PDA

View Full Version : Should Dayton join the Patriot League for Football?


DetroitFlyer
03-05-2009, 08:29 AM
The talk is hot and heavy across the Internet that Fordham has issued an ultimatum to the Patriot League.... Convert to normal athletic scholarships by June 2009 or we are leaving.... It has also been revealed that Fordham has been operating at a scholarship equivalent level of 58! Remember, 63 is the maximum in FCS. So, basically our Flyers have beaten a team the past two years that is qualified to play FBS programs, (57 athletic scholarships is the minimum for an FBS to count a win over an FCS for bowl eligibility). Speaking of which, Fordham has also announced that UConn and Army, both FBS programs have been added to future schedules. Word is they almost landed a game with Rutgers for this season. Fordham is obviously looking to step things up in football. No doubt in my mind, they dropped us because losing to Dayton does not impress FBS programs when you are trying to line up money games.... Of course I would also like to take this opportunity to point out that we are really not that far away from being able to play with some FBS programs. If Fordham can do it, we sure could....

Oh well, I'm betting that the PL does not go full athletic scholarship... Fordham will leave which will potentially create an opening for a new member.... Like all conferences, the PL will want another full member, but I doubt that will happen either....

So, should Dayton consider taking Fordham's place in the PL? It certainly would not hurt our desire to continue our improvement in academic reputation.... We would also be in an autobid conference, so winning the PL would garner us a bid to the playoffs, unlike winning the PFL which pretty much means absolutely nothing.... (Do not get me started on the sorry Gridiron Classic or PFL Championship games between divisions).

Travel would not really be much worse than the PFL is today. The big challenge? If would be far more expensive to play in the PL. Our current football budget is around $700K give or take a bit.... Most PL teams spend about $3,000,000.... Georgetown spends less, but they do not do well in the PL at all.

Academically, UD is not on a par with the current PL schools. Fordham is probably the lowest ranked school currently, and Fordham is ranked above UD.... Still, UD has been improving year on year and the PL did admit Towson for a short stint at one time....

Most know here that I am VERY unhappy with the directionless, head in the sand conference called the PFL.... Moving to the PL is very intriguing to me on a number of levels.

What do the rest of you think?

Charlie B
03-05-2009, 09:51 AM
Df

Explain please the "Academically, UD is not on par with the PL schools " quote. Charlie:confused:

DetroitFlyer
03-05-2009, 10:51 AM
Df

Explain please the "Academically, UD is not on par with the PL schools " quote. Charlie:confused:


I actually researched it last year to see how we stacked up.... The PL schools typically fall in the "most selective" catagory in the US News and World Reports ranking system, (same as the Ivy League). Dayton is a notch below that.... The PL schools typically admit a small number of applicants, (30%), maybe.... Dayton is something like 75% currently.... The PL schools kids will typically have higher test scores than UD, (SAT, ACT), on average. Keep in mind that the PL's core schools fancy themselves to be on a par with the Ivy League.

Today, Fordham also has better "numbers" than Dayton and is ranked above us in US News and World Reports.

Trust me, I also have my thoughts on the whole ranking process, but by the numbers typically used to rank schools, Dayton is still a bit below the PL level.

Now, for the most part, the PL schools cannot improve all that much.... UD on the other hand has been improving almost every year. Note this year's record number of applications. Our percentage admitted will go down as more and more students make UD their first choice school. I'm not really certain that we need to reach the PL or Ivy levels, but some improvement is desired....

Lurking Dog
03-05-2009, 11:18 AM
If Dayton abandoned a true nonscholarship model, wouldn't it make more sense to follow Fordham...wherever they're going? After all, UD and Fordham are in the same conference for most sports. I would think they are a more valued rival than a Lehigh.

On the other hand, if Dayton suddenly decides to offer athletic aid, maybe they could convince the rest of the PFL to follow suit. Make the Pioneer a better league and stay put.

But we all know that the opposite is true. Dayton has fought to keep the PFL nonscholarship...no athletic aid whatsoever.

Avid Flyer
03-05-2009, 11:33 AM
The PL schools typically admit a small number of applicants, (30%), maybe.... Dayton is something like 75% currently....

