|
|
Post by Pantherholic on May 20, 2012 18:17:55 GMT -6
But a mediocre basketball program (just based on post-season success as of late) is not going to be able to fund the needed improvements and upgrades in the other non-revenue producing sports. Football isn't some guaranteed cash cow. For the '09-'10 fiscal year, 3 MAC schools made a profit from football. Everyone else broke even except NIU who lost $3.2M. How did football help pay for other sports for 75% of the schools in that conference? |
|
|
|
Post by PantherU on May 20, 2012 18:30:24 GMT -6
The vast majority of programs with football are losing money on it. When you couple that with UWM's horrible track record when it comes to private endowment, I'm worried. If football is to be in UWM's future, I'd hypothesize that this future is at least a few decades away. This last part I don't understand. Show of hands - who was around in 1992? Twenty years ago, were we anywhere CLOSE to what we are today? So football is even further down the road? |
|
|
|
Post by PantherU on May 20, 2012 18:32:56 GMT -6
But a mediocre basketball program (just based on post-season success as of late) is not going to be able to fund the needed improvements and upgrades in the other non-revenue producing sports. Football isn't some guaranteed cash cow. For the '09-'10 fiscal year, 3 MAC schools made a profit from football. Everyone else broke even except NIU who lost $3.2M. How did football help pay for other sports for 75% of the schools in that conference? Adding to this point, those teams that broke even actually likely lost money, although who knows how much. A lot of what Milwaukee counts as men's basketball expenses are latched onto the football programs at other schools, so there's that. But I'll say this. Milwaukee doesn't start football to have a profitable football program. They start it for all the other reasons. If the football program is profitable, that's icing on the cake. |
|
|
|
Post by uwmfutbol on May 20, 2012 19:14:27 GMT -6
The vast majority of programs with football are losing money on it. When you couple that with UWM's horrible track record when it comes to private endowment, I'm worried. If football is to be in UWM's future, I'd hypothesize that this future is at least a few decades away. This last part I don't understand. Show of hands - who was around in 1992? Twenty years ago, were we anywhere CLOSE to what we are today? So football is even further down the road? I was around in '92. In the grand scheme of things, 20 years is nothing. Considering what UWM's academic and research goals are, an undertaking such as football is going to be low on the priority list for many in the University community. |
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on May 21, 2012 8:57:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by skrapheap on May 21, 2012 12:37:50 GMT -6
the first two comments on the article exceeded the expected level of idiocy.
|
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on May 22, 2012 9:11:44 GMT -6
The first two comments on the article exceeded the expected level of idiocy. A 59-42 record over three seasons could be called be a lot of things -- thrilling, maddening, rewarding, inadequate, revealing, redemptive. But "pathetic" it most assuredly is not. Rob Jeter is about 21st on Andy Geiger's list of problems. |
|
|
|
Post by uwmfutbol on May 22, 2012 15:16:52 GMT -6
The stupidity of the posts on JSonline knows no bounds, that's for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by gman2 on May 22, 2012 20:21:11 GMT -6
Not only does he have his worked cut out at UWM, but he will also need to work with the HL AD's on a strategy for staying somewhat relevant without Butler. Not that the opinion really matters, but around the time of the official annoucnement that Butler was leaving, most of the guest idiots on the Dennis Krause show had the HL, and Milwaukee basketball in the local sports scene, as irrelevant. Unfortunately this view will prevail among a large segment of the sports fans. So his work will go beyond Milwaukee.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingsteve on May 23, 2012 7:34:52 GMT -6
It is amazing how quickly relevant we would become and these guys would jump on the bandwagon at a moments notice if we GOT TO THE NCAA TOURNEY even in a somewhat diminished Horizon League...we should have done better under this regime...just not good enough.. underachieved and underwhelming...that being said hopefully they can before the current Head Coach's contract runs out actually do this... clock is ticking...some on this board are happy with our "20 win seasons" and whatever that means..It is not generating any buzz...we have to go beyond at some point...this is bottomline with our mens program to really be on the radar screen in this city. Short of that will continue to be viewed as backwater....need to step up and win some big games when the chips are down in post season....other than with inherited players how many years ago we have not exactly done this or even hinted at it in post season.. something is missing...get it done or move on in a couple years...
|
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on May 23, 2012 9:02:03 GMT -6
Just to re-emphasize: if expansion is handled poorly by the H League, I surely hope that Andy Geiger and his almost certainly hand-picked successor have a broad-view master plan in mind for our teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by davedome on May 23, 2012 13:55:26 GMT -6
Football isn't some guaranteed cash cow. For the '09-'10 fiscal year, 3 MAC schools made a profit from football. Everyone else broke even except NIU who lost $3.2M. How did football help pay for other sports for 75% of the schools in that conference? Adding to this point, those teams that broke even actually likely lost money, although who knows how much. A lot of what Milwaukee counts as men's basketball expenses are latched onto the football programs at other schools, so there's that. But I'll say this. Milwaukee doesn't start football to have a profitable football program. They start it for all the other reasons. If the football program is profitable, that's icing on the cake. |
|
|
|
Post by davedome on May 23, 2012 13:59:12 GMT -6
Maybe I'm a optimist but I think college football can work in Milwaukee far better than MAC cities like Akron, Kent, Muncie, Oxford, Mount Pleasant, Toledo and Buffalo. The city of Milwaukee has certain advantages that none of those places have. Also, which one of those places would be considered a "sports town"?
|
|
|
|
Post by illwauk on May 23, 2012 14:37:08 GMT -6
Not sure how you're defining "sports town," but I'm sure Buffalo qualifies as one by any standard.
Either way, without football, whether or not we get out of the Horizon League is going to depend on how nice the Missouri Valley decides to be to us IF we're able to get a new arena. And even then, we won't have any options beyond them.
With football, we more/less guarantee ourselves a spot somewhere other than the Horizon League... and more than likely, the MAC, which I think everyone can agree is the ideal place for our program to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by parkerj on May 23, 2012 20:20:17 GMT -6
and more than likely, the MAC, which I think everyone can agree is the ideal place for our program to be. i don't agree |
|
