|
|
Post by John Knight on Oct 31, 2013 11:19:15 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by fballcoachg on Oct 31, 2013 11:27:36 GMT -6
I see the train of thought but how about all of the small colleges adding it and looking at the student body increase? They are making money off of the addition of football...those schools are looking at the peripheral with all of the extras a program brings. And, as a side note, I never trust the "debt" analysis of a program, I remember when they were contracting baseball and all these teams were talking about how much they lost, an accountant flat out and said that he can easily make a large surplus look like a huge debt. I think all they did was focused on the expenditures and only counted the ticket sales, no mention of the merchandising, tv contracts, endorsements, etc. So while UT may very well have run a debt, it was not because of the football program.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Oct 31, 2013 11:39:09 GMT -6
The problems facing small schools are real and serious. My college, Mansfield University (Pennsylvania) eliminated D.2 football a few years ago and now fields a Sprint (lightweight) team. It drives us football alums nuts but the school is facing a $14 million deficit and is laying off 54 employees. It's hard to push to reinstate NCAA football when the university itself is fighting for its life.
|
|
|
|
Post by breakerdog on Oct 31, 2013 12:15:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Oct 31, 2013 12:24:40 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2013 12:33:27 GMT -6
that is such small thinking...But as I have said before, I think football is in trouble anyways....and not for financial or medical reasons.
|
|
|
|
Post by breakerdog on Oct 31, 2013 12:38:51 GMT -6
Counter-counter-counter point
Between the 2001-02 season and the 2011-12 season the number of football playing student athletes in the NCAA went up from 1036 to 1096. In the same time period the number of participating teams went up from 617 to 651. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Oct 31, 2013 12:44:57 GMT -6
Counter-counter-counter point
Between the 2001-02 season and the 2011-12 season the number of football playing student athletes in the NCAA went up from 1036 to 1096. In the same time period the number of participating teams went up from 617 to 651. I'm not a "Sky is falling" guy. I don't believe that college or HS football are going away anytime soon. I do not believe that Penn State will be walking their cows across the street to graze at Beaver Stadium. During tough economic times, though, maybe football isn't for every school. |
|
|
|
Post by fballcoachg on Oct 31, 2013 15:33:51 GMT -6
Counter-counter-counter point
Between the 2001-02 season and the 2011-12 season the number of football playing student athletes in the NCAA went up from 1036 to 1096. In the same time period the number of participating teams went up from 617 to 651. I'm not a "Sky is falling" guy. I don't believe that college or HS football are going away anytime soon. I do not believe that Penn State will be walking their cows across the street to graze at Beaver Stadium. During tough economic times, though, maybe football isn't for every school. I agree with you but I also know that some schools are adding it to actually help their economic situation. I had a buddy at a D3 in PA who said the school told them they had to bring in X amount of freshman every year, for the school it was about enrollment. My question, at some schools is it harder to maintain a program than add a program? Certainly there is no new car smell to it and if they are down then it's probably not as much of a pull. |
|
|
|
Post by coach2013 on Oct 31, 2013 17:49:06 GMT -6
many kids still play football. many however are playing up the concussion thing as a way to get reduced work loads in school.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Nov 1, 2013 5:03:37 GMT -6
Counter-counter-counter point
Between the 2001-02 season and the 2011-12 season the number of football playing student athletes in the NCAA went up from 1036 to 1096. In the same time period the number of participating teams went up from 617 to 651. I don't think you are reading that chart correctly...or you just mistyped a few words. According to what you wrote, there currently only 1096 NCAA football players playing on 651 teams, meaning each team is fielded by an average of less than 2 players. According to the CHART-- there has been a net increase in football teams of 34 over that decade, and a net increase of football playing student athletes 11553. That data shows the bigger increase is in squad size. |
|
coachsmi0901
Freshmen Member
Ever heard of that coach that hated his job? Yeah, me neither.
Posts: 85
|
Post by coachsmi0901 on Nov 3, 2013 21:08:10 GMT -6
What this really means is that the trend will be the smaller schools will eliminate football due to costs incurred, and we'll move to a large football scope. Meaning that all that will be left are the big football conferences at the D1 level.
I agree on the deficit thing as others have said. Tennessee may have run a $200 million deficit, but they also just built a $45 athletics facility that they're surely carrying on the balance sheet. Not an accurate representation.
|
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Nov 4, 2013 11:24:42 GMT -6
many kids still play football. many however are playing up the concussion thing as a way to get reduced work loads in school. No offense but I disagree with extreme prejeduce. I would have said kids are playing up the concussion thing as well, until this year... We have impact sensors installed in all of our helmets and have measured each and every impact any of our students has had from the smallest bump to the biggest collision. In 2011-2012 we evaluated maybe 6 kids for concussion related symptoms. With this new program we are assessing on average about 6-8 students a day in practice. We are still at about the 10% mark for head injury which falls in line with the rest of the data out there. But our return to play protocol data is showing that kids who have head trauma are out 2-3 weeks minimum before all symptons / baseline is regained. We have lots of kids who take a shot and end up sitting out a part of practice before they are assessed again. The consussion thing is real we as coaches should be the first to see that as we are on the front lines. Our program is moving toward other ways of reducing impact as well as the continued measurment of imapcts. |
|
|
|
Post by shocktroop34 on Nov 4, 2013 12:11:25 GMT -6
In regard to the article, though it saddens me greatly, it is really hard to argue with the financial aspect of things. One question to be considered is how football programs could be more cost effective regarding football. When I was in college, and we traveled, all of the AD's and their wives, and "this person and that person" were all on the plane. Who footed the bill for their travel, rooms, food, etc? I know that is only one example, but you understand my point. What can programs do to cut away as much frivilous spending as possible. Unless schools can start looking at more cost effective measures, I think we will slowly see a decline in programs across the country. I hope I'm wrong. And furthermore, a garden on the football field is just d*mn disrespectful. lol.
|
|
