|
Post by rmcalhoun on Dec 13, 2018 13:10:46 GMT -6
Is it a waste yes it is.. Do we have to have it yes we do if our plan is to stay at this level which it is I sort of agree with that. The High School where I used to live built an indoor practice facility. A lot of high schools are building them.. Even sillier
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Dec 13, 2018 14:43:29 GMT -6
We plan on staying yes. But if/when it all crashes, it's a large sunk cost. It allows us to kick the can down the road a few years and avoid a hard decision. We can hope the multiple uses let us get enough value, but the cold numbers don't look good. I would either stay in the BCS or drop football completely. Dropping down to FCS doesn't really save all that much money. That's true to a point as things are now structured, although there are significant savings. Staying is long term not very feasible, and although dropping FB completely is obviously greater savings, cutting budgets and reorganizing is possible. Different scholarship limits, different market for coaching salaries, just a less intensive arms race in facilities and other costs associated with being competitive.
It is conceivable there is no way to preserve college football at mid majors, or that the second level may have to become more like D3 to survive. But whatever the level it will be lower cost and that will be more easy to negotiate, at least possible if the MAC is NOT committed to being the lowest level conference in the higher classification. I love the sport and the chance to compete against peers. The idea we are "going forward" to achieve the goal of being the low end of the high classification is not very encouraging to me.
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Dec 13, 2018 14:56:03 GMT -6
I would hope alumni who love football would support the football program no matter at what level it played. The grim reality is what we/the Mac are trying to do is not sustainable long term (unless we scored a big 10 level tv contact, which is never happening). So at some point the group our conference is in will have to make very hard decisions. The power 5 teams will split off into their own group at some point and keep all that money to themselves. The rest of us will then be forced to either develop a new, lower level to the Power 5 as we will no longer be remotely BCS qualified. Are long time supporters/donors gonna just yank their support then? Can’t hold programs hostage anymore at that point.
|
|
|
Post by david75bsu on Dec 13, 2018 15:11:27 GMT -6
I enjoy Ball State/college football. No MAC or Group Of Five team will ever win or be given the opportunity to win a national title - look at UCF. The Power Five conferences and ND own that opportunity. I’d rather see the Group Of Five have their own play off or see us play at the FCS level. There will always be high school players wanting to play college football and not all are Power Five players. The Group of Five could actually have a real play off system, that would give that group some real excitement. It’s time for the change, why wait for the Power Five to insult the Group of Five, which they do every year when the grant us an opportunity to play a good Power of Five team - look at how much respect it earned NIU!
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Dec 13, 2018 15:56:25 GMT -6
I think Boise State in 2009 could have been given the four seed. But things have changed a lot since then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 16:03:07 GMT -6
Here is a breakdown of MAC with regards to indoor practice facilities: School | Facility Opened | Cost | Just Turf & Track? | Full Field | Just Football? | Toledo | 2010 | $ 9.0M | Yes | Yes | No | CMU | 1999 | $28.0M | Other Facilities | Yes | No | WMU | 2003 | $25.0M | Other Facilities | 80 yds | No | EMU | 2010 | $ 3.9M | Yes (Bubble) | Yes | No | NIU | 2013 | $ 9.5M | Yes | Yes | No | Buffalo | 2019 | $16.0M | Yes | Yes | No | Kent State | 1990 | $ 6.5M | Yes | Yes | No | Akron | 2004 | $41.0M | Other Facilities | Yes | No | BGSU | 1993 | $ 8.7M | Other Facilities | 70 yds | No | Ohio | 2014 | $13.0M | Yes | Yes | No | Miami | 2015 | $14.0M | Yes | Yes | No |
Other Regional D1-FBS Schools School | Facility Opened | Cost | Just Turf & Track? | Full Field | Just Football? | Other Notes | TSIB | 1997 | $ 6.5M | Turf Only | Yes | No |
| PU | 1990 | $10.3M | Other Facilities | Yes | No |
| ND | 1988 | $ 5.7M | Other Facilities | Yes | No | Currently building a football only facility. Price unknown (Private school). Opens July, 2019. | Cincinnati | 2010 | $15.5M | Bubble & Other Facilities | Yes | No |
| Louisville | 2006 | $ 8.0M | Yes | Yes | No |
| Illinois | 1999 | $ 2.5M | Yes | Yes | No |
| WKU | ? | $22.0M | Yes | Yes | No | Started Bid Process in 2016. Issues with RFP process have put project on hold. | UK | 1994 | $ 8.0M | Other Facilities | Yes | No | A new $41M indoor facility is under construction. Will be multi-use. | OSU | 1987 | $ 8.7M | Other Facilities | Yes | No | Renovated old facility with $18.5M. Still a multi-use facility. |