Somehow that don't quite compute. UD is reporting a record number of applications at around 12K. 75% of that would put just the freshman class well over the total number of undergraduates for the university. Thought I read they took like 2500 students out of the 12K.

http://news.udayton.edu/News_Article/?contentId=22793

DetroitFlyer
03-05-2009, 12:12 PM
Somehow that don't quite compute. UD is reporting a record number of applications at around 12K. 75% of that would put just the freshman class well over the total number of undergraduates for the university. Thought I read they took like 2500 students out of the 12K.

http://news.udayton.edu/News_Article/?contentId=22793

OK, I will not look up all the details, but the links below give you some idea. It looks like the latest data is from the fall of 2007.

Dayton: More selective. Accepted 81.9%.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/items/3127

Fordham: More selective. Accepted 42.1%.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/items/2722

Georgetown: Most selective. Accepted 20.8%.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/items/1445

Colgate: Most selective. Accepted 25.6%

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/items/2701

Bucknell: Most selective. Accepted 29.9%.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/items/3238

Holy Cross: More selective. Accepted 33.0%.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/items/2141

Lafayette: Most selective. Accepted 35.0%

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/items/3284

So, maybe my terminology was off a bit. The key is acceptance rate. UD has to accept a far larger number of students in order to fill the class as compared to the PL schools. We are also in the "more selective" catagory as compared to the "most selective". Not all PL schools are "most selective" but I think most of them are currently.

FLORIDAFLYER
03-05-2009, 01:41 PM
Adding $2.3 million to the football budget, or anything close to that amount. is a stretch. And we would be playing a bunch of eastern cchools that we have nothing in common with, just like the PFL. I doubt that the driving force behind the academic improvement is football. the basketball program is the cash cow, I don't see money being diverted to football. UD has a good well rounded program. I know some folks are not happy with the current football setup, however the administration appears to be content. Face it, we are not in the big ten, and will never command the respect and coverage that a D-1 program does. We could probably compete with some of the teams in the PL, but what does that get us? We can't get the students to back a major college bball team consistantly, the chances of increased football support is slim. I think we stay put.

Lurking Dog
03-05-2009, 05:43 PM
Taking the U.S. News ratings/rankings one step further, I've listed members of my ideal athletic conference below. Selection criteria are (1) private school in the 12-state area defined by the Census Bureau as the "Midwest." (2) Division I (3) U.S. News 1st tier school (4) not currently a member of a BCS conference--just keepin it real.

the lineup:

St. Louis
Dayton
Loyola
Creighton
Xavier
Valparaiso
Butler
Drake
Bradley
Evansville
Detroit Mercy

...20 conference games per year in basketball...RPI would be .5388 today--slightly better than the A10's.

Conference HQ and basketball tournament would be in Chicago...grab some associate members from the PFL to fill out the football conference.

UACFlyer
03-05-2009, 06:50 PM
Avid, you are missing a critical point; DF's numbers do, indeed, "compute". UD receives roughly 12,000 applications; and it offers admission (i.e., "accepts") 80% of those that apply. BUT, of those offered admission only one in four, 25%, chooses to attend UD.

Most definitely, UD is not a first choice school as the low "yield" of admitted applicants shows. As for an academic comparison with PL schools, DF is being sensitive. UD is not on the same page with PL schools.

As for DF's comment that UD is "improving" academically, probably that is true; but not as rapidly as other schools. Over the last five years UD's US News ranking among "national doctoral universities" has decreased from 98th to 108th.

My bottom line is that UD is on the right track but is not moving nearly fast enough.

Avid Flyer
03-05-2009, 07:13 PM
Think I got it, knew something didn't compute. Math wasn't my strong suit.

Avid Flyer
03-05-2009, 07:29 PM
DF sorry if I came across as challenging you, it was the figures I was challenging. Had seen these figures before and just couldn't make heads or tails out of them. Knew there had to be a good explanation but I just wasn't seeing it or getting it.

DetroitFlyer
03-06-2009, 12:00 PM
DF sorry if I came across as challenging you, it was the figures I was challenging. Had seen these figures before and just couldn't make heads or tails out of them. Knew there had to be a good explanation but I just wasn't seeing it or getting it.

really.... I had done the research last year so I was speaking from memory. I was just feeling too lazy to redo the work.... Kind of glad your comments made me go back and review it again.

