Rumored salary for Schmidt draws ire of faculty

[TransplantedBonnie]

Thanks for the stats clubber, I do appreciate a first-hand account as I thought you were pulling stats out of thin air (like a lot of people on here do.) However, you never answered my other questions ... once you add football, what woman's sport would you be adding/spending money on? Or, what men's sport would you kill off?

[treedoyle]

Why no to football -- quickly off the top of my head:

1. More academic support staff
2. More SID staff
3. More compliance staff
4. More athletic trainers
5. More equipment managers
6. Playing fields
7. Bigger weight room
8. Locker room
9. Coaching staff
10. Addition travel budget
11. Additional insurance
12. Game-day staff
13. Maintenance staff (field, operations, etc.)

Too much money for too little reward.

[johnwayne100]

Campbell University Set to Resume Varsity Football in 2008

Fighting Camels Will Compete as an NCAA Division I-AA
Non-Scholarship Program

BUIES CREEK, N.C. – After more than a five-decade absence, Campbell University plans
to once again fi eld a varsity football program in 2008. The Fighting Camels will compete
on the NCAA Division I-AA (non-scholarship) level. University President Dr. Jerry M.
Wallace made the announcement Friday afternoon in a campus-wide gathering at Turner
Auditorium.

“Throughout the years, a continuing request from students, alumni, and university friends
has been to consider the return of football to the athletic program of the university,” said
Dr. Wallace. “After a very careful feasibility study, which included faculty, students, alumni,
trustees, and athletic staff, the trustees have approved the addition of football to Campbell’s
athletic program. Therefore, I am delighted to announce the Fighting Camels will be
back on the gridiron in the fall of 2008.”

A member of the NCAA Division I ranks since 1977 and of the Atlantic Sun Conference
since 1994, Campbell will compete against similar non-scholarship programs on the Division
I and non-I levels. Home games will be played at a yet to be constructed on-campus
site.

“This is a very exciting day to be a Fighting Camel with the return of football after an over
50 year absence,” said Director of Athletics Stan Williamson, who has been heavily involved
with football programs at Georgia Southern, Houston and Nicholls State. “College
football is one of the most exciting events in our country. The atmosphere that on-campus
intercollegiate football brings to a campus is exhilarating. The addition of football at
Campbell will certainly enhance the student life aspect of Buies Creek. Also, we anticipate
football will bring about an increase in undergraduate enrollment at Campbell. Most
of my professional career has included college football and I am thrilled that we have the
chance to bring that excitement to Campbell University.”

According to Williamson, the decision to compete as a Division I-AA non-scholarship program
allows Campbell to enjoy campus life enhancements and increased undergraduate
enrollment without the fi nancial burden tied to providing scholarships to be competitive at
the scholarship level. Fellow Atlantic Sun Conference member Jacksonville University
added non-scholarship football in 1998 and competes in the Pioneer Football League
along with Davidson, Butler, Dayton, Drake, Morehead State, San Diego and Valparaiso.

Other Division I-AA programs with similar non-scholarship philosophies are Duquesne,
Iona, Marist, La Salle and St. Peter’s.
“We believe Campbell will develop a competitive non-scholarship football program and we
hope to be able to compete in the Pioneer Football League as early as the 2008 football
season,” said Williamson.

The search for a head football coach will begin immediately.
“We will be seeking an individual with strong leadership abilities, who will be a good fit for
the mission and purpose of Campbell University. This individual will need to have a good
understanding of NCAA Division I-AA non-scholarship football and a vision of bringing this
football program to a solid competitive level,” said Williamson.
In addition, the University will add competitive, practice and other football-related facilities
on campus over the next two years.

[johnwayne100]

(from a Georgetown football site)


As a result of NCAA restructuring after the 1992 season, Division I schools playing football must either play in Division I-A or I-AA. Of the 27 schools directly affected by this decision, one moved to I-A (Alabama-Birmingham), one dropped the sport (Santa Clara) and 25 moved to I-AA. Rather than try to battle with more scholarships and more money, these schools maintained their programs and sought to build from within rather than trying to become the next Notre Dame or Nebraska.