Stop thinking in terms of this as being just a football practice facility. It is not, and was never planned to be such. Much larger programs like OSU and Notre Dame do not currently have football only indoor facilities. That will change at ND in 2019, but they are a private school with deep pockets. Hell, Northwestern is building a $260M indoor facility, but even this facility will be for all field sports. But before you say, "Let's save the cost and drop to D1-FCS", I'll share this perspective on the Missouri Valley Football Conference (comparable climate to the MAC) School | Facility Opened | Cost | Just Turf & Track? | Full Field | Just Football? | Other Notes | Youngstown State | 2011 | $14.0M | Yes | Yes | No |
| Illinois State | 2022-2025 | $25.0M | Other Facilities | Yes | No | Capital campaign is underway. | Missouri State | 2022-2025 | $10.0M | Yes | Yes | No | Capital campaign is starting. | South Dakota State | 2014 | $32.0M | Other Facilities | 80 yd | No | SDSU has an outdoor football stadium, but built a state-of-the-art indoor practice facility | North Dakota State | 2020-2021 | $37.2M | Other Facilities | Yes | No | NDSU already has an indoor football stadium, The Fargodome, but they are also building a separate indoor practice facility for $37.2M. | Northern Iowa | 1976 | $ 7.5M | Other Facilities | Yes | No | The UNIDome is primarily the football stadium for games, but is also the indoor practice facility for all outdoor sports. | South Dakota | 1979 | $22.0M | Other Facilities | Yes | No | USD has the DakotaDome for football games, and uses it as an indoor practice facility for multiple teams. | Indiana State | None |
|
| | | Nothing planned, but they do have an high quality indoor track facility, and some indoor turf for baseball and softball. | Western Illinois | None |
| | | | It doesn't look like any plans. State of Illinois Higher Ed budgeting is struggling. WIU doesn't have a solid donor base. | Southern Illinois | None |
|
|
|
| Like WIU, no plans, and while they have a stronger alumni base, it isn't as strong as Illinois State. | North Dakota | 2015 | $19.5M | Other facilities | Yes | No | Joins the MVFC in 2020. Not only do they have an indoor football stadium built in 2001, they have also built and indoor practice facility in 2015. |
So, yeah, we drop to FCS and guess what, we're still in a war of facilities. Stay in the MAC, or another D1-FBS conference and understand that these facilities are multi-use, and necessary in our climate.
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Dec 13, 2018 16:11:17 GMT -6
I sort of agree with that. The High School where I used to live built an indoor practice facility. A lot of high schools are building them.. Even sillier Believe me it was not a popular decision with local taxpayers.
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Dec 13, 2018 16:22:24 GMT -6
Kids future high school here is going to field turf soon. Im sure there will be opposition
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 16:36:41 GMT -6
I do hope the indoor practice facility will also include locker and meeting facilities for other field sports (closer to their actual fields), and even the band (not sure what they require). I hope they also consider adding an academic center as well, although, if they can move some field team facilities out to the new complex, that would free up building space in the old facilities near Worthen that could become an academic center. Makes sense to have it near the center of campus.
|
|
|
Post by BSU Card Fan in AZ on Dec 13, 2018 17:29:04 GMT -6
Well, depends how it is funded. Those throwing big bucks toward it have a right to do so, it will be a major plus for the university in my opinion. Multi use is the key.
|
|
|
Post by journalismjoe76 on Dec 13, 2018 17:29:08 GMT -6
I think the money could be better spent on a geothermal project.
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Dec 13, 2018 17:33:51 GMT -6
It also looks like 18-20 million will be a pretty nice facility
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 17:50:07 GMT -6
The MAC is doing a disservice to all the members. Their stadium and attendance standards require throwing money at something that is proven to be an inferior product. MAC schools trail almost every FBS school in almost ALL bottom line financial categories....as well as bowl performance against other conference schools.
All of this to the detriment of other sports where some MAC schools MIGHT have a chance of excelling if not for the $$ drain of supporting football.
|
|
|
Post by BSUMike on Dec 13, 2018 18:15:21 GMT -6
I am amused at the number of Ball State football fans that are so upset about the prospect of our football team getting an indoor facility; a nice facility that could be used by multiple sports teams when there is inclement weather. What other fan base would react so negatively? We would rather fold the football program than build an indoor facility? OK... I guess I’m just wasting my time on this messageboard.
There can be debate on whether or not it is money well spent, but if it happens, the student athletes at the very least will benefit so it wouldn’t be a complete waste. I may be ignorant and completely wrong, but it sounds like good news to me.
|
|
|
Post by redbirdman on Dec 13, 2018 18:31:48 GMT -6
BSUMike I agree it is good news for the athletes in any outdoor sports & needed to compete in the conference.
|
|