Like most Flyers, I sure want to see UD improve on all fronts, but I would hate to see the day when our admission standards are Ivy like....

UACFlyer
03-08-2009, 06:25 PM
DF, the average SAT score of Ivy freshmen is about 1450;....UD's is about 1150. And well over 90% of Ivy freshmen rank in the top 10% of their HS class; UD's figure is slightly over 20%.

But, our president has stated that a UD goal is to be ranked among the top five Catholic national doctoral universities, meaning that the makeup of our freshman class has to be more along the lines of Fordham, Marquette and Saint Louis, e.g., SATs about 1250 and 35-40% among the top 10% of their HS class. Those figures represent a significant improvement but are no where near Ivy levels.

You have no need to worry.

ClevelandFlyer05
03-12-2009, 06:25 PM
The Patriot League would be a pretty good fit for Dayton for football and it would give our academic image a boost by associating with schools like Georgetown, Bucknell, Lehigh, etc. The PFL is going nowhere. If the football program is going to simply tread water like it's been doing for the past decade and a half, may as well do it in the Patriot League.

chriscage
05-08-2009, 09:52 PM
There's been lots of talk here about the lack of awareness of the PFL, its low profile and lack of an automatic FCS playoff bid.

It is clear that PFL founder schools are committed to the non-scholly model. Given that committment, the PFL won't "buy" its way in through partial scholarship funding as did the NEC.

WHEN and IF the quality of play at schools like Campbell, Valpo, and Butler consistently matchs Dayton, San Diego and Jacksonville, the league's RPI should exceed several other FCS conferences. That will give the PFL a legitimate claim on an auto bid.

Meanwhile, perhaps the PFL could benefit from some re-positioning.

The PFL has a strong footprint in the Midwest, a growing presence in the Southeast and (so long as San Diego and Marist are committed) a bi-coastal presence.

Further, by good fortune or good planning, the PFL is present (and receives media coverage in mid to large cities like San Diego, Indianapolis, Dayton and Jacksonville) and nearby metro areas like Chicago (Valpo), New York (Marist), Charlotte (Davidson) and Raleigh (Campbell). Sure beats the hell out of Bloomington and West Lafayette, Indiana, Athens, Ohio or Storrs, Connecticut. This is a great PR base on which to build!

If the PFL should ever undertake a campaign to raise its profile, I would urge them to consider a name change.

Why not dub it the NCFL? (The National College Football League). That’s what it is. And it is the only one!

You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but brand names matter...and I can't think of a better brand name than the National College Football League.

The NCFL...What do you think? :singer:

UACFlyer
05-09-2009, 10:24 AM
Chris, National College Football League surely has a nicer ring to it than Pioneer Football League. But, more important than the league name is the level of play. As with the A10, it's in UD's interest to do all it can to ensure excellence, starting with minimum standards for funding, facilities, etc.

One would think that institutional peer pressure would encourage schools to invest at a level for which their facilities and competitiveness are consistently at least "average". Of course, not every member can be average; but everyone can be close to it. By that I mean, while someone has to finish last, that doesn't mean that the teams near the bottom are not competitive when they play the top-tier teams.

As for Fordham's plans and, more important, motives,...a topic that got this thread going,....I cannot in my wildest dreams understand why a major university that settles for less than mediocre in A10 sports, most notably the flagship men's BB, would even consider investing in scholarship football. What could they possibly be thinking?

It has been mentioned that Fordham has UConn and Army of future football schedules. Why? Army football may be about at FU's level; but not UConn's. UC is a middle-of-the-pack FBS program that has been scheduling an annual game with FCS scholarship schools. Those games have been slaughters.

And, if Fordham left the Pat league, which I seriously doubt, where would they go?.....the Colonial league?.....maybe. The CAA plays FCS football at a level well above the Ivy, Pat, NEC, or whereever. But why would they want to do that? The Pat league is comprised of very prestigious, academically elite schools. Why not at least derive the benefit of such an association? In my opinion a move by Fordham is nothing more than an unfounded rumor, absent a rational statement by FU explaning their reasoning.

chriscage
05-10-2009, 01:43 PM
Well, UAC I agree that the quailty of play is more important than the name of the league. But when it comes to marketing, both matter. When and if the PFL undertakes an effort to elevate its profile, I hope they will take a look at their brand name as well.

