Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

[chapmaja]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

EMU's overall athletic program would dominate the GLIAC the first few years they would be in the league.

Swimming and Diving, easily would win the GLIAC title the first few years. (both men and women).

Track and Field and Cross County would dominate the GLIAC. Let's not forget EMU has had at least one student or graduate represent their home county each Olympics since 1948.

Football would, early in their conference affiliation be very difficult to beat.

Where EMU would drop off is as they don't replace graduating students due to scholarship limits lower at the D2 level.

[KleShreen]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

EMU's overall athletic program would dominate the GLIAC the first few years they would be in the league.

Swimming and Diving, easily would win the GLIAC title the first few years. (both men and women).

Track and Field and Cross County would dominate the GLIAC. Let's not forget EMU has had at least one student or graduate represent their home county each Olympics since 1948.

Football would, early in their conference affiliation be very difficult to beat.

Where EMU would drop off is as they don't replace graduating students due to scholarship limits lower at the D2 level.

I don't think this is necessarily true. The top level athletes those programs currently have would transfer to other D1 schools if EMU ever announced they were dropping to D2. And I believe they would be allowed to do so freely.

[champgymusa]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

EMU would win the gymnastics for sure!! GVSU club team won nationals this year but they would lose to EMU like 132-0 in football as a comparison...EMU is not going anywhere...

[Eagles73]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

Ashland has no reason to leave they compete year in year out.

Bottom line on Ashland, is just that, the bottom line. Will they continue spending the money needed to compete at a high level in the Gliac, remember, this is an overall sports funding issue, not just football.

[BlueBlood]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

Bottom line on Ashland, is just that, the bottom line. Will they continue spending the money needed to compete at a high level in the Gliac, remember, this is an overall sports funding issue, not just football.

I did an exercise a few months ago (using last years GLIAC Presidents Cup All-Sports rank) that showed that the schools that left, on average, were nearly as competitive as the ones that stayed. In fact, it was so close that if Ashland left, the departing schools average position would actually surpass the staying schools. (I think my math is in the "Ashland is Staying" thread)

If Ashland would leave, that would mean that 4 of the top 6 schools (from an all-sports perspective) will have left. When laid out in math, the overall sports strength of the departing schools was kind of a surprise to some on here. Sometimes folks get so caught up in football and maybe even a general knowledge of GVSU's overall sports dominance (nationally, not just in the GLIAC) that the actual overall competitiveness of the departing schools may not have been fully realized or considered until they were gone.

I believe GVSU really needs Ashland to stay. AU is the school that pushes them (again, from an all-sports perspective). If Ashland leaves, the all-sports gap between GVSU and the rest of the conference widens.

[OhioDadGVSON]

[KleShreen]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

Football does matter most in terms of dollars, but you can't just torpedo every other sport in the conference for the sake of football expediency.

[OhioDadGVSON]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

Football does matter most in terms of dollars, but you can't just torpedo every other sport in the conference for the sake of football expediency.

[KleShreen]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

There's no "football only" conferences in Division II. The GLIAC needs enough teams to get schools in to the national tournaments in the other sports. If that means taking a crappy football school or two, then so be it.

[OhioDadGVSON]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

I believe your completely wrong in your statement.

[Tech Boys]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

I'm with Kle on this one. Football may bring in the cash but a conference is only as strong as the athletic DEPARTMENTS of its members, not just football. A good example is the CIAA. They didn't have enough schools with baseball and men's tennis so the conference had to end sponsorship of those sports. Because of that, Chowan ended up having more than half of their sports as an affiliate of Conference Carolinas which included a sport the CIAA sponsors. Now Chowan is moving to the CC and will have 17 of 19 sports in one conference and the CIAA loses a member that regularly makes NCAA postseason appearances in a large number of sports. The one sport I haven't seen them make a postseason appearance in is football. The CIAA recently removed the requirement that members must play football as a means hopefully expand membership to schools that do have baseball and men's tennis.

I want a conference mate who can bring it across the board. Doesn't every school have a sport that may not be all that good? Every sport and every athlete has value, not just football and football players (I'm saying that as a former football player).

