Moving back down to FCS could be pretty costly for Idaho

[Pwns]

https://tubsattheclub.com/2017/02/13/ui ... -sky-drop/

But I thought that being FBS meant spending ungodly amounts of money from student fees and state money and such?

Looks to me like moving down is going to require Idaho to find new sources of funding.

As long as being an FBS independent isn't an issue from a scheduling standpoint it might make more financial sense to stay FBS.

[kalm]

They're still FBS through 2017. Part of the shortfall is smaller payouts for UW and WSU vs. USC and Auburn. They also, according to the article want the funds to keep them at an FBS level of spending. Then the article acknowledges that once travel costs, less schollies, and lower coaches salaries hit the books, the deficit will reduce and if they start winning, donations may start increasing again.

Mixed bag and this may be coming from one of the bitter FBS fantasy donors...

[Pwns]

They're still FBS through 2017. Part of the shortfall is smaller payouts for UW and WSU vs. USC and Auburn. They also, according to the article want the funds to keep them at an FBS level of spending. Then the article acknowledges that once travel costs, less schollies, and lower coaches salaries hit the books, the deficit will reduce and if they start winning, donations may start increasing again.

Mixed bag and this may be coming from one of the bitter FBS fantasy donors...

So, to summarize:
1.you are going to lose the $1.2 million+ a year from the CFP (BTW, each Sun Belt member is going to get more than that this year for finishing ahead of CUSA and the MAC, but I'll use that number to be conservative).
2.You will lose around $125k a year for the TV contract.
3. The payout games will be fewer in number and payouts smaller. Let's estimate that on average you lose $200k a year (that's probably conservative, G5s make significantly more on these games)
4. Loss of donations (maybe $100k a year to be conservative)

And you are going to try and balance that with
1. Fewer scholarships (let's be real, at a public college that's probably a few hundred thousand at the most).
2. Travel Costs (not going to be significantly less in the Big Sky which is quite spread out)

Point being: FBS football doesn't really hemorrhage money like some want to make it out to be.

BTW, remember all those predictions about how Idaho moving down to FCS would start an exodus to FCS? Yeah, don't expect that one to happen with Idaho and NMSU already being committed to staying in FBS as independents.

[kalm]

22 less schollies most of which are out of state is probably over $600,000.

They'd be replacing 5 cross country air trips with 5 bus trips.

[Mvemjsunpx]

22 less schollies most of which are out of state is probably over $600,000.

They'd be replacing 5 cross country air trips with 5 bus trips.

Not to mention being an FBS indie in Moscow, Idaho means almost no home games. The lack of prestige of being in that position will lead to a reduction in P5 payouts, too, because the Vandals will be super desperate to fill their schedule. Also… that TV money Pwns references is conference-based, so Idaho's gonna lose that anyway. In other words: a lot (most?) of the money the Vandals are losing is because they were kicked out of the Sun Belt, not because they're going FCS.

This whole situation is more proof that Idaho never should've moved up in the first place than it is that moving down is an awesome idea. They're now screwed no matter what they do, it's just that they're screwed harder by staying up in limbo.

[SDHornet]

22 less schollies most of which are out of state is probably over $600,000.

They'd be replacing 5 cross country air trips with 5 bus trips.

Not to mention being an FBS indie in Moscow, Idaho means almost no home games. The lack of prestige of being in that position will lead to a reduction in P5 payouts, too, because the Vandals will be super desperate to fill their schedule. Also… that TV money Pwns references is conference-based, so Idaho's gonna lose that anyway. In other words: a lot (most?) of the money the Vandals are losing is because they were kicked out of the Sun Belt, not because they're going FCS.

This whole situation is more proof that Idaho never should've moved up in the first place than it is that moving down is an awesome idea. They're now screwed no matter what they do, it's just that they're screwed harder by staying up in limbo.

Decrease in coaching staff size and salaries as well as no mention of the residual of WAC exit fees that NMSU & Idaho were collecting are now gone.

Another swing an a miss on the bottom tier FBS being lucrative concept.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

22 less schollies most of which are out of state is probably over $600,000.

They'd be replacing 5 cross country air trips with 5 bus trips.

Wouldn't it be 44 or are they leaving all women's sports alone going forward?

[kalm]

22 less schollies most of which are out of state is probably over $600,000.

They'd be replacing 5 cross country air trips with 5 bus trips.

Wouldn't it be 44 or are they leaving all women's sports alone going forward?

Good point, I'm not sure.

[GannonFan]

22 less schollies most of which are out of state is probably over $600,000.

They'd be replacing 5 cross country air trips with 5 bus trips.