From this change came three new I-AA football conferences--the Metro Atlantic, the Northeast, and the Pioneer, to join the Ivy and Patriot Leagues in providing competitive Division I-AA football without the high cost of athletic scholarships. At these and other schools, including the Ivy League, football players receive the same need-based financial aid available to any other student, without regard to athletic ability.

These students compete not for television audiences or for a pro contract, but for the fun of the game itself.

A non-scholarship team offers other benefits to a university community. These teams will be academically representative of their class, and compete with their fellow students, not for them. Not only is a non-scholarship program far less costly to a university, such a program attracts quality applicants who want the opportunity to compete at a college level while maintaining their academic pursuits, as well as non-athletes who are also attracted to a well-rounded extracurricular program.

Many smaller schools can point to a tangible increase in enrollment with the addition of football, and not just because of the team itself. In a larger sense, a non-scholarship football program raises the visibility of their school nationwide for providing students the opportunity to excel on the playing field as well as in the classroom. A program without scholarships eliminate a huge chunk of "fixed costs" (grants-in-aid) that add upwards of $2 million a year in costs which must be made up by ticket revenues or through deficit spending. Finally, the absence of as many as 63 additional I-AA scholarships does not upset the balance of men's and women's grants that will be battled in the emerging issue of Title IX and equal access to athletic programs.

You're not going to see such programs in the national spotlight, and no, you won't confuse a program at Siena with one at Syracuse. But what non-scholarship football does offer is opportunity--opportunity for the players to compete, for the coaches to teach, and for the fans to experience the heritage and tradition of college football on their own campuses. These are the kind of shared expeiences that are missing from many schools, and one which could only be enhanced by adding a football program consistent with the goals of a college or university.

Non-scholarship football isn't for every school. But if the alternative is no football at all, it's a choice worth considering.

[treedoyle]

johnwayne100 said:

You're not going to see such programs in the national spotlight, and no, you won't confuse a program at Siena with one at Syracuse. But what non-scholarship football does offer is opportunity--opportunity for the players to compete, for the coaches to teach, and for the fans to experience the heritage and tradition of college football on their own campuses. These are the kind of shared expeiences that are missing from many schools, and one which could only be enhanced by adding a football program consistent with the goals of a college or university.

Non-scholarship football isn't for every school. But if the alternative is no football at all, it's a choice worth considering.

Collegiate athletics is about money, pure and simple. SBU isn't in the position for warm and fuzzy experiences. It needs to concentrate on MBB.

[spils84]

transplantedbonnie said:

Thanks for the stats clubber, I do appreciate a first-hand account as I thought you were pulling stats out of thin air (like a lot of people on here do.) However, you never answered my other questions ... once you add football, what woman's sport would you be adding/spending money on? Or, what men's sport would you kill off?

I don't presume to speak for Clubber, but I believe the following information demonstrates why Title IX does not preclude schools from adding men's sports, particularly football, as many schools have recently done:

Participation: Title IX is not a quota system. Every institution has three options to demonstrate fairness in athletic opportunities. Schools can show that they comply with Title IX if they can demonstrate any one of the following:

1. Substantially proportionate athletic opportunities for male and female athletes;
2. A history and continuing practice of expanding opportunities for the under-represented sex;
3. Full and effective accommodation of the interests and abilities of the under-represented sex. Schools do not necessarily need to offer identical sports, yet they do need to provide an equal opportunity for females to play in sports of interest.

It looks as though Bonas is clearly covered by complying with Option 2.

[spils84]

treedoyle said:

Why no to football -- quickly off the top of my head:

1. More academic support staff
2. More SID staff
3. More compliance staff
4. More athletic trainers
5. More equipment managers
6. Playing fields
7. Bigger weight room
8. Locker room
9. Coaching staff
10. Addition travel budget
11. Additional insurance
12. Game-day staff
13. Maintenance staff (field, operations, etc.)