[MrsThortonMelon]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

Actually you are VERY wrong on that statement. GVSU is an example of that...sure football brings in a lot of cash but over all donations come from MANY other places that football. Title IX is here to stay and GVSU is all about that. Those Directors Cups in the Tim Selgo wing didnt come from football. If you think football drives the ship you are gonna be man over board with the Lakers.

[OhioDadGVSON]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

I'm with Kle on this one. Football may bring in the cash but a conference is only as strong as the athletic DEPARTMENTS of its members, not just football. A good example is the CIAA. They didn't have enough schools with baseball and men's tennis so the conference had to end sponsorship of those sports. Because of that, Chowan ended up having more than half of their sports as an affiliate of Conference Carolinas which included a sport the CIAA sponsors. Now Chowan is moving to the CC and will have 17 of 19 sports in one conference and the CIAA loses a member that regularly makes NCAA postseason appearances in a large number of sports. The one sport I haven't seen them make a postseason appearance in is football. The CIAA recently removed the requirement that members must play football as a means hopefully expand membership to schools that do have baseball and men's tennis.

I want a conference mate who can bring it across the board. Doesn't every school have a sport that may not be all that good? Every sport and every athlete has value, not just football and football players (I'm saying that as a former football player).

[MrsThortonMelon]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

I am not disagreeing with you on your thoughts I am merely stating the way it is at GVSU and most GLIAC schools for that matter. GVSU takes equality in sports very seriously. You dont have to like it but you best learn to understand it! Thurston and I have been Irwin club members for years and season ticket holders since before Kelly...I know it sounds odd...just it is the fact.

[Tony Nicolette]

Re: Future GLIAC Members? Particularly Football?

I believe your completely wrong in your statement.

Believe what you want, but the premise that football generates enormous amounts of money in D2 and everyone funds the rest of their athletic departments from that money is simply not true. Not even close. Schools at all levels (and particularly THIS level) take a program-wide approach to figuring out where and how they participate.

Seriously, go through some of the other threads and read what I wrote about how funding is done, what conferences consider in placement decisions, etc. It's been discussed out here ad nauseum. Most D1-FBS schools don't generate enough money from football to do what you are describing. It is literally the top half of the Power 5 schools (and maybe a few others) and that's it.

I'm not giving you crap, but in general your position simply isn't accurate. In your defense, it's what most people think. It just isn't reality. Folks see the locker rooms that Alabama and Clemson and Ohio State build, and the 10's of thousands of people that attend games every week and all of the TV $ and merchandise sales and big-time donors and think that all of college sports is like that. It totally is NOT. Again, for those forty or fifty-ish schools is it? To a certain extent yes. Everywhere else, it's not even remotely close.

Think of it this way: Northwood is a proud, long-standing GLIAC program. In the 2000's, they were one of the toughest teams in the league...perennially a top rushing school in the country, great defense, etc. They made three playoff appearances in a five year stretch, and won the GLIAC several times as well. They went 7-4 last year...a good season and they are making their way back. You know what they averaged in attendance last year for their home games? About 2200 per. Even at $25.00 per seat (which is WAY more than they actually charge), that would only equate to $55,000 per game in ticket revenue. Even if they had six home games, that would total $330,000 in revenue...FOR THE SEASON. What about merchandise? I would contend they would be LUCKY to net anywhere near that amount in merchandise profits across ALL of their sports for an entire year. For football Saturday's only, let's be generous and see they clear $75,000 in profits for the season. Toss in the local Jimmy John's franchisee being a title sponsor for the season ($10,000 at a VERY generous best), some donors that maybe float a few big $ donations, and you have a program that MIGHT bring in $500K or so...I would argue it's not anywhere NEAR that. Dude, that doesn't even cover the cost of their schollies for a year...let alone game day costs, facility maintenance, coaching staff, their share of athletic administrative costs, etc. The notion that every football team in the land makes crap-tons of money and can sling it all over their school's campus and athletic departments is just not rooted in any plausible reality. And, I'm not knocking Northwood...they are just the face I picked for the example...EVERYONE in D2 is up against this.

So, again, Kle is 100% correct that while football may carry a disproportionate amount of influence on conference membership and alignment, it is FAR from the only driver a school makes when deciding what league they are in, how they want things done, etc. AND, his assertion that football simply can't "torpedo" the rest of an institution's program's and the totality of those needs is also 100% accurate.