additional athletic trainers and athletic training space. We will need more support staff in every area -- compliance, academic support, sports information, strength and conditioning -- and bigger spaces to accommodate the 100 additional student athletes.

And the biggest issue: if we add 100 male student athletes, we'd need to add about 130 female student athletes to stay in Title IX compliance (since the university is currently about 57% female). So we'd go from supporting about 330 student athletes to a whopping 550. This is a terrible idea.

If it was a terrible idea it would have been shot down from the start. The staff, coaches, equipment and insurance are all part of the football budget, and there are examples all over the Midwest that this is doable. Even being very conservative, say the 100 athletes pay $28k a year, and the budget is $1.5Mil. That's still a $1.3mil cushion. Believe me, Butler is one of the most tightwad schools in America, and they have had football since forever. That alone is proof that this will work.