I'm pleased that you like the NCFL idea. It amplifies the fact that the PFL is something UNIQUE. the ONLY national college football league.

The Pioneer League would be a fine name for a league consisting of Davy Crockett U, Sam Houston Institute of Technology, Ozark State (all fictitious) and maybe Appalacian State.

Sure, the name refers to "pioneering" true non-schollly ball in D-1 but most folks just don't "get" that. It sounds like we are harkening back to Lewis and Clark and our early settlers.

As for Fordham, if there's a kernal of truth in the blogs, it may well be that Football is their new centerpiece. Unlike Duke and Dayton, Fordham may see Football as their future "claim to fame". (Isn't it amusing that UD beat them twice in a row despite their much larger budget and Patriot league status!) :singer:

UACFlyer
05-10-2009, 02:56 PM
Chris, you may be right that FU has decided to focus on football as the best means of elevating athletics specifically and the university generally. If so, that's a might interesting decision.

The question then becomes: what conference?....for the program must be in a conference. Unless, that is, FU plans to go all the way to FBS status, in which case playing as an independent for five years, or so, is an option to establish creds. But, then what conference?...the Big East as a football member only? For that to make sense FU would need a commitment from the BE in advance before spending a fortune only to be denied membership.

For such an ambitious step to make sense for FU they would have to be convinced that attaining the status of a BC or ND requires big time football. Although Georgetown is a member of the Catholic "elite three" without football.



All mere speculation. Considering the sorry state of Fordham athletics generally it's very difficult to make sense out wanting to move beyond the Patriot League for football. The PL is a good league comprised of elite schools; FU is lucky to be associated with them.

San Diego Flyer
05-10-2009, 07:15 PM
Just as a UD fan, I don't see any advantage in joining the PL for another 2.5M/year and gaining...what? If UD wants to painlessly juice up the schedule why not play lower tier scholarship teams in Ohio and not spend anything more.

If we were really into a scholarship football long term strategy (which we most certainly are not), I would opt for the MAC. That's where some potentially close rivals reside---Miami, BG, Ohio, Toledo, Akron, Kent State.

Problem is they likely wouldn't let us do a "Temple". The MAC would want us to play basketball and that queers the whole deal. Which is a pipedream anyway.

2 cents

DetroitFlyer
05-11-2009, 09:26 AM
The "advantages" of joining the PL for football would be access to the FCS playoffs and maybe being associated with more elite academic institutions.

In Fordham's case, they already spend a fortune, (normally at the very top of FCS), on football with the twisted aid model that the PL uses. Combined with some recent "tweaking" of the academic aid, (AI), requirements, it might not make much sense for Fordham to remain in a non-athletic scholarship aid model. Essentially, the PL spends as much on aid as most FCS athletic scholarship conferences, but then they tie their hands with the "need based" model and the AI, (trying to be the Ivy League light).... The issue they are facing is that you cannot be the Ivy League and be State U at the same time.

Frankly, the PFL, Ivy and PL would do well to consider banding together and forming an FCS subdivision. A subdivision like this sure would attract more schools to the non-athletic aid model than the PFL alone. Of course both the Ivy League and the PL want to believe that they are equal to most of FBS and certainly on a par with any State U FCS conference.

As for the NCFL idea, it sounds good. The problem, which has been around since 1991, is that as a conference the PFL does not want to have a higher profile.... It is almost hard to imagine an athletic conference being run any lower key than the PFL. Very little is done to improve attendance, schedules are only now VERY slowly being improved, (maybe thanks to Jim Harbaugh), we have refused to request a playoff bid, and the list goes on.... Let's face it, a conference that is essentially run in the spare time that Patty Viverito has when she is not running the MVC, is not going to embrace greatly improving its national profile....

Why? My theory has always been that schools like UD, that may have a "bad" memory of trying to play athletic scholarship football in the past, do not want ANYTHING to build momentum in that direction. Say for example the PFL gets a playoff bid.... What happens if the PFL team is killed in the first round every season? (I do not think that would happen by the way), but say it does.... Well, the fans may begin asking why we do not add athletic scholarships in order to improve our level of play....