I never buy into the cost of the schollies in terms of actual money. Other than the room and board part, the added incremental cost to a University to educate an additional student (or in this case 22 or some number) isn't all that real - they don't have to build a building or hire new staff or really outlay any money at all (again, other than the room and board). And having these students here doesn't really in anyway foreclose having the same number of students as paying replacements (students who would fill these slots if the slots weren't taken up by the schollie athletes). And saying that an out of state student costs more than an in-state one is again a weird exercise in accounting when it comes to cost to the University. I get that they need to account for it on the books and may it look a particular way, but at the end of the day the real cost to the University for the scholarships is more of a phantom number.

[kalm]

22 less schollies most of which are out of state is probably over $600,000.

They'd be replacing 5 cross country air trips with 5 bus trips.

I never buy into the cost of the schollies in terms of actual money. Other than the room and board part, the added incremental cost to a University to educate an additional student (or in this case 22 or some number) isn't all that real - they don't have to build a building or hire new staff or really outlay any money at all (again, other than the room and board). And having these students here doesn't really in anyway foreclose having the same number of students as paying replacements (students who would fill these slots if the slots weren't taken up by the schollie athletes). And saying that an out of state student costs more than an in-state one is again a weird exercise in accounting when it comes to cost to the University. I get that they need to account for it on the books and may it look a particular way, but at the end of the day the real cost to the University for the scholarships is more of a phantom number.

If they're a part of the football budget, they're not real numbers?

At EWU, athletics is literally writing checks to dining services...

They are VERY provincial in many ways, including accounting.

[89Hen]

I never buy into the cost of the schollies in terms of actual money. Other than the room and board part, the added incremental cost to a University to educate an additional student (or in this case 22 or some number) isn't all that real - they don't have to build a building or hire new staff or really outlay any money at all (again, other than the room and board). And having these students here doesn't really in anyway foreclose having the same number of students as paying replacements (students who would fill these slots if the slots weren't taken up by the schollie athletes). And saying that an out of state student costs more than an in-state one is again a weird exercise in accounting when it comes to cost to the University. I get that they need to account for it on the books and may it look a particular way, but at the end of the day the real cost to the University for the scholarships is more of a phantom number.

If they're a part of the football budget, they're not real numbers?

At EWU, athletics is literally writing checks to dining services...

They are VERY provincial in many ways, including accounting.

Many state schools also have a fixed number of out of state students it can take, so a scholarship athlete DOES take the place of somebody else who might have to pay full freight.

[kalm]

If they're a part of the football budget, they're not real numbers?

At EWU, athletics is literally writing checks to dining services...

They are VERY provincial in many ways, including accounting.

Many state schools also have a fixed number of out of state students it can take, so a scholarship athlete DOES take the place of somebody else who might have to pay full freight.

But we're still talking about Idaho's athletics budget saving money here, right?

[89Hen]

Many state schools also have a fixed number of out of state students it can take, so a scholarship athlete DOES take the place of somebody else who might have to pay full freight.

But we're still talking about Idaho's athletics budget saving money here, right?

I think athletic departments get very creative with their numbers to show a profit, a loss or to break even. I'm not even close to qualified to really make a statement on whether they would save or lose money with a move to I-AA, but I'm confident in saying that if they wanted to make it look like it was a loser, they will make it look like a loser, and vice versa.

[JohnStOnge]

We'll see how it goes for Idaho. But the point has always been that FCS means less revenue but also means less expense. And, on average, it has always appeared that what's lost in revenue is more than compensated for by what's saved in terms of reduced expenses if what you're talking about is FCS vs. FBS but not in the Big 5.

That basic formula applied to Idaho's three D-I schools in the latest year for which data are available in the database at http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances (2015). Counting only revenues outside of money the schools kicked in to help balance things FBS Boise State ($35.9 million) and Idaho ($11.5 million) had more revenue that FCS Idaho State ($6.1 million). But they also had more expense at $44.2 million for Boise State and $19.2 million for Idaho vs. $12.3 million for Idaho State.

The end result is that Idaho State suffered a smaller net cost to the school ($6.2 million) than Boise State (9.3 million) or Idaho ($7.7 million) did.

[SDHornet]

I never buy into the cost of the schollies in terms of actual money. Other than the room and board part, the added incremental cost to a University to educate an additional student (or in this case 22 or some number) isn't all that real - they don't have to build a building or hire new staff or really outlay any money at all (again, other than the room and board). And having these students here doesn't really in anyway foreclose having the same number of students as paying replacements (students who would fill these slots if the slots weren't taken up by the schollie athletes). And saying that an out of state student costs more than an in-state one is again a weird exercise in accounting when it comes to cost to the University. I get that they need to account for it on the books and may it look a particular way, but at the end of the day the real cost to the University for the scholarships is more of a phantom number.

If they're a part of the football budget, they're not real numbers?

At EWU, athletics is literally writing checks to dining services...

They are VERY provincial in many ways, including accounting.