Too much money for too little reward.

75 student athletes X $30000 = Bonas' reward

[treedoyle]

75 x $30,000 = $2,250,000

Some real rough numbers using below-average pay scale:
Coaching Staff = 10 coaches averaging $75,000 = $750,000
Additional SID = $25,000
Two Academic Staff = $50,000
Compliance = $30,000
Two Trainers = $50,000
Game-Day Staff/Maintenance = $50,000
Equipment Managers = $40,000
Ticket Office Staff = $25,000
Travel Budget = 50 Hotel Rooms away games & food for away games & transportation for away games 4-5 away games

With all that you're pushing one million per year easily. And, only a portion of tuition goes to Athletics.

So how are we going to maintain a million dollar per year football program?

[spils84]

I will let someone more knowledgable than I attempt to refute your numbers, if possible. But I know it must be able to be done, if many schools are going in this direction. One number that you didn't include was ticket sales, whatever that would be.

[treedoyle]

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but it's just not reasonable for SBU to add football. The initial investment alone would be in the millions ... millions SBU can't afford to spend on a football program that will generate next to no worthwhile revenue.

As for ticket sales, how many people can SBU expect to draw to each home game? A quick look at Duquesne and Lehigh show an average of roughly 9,000 people per game. SBU has far less of a population to draw, but say 3,000 for sake of argument. What's a reasonable ticket price for non-scholarship football in the Souther Tier? $20 average? That's $60,000 -- or far less than your head coach would make.

[sbu79]

Dem-

Please, Please tell them you were being sarcastic!

[spils84]

I'm not trying to be a jerk either, but I know many colleges have used non-scholarship sports as a way to boost enrollment, as well as adding to the college atmosphere, as cited above.

Also, your $60,000 figure is per home game, right?

[treedoyle]

Whoops. You got me on the math. You're right ... $60,000 per home game if you get five home games at $20 per ticket that's $300,000. That's if you can get $20 a ticket to watch bad non-scholarship football.

We can't even master MBB at this point; why add FB?

Why not focus on other areas to boost enrollment? And what's wrong with a target enrollment of 2,000 if you have capable development and alumni departments that can raise a bunch of dough and continue to add to the endowment? There's a host of other avenues SBU can take to solve its financial and enrollment difficulties. FB is not the answer.

[treedoyle]

FYI - Here's Bucknell's 2006 football ticket rates:

Reserved Season Tickets (6 home games) $50.00
General Admission Season Tickets (6 home games) $40.00

[unclefrosty]

why oh why do I always take the bait on this subject

treedoyle is correct, you are adding many people (and his figures are very low, you also have to include insurance costs for each employee), you have a tremendous amount of "upfront" money to start this and sbu quite simply is not in a position to do this, you cannot rely on "ticket sales" to survive and run the program (ie, see current bball ticket sales)

one things these other schools have is endowment, sbu does not, most of these other schools can take the initial hits and then balance things in the long run, sbu cannot afford to do that

my offerings for added sports are:

-men's lacrosse (extremely popular in the sbu footprint, field is already in place, much lower staff costs and equipment costs than FB)

-track and field (all high schools have t&f and t&f is always ranked at the highest participation sport in high schools across the country so it would have a huge draw of potential students for sbu, very low costs, can use olean or alleghany hs track, you can get 50 men/50 women without much work at all, every kid runs so you don't have pissing and moaning kids or parents because their kid is not playing or the team is loosing, it doesn't matter because the kid is running in the meet)

these are the most realistic, cost effective sports to add, maybe someday when the endowment grows to a solid point they can add football, but right now adding FB would be all or nothing, if it failed the cost of that failure would shut the school down, not worth the risk right now

a new varsity weight room and a field house are must's, not maybe's if the sport programs are to go from survival mode to thriving mode

just one man's opinion