As you all know, I am not at all against UD returning to athletic scholarship football. The rules today are significantly different that in the good ole days.... Teams are limited as to the number of athletic scholarships they can grant, which greatly levels the playing field in both FBS and FCS. In the good ole days, UD was at best a smaller, mostly regional university. In 2009, we are a top 120, national university with an improving reputation. Still, many in the UD community want to point to the 60's and 70's as clear "proof" as to why athletic scholarship football will not work at UD. Hard to understand how such a talented community cannot see the forest through the trees....

Oh well, until the PFL decides that it wants to improve itself, we can expect the conference to continue striving for mediocrity rather than excellence. Sad on many, many levels....

UACFlyer
05-11-2009, 10:56 AM
DF, as much as I enjoy college football at the highest level, it does not pass the "financial common sense test", even for the majority of FBS programs.

There is a reason why only two among dozens of major Catholic universities play FBS football. And there is a reason why only about 120 of the ~ 330 Div 1 schools play FBS football; and there is a reason why only a few hundred of the thousands of colleges in the U.S. give scholarships in any form.

Consider UMass as an example.....a large, major state university that happens to have a legacy of very good football at the FCS level. Indeed, UMass as is could be competitive in several FBS conferences. And, UMass wants to upgrade to FBS in the worst way. Driving UMass nuts is the way it has been eclipsed by longtime neighbor and hundred year rival UConn, right down the road. Every five years a task force is convened to consider the matter; and the conclusion is always the same. From a financial point of view it makes absolutely no sense. The capital investment is well over $100 million and the annual red ink is in the millions. There is no perceived benefit that comes close to offsetting that.

Average attendance at most FBS schools reflects lacking fan support. The MAC is a good example of that. Fan support is excellent for the very top tier programs, good for a few dozen more and then drops off sharply.

It is difficult to understand why a UD peer like Villanova is willing to absorb the losses year after year when fewer than 10,000 show up for games. That hardly suggests a burning interest among Philly fans for VU football, which is usually quite good.

UD and the PFL schools that have decided that there is a benefit to playing football have exactly the right model. What they could do much better is promote the league and model much better. To suggest that they resist doing so because they fear fan pressure to upgrade will grow is not realistic at all. All one has to do is look at the level of fan support among most FCS programs and many FBS programs to realize that fan support juistifying the expense exists only at the very highest level of college football. And even then the finances often fall short. FBS school sconsider a bowl game their main objective;...and when they get there they usually wind up in the red, sometimes even for one of the few BCS bowls.

DetroitFlyer
05-12-2009, 05:52 PM
I have little doubt that today; the PFL is a league of managed expectations. We have a part time commissioner, we do not apply for a playoff bid, we pretend to "pioneer" a unique level of college football, (one that has not thrived for 16 years and counting)....

I honestly believe that the PFL really does not want to be too successful. I'm not saying that the fear is rational, but I think it is real. Until that fear is overcome, the PFL will not look to promote itself or raise its national profile.

Call it the Richmond or Villanova syndrome if you will. Both have been successful to the point where "stepping back" to a PL or PFL level would rile up too many people. They are both kind of stuck playing money losing FCS football at the highest possible level when one or both just might want to play at a PFL level. Schools of the PFL do not want to risk falling into the Richmond/Villanova syndrome. One way to do that is to manage the expectations of the league, which has gone on for 16 years and counting....

Trust me, there is a lingering feeling in the halls of PFL programs that you just cannot compete at the highest levels of FCS, (read playoff level), without athletic scholarships. This feeling remains even though many PFL teams have competed with and won games against "traditional" FCS teams.... I for one will always believe that the 2007, Hoyng led Flyers could have defeated ANY team in FCS on any given Saturday....

This will only change when the PFL stops pretending to be some unique level of college football and decides to simply join the world of FCS. We do that by obtaining an automatic bid to the FCS playoffs for our champion and by playing traditional FCS teams on a regular basis. Not NEC teams, certainly not the Tiffins, Urbanas, and Central States of the world, but the OVC, the MVC, the Ivy League, the Patriot League, etc. We not only have to play these teams, we have to be competitive. Now, if your fundamental belief is that you cannot field competitive teams with non-athletic scholarship players, then you are not going to schedule the games and you are right back to the whole managed expectations thing....

UACFlyer
05-12-2009, 08:31 PM
DF, no one knows more about PFL/Dayton football than you. But, in my opinion you are doing a bit of "reading between the lines" when really there is nothing there, e.g. "managed expectations".

There are three comparable leagues relevant to the discussion: IL, PL and PFL. The PFL has a part-time commissioner not as a reflection of its lack of serious interest but because it's a football-only league. What in the world would a full-time commissioner do? In contrast the IL and PL are all-sport conferences, essentally. Leading those conferences is a full-time job.

As for not applying for a play-off slot, the Ivies choose not to apply as well. It's a choice.

PFL scheduling of the Ivies and Pats would be great and I think UD (the top PFL team) should keep at it. But, it is very, very convenient for the Ivy and Pat schools to play most of their non-conference games against one another.
If you go to the Wikipedia description of the PFL there is a map showing the PFL school locations. Looking at that map and knowing the locations of all Ivy and Pat schools one can easily see that all the schools in both those conferences fit in a geograpghic area about the size of Ohio, i.e., they are in very close proximity so that travel is very easy and convenient. That fact and their institutional compatibility explains why there is so much cross-conference scheduling between the IL and PL. Nonethless, occasionally IL and PL schools do schedule opponents from other conferences; and I think UD should do all it can to schedule Ivies and Pats without requiring a game in Dayton. Perhaps Tim Wabler feels otherwise.

In my mind the most important thing for the PFL is to improve the level of play from top to bottom. The Sagarin rankings provide a decent measure of where the PFL fits into the scheme of things. And while top PFL teams like UD and USD usually rank near the middle of the IL and PL, the drop off is very rapid with the average and lower PFL teams falling well below the typical Ivy or Pat. This is an issue not unlike that faced by A10 basketball, i.e., an improved level of play takes care of many issues and provides opportunities.

On another matter, I had not read the "unoffical" PFL site in a while until today. It does seem as if Detroit may be getting ready for football. If they join the PFL it will take quite a while to come up to speed as Campbell is learning. And you know about the X "rumor". If true that would be interesting for UD.

The Chef
05-15-2009, 03:16 PM
DF, I know you know what these terms mean. So tell us once you've looked at those things whether you indeed think "access to the FCS playoffs" (mind you, not a guarantee to make the playoffs) alone is worth the investment it would take to be eligible for admission into an already stable Patriot League, which would also not be a slam dunk even at that point.

Exactly how much money is seeing Dayton play in the 2025 FCS playoffs worth? I don't even know if I'll be around to see it.

For me, it still costs way to much to make it worth the effort.

DetroitFlyer
05-17-2009, 09:44 PM
Come on now.... If college athletics were all about ROI, most college athletics would not exist.... What do you think the ROI is on any sport at UD beyond men's basketball that would justify their existance? UD chooses to fund the entire athletics program by men's basketball profits. Not all schools have that same option and choose to fund athletics in a different manner. Who is "right" relative to football, Richmond or Dayton? Fordham or Dayton? Obviously, it depends on you define "right".

The PFL certainly has a unique philosophy relative to FCS football. No doubt that the league is the most cost controlled of the cost controlled FCS division.... Unfortunately, the philosophy of extreme cost control also seems to be a philosophy of extreme isolation as well....

chriscage
05-17-2009, 11:11 PM
Great points DF!

In many respects it appears that non-scholarship FCS football is "right" for Dayton. Because UD offers numerous need-based grants to the student body at large, we can offer aid to Flyer football players at a similar rate. Add the attraction of our D1 facilities, a lovely campus along with sound academics... and our capable recruiters are able to attract talent equal to many FCS scholarship programs.

Meanwhile UD seems able to control costs (partly by sharing Welcome Stadium) while still achieving a respectable 44.2 Sagarin rating (comparable to Fordham, Princeton, Grambling and UC Davis.)*

It is hard to see sufficient benefits that may accrue from the drastically increased costs resulting from switching to the PL.

Is there some reason that FCS bottom feeders like Georgetown (PL) and Valpo (PFL) can't someday do the same? The college football establishment is watching. If the PFL is to flourish, it must do a far better job of marketing itself as the only national college football league. AND member schools must upgrade their quality of play and strength of non-conference schedules.

*(However, one way it is NOT working at UD is attendance...THAT needs to change!)

The Chef
05-20-2009, 12:52 PM
Come on now.... If college athletics were all about ROI, most college athletics would not exist.... What do you think