Also the overhead costs needed to manage/service those 22/44 scholarships, compliance needs to watch over those additional bodies as well as the academic needs too. How those are captured in the bottom line is tough to tell, but admin efforts are needed nonetheless.

[kalm]

If they're a part of the football budget, they're not real numbers?

At EWU, athletics is literally writing checks to dining services...

They are VERY provincial in many ways, including accounting.

Also the overhead costs needed to manage/service those 22/44 scholarships, compliance needs to watch over those additional bodies as well as the academic needs too. How those are captured in the bottom line is tough to tell, but admin efforts are needed nonetheless.

Is the compliance office a part of the athletics budget?

[kalm]

But we're still talking about Idaho's athletics budget saving money here, right?

I think athletic departments get very creative with their numbers to show a profit, a loss or to break even. I'm not even close to qualified to really make a statement on whether they would save or lose money with a move to I-AA, but I'm confident in saying that if they wanted to make it look like it was a loser, they will make it look like a loser, and vice versa.

Fair enough.

WSU lost a kid today to Nevada. According to the local ESPN radio show he was an out of state walk on WR who lettered, returning a punt for a TD against Cal, 6 punts, and handled the place kicking holder duties all season, playing in 13 games. He was offered a chance to earn a scholly next fall but probably nothing more because his out of state tuition counted against the budget. He could transfer without losing a year because he was a walk on. So he did.

[SDHornet]

Also the overhead costs needed to manage/service those 22/44 scholarships, compliance needs to watch over those additional bodies as well as the academic needs too. How those are captured in the bottom line is tough to tell, but admin efforts are needed nonetheless.

Is the compliance office a part of the athletics budget?

Why wouldn't it be? They exist only because the NCAA makes them exist.

[GannonFan]

I never buy into the cost of the schollies in terms of actual money. Other than the room and board part, the added incremental cost to a University to educate an additional student (or in this case 22 or some number) isn't all that real - they don't have to build a building or hire new staff or really outlay any money at all (again, other than the room and board). And having these students here doesn't really in anyway foreclose having the same number of students as paying replacements (students who would fill these slots if the slots weren't taken up by the schollie athletes). And saying that an out of state student costs more than an in-state one is again a weird exercise in accounting when it comes to cost to the University. I get that they need to account for it on the books and may it look a particular way, but at the end of the day the real cost to the University for the scholarships is more of a phantom number.

If they're a part of the football budget, they're not real numbers?

At EWU, athletics is literally writing checks to dining services...

They are VERY provincial in many ways, including accounting.

Well, I did say that room and board are certainly real costs, so not sure why you bring up dining services (which is the board of room and board). The tuition costs themselves are where I don't see much of a real cost to the University. They show the costs on the books, sure, but once you roll everything up it's not really costing the University tuition-wise.

The fixed number of out of state kids a state school can take, if that's a case, would skew the argument. The compliance cost for 22 kids versus 44 kids doesn't seem to be that big of a hurdle. Once you're measuring and tracking compliance the marginal cost to measure and track another student, or even double, isn't much. There's the initial cost to get a system set up, but after that it's not terribly difficult and doesn't get harder by just having to add more names to a database to check.

[89Hen]

The fixed number of out of state kids a state school can take, if that's a case, would skew the argument.

But some state universities face state laws known as mandates that cap the number of out-of-state students. The University of North Carolina—Chapel Hill, for instance, must limit out-of-state enrollment to 18 percent. The school jeopardizes its state funding if it exceeds that cap.

I can't find numbers for how many schools do this, but I know they're not alone. 89Jr did not get into UVA (only one that declined him) with a 4.4 GPA, high test scores, letters in two sports, VP of band council, son of an alum (who graduated with honors)... but there were kids in his high school class from the state of Virginia who got in with a lot less.

[kalm]

If they're a part of the football budget, they're not real numbers?

At EWU, athletics is literally writing checks to dining services...

They are VERY provincial in many ways, including accounting.

Well, I did say that room and board are certainly real costs, so not sure why you bring up dining services (which is the board of room and board). The tuition costs themselves are where I don't see much of a real cost to the University. They show the costs on the books, sure, but once you roll everything up it's not really costing the University tuition-wise.

The fixed number of out of state kids a state school can take, if that's a case, would skew the argument. The compliance cost for 22 kids versus 44 kids doesn't seem to be that big of a hurdle. Once you're measuring and tracking compliance the marginal cost to measure and track another student, or even double, isn't much. There's the initial cost to get a system set up, but after that it's not terribly difficult and doesn't get harder by just having to add more names to a database to check.

I brought dining services as an example of how even within the same university, expenses aren't simply absorbed and are still accounted for. Those schollies may not cost the school $30k but they cost the football budget 30k which was the initial discussion regarding Idaho.

I do think 89's point has some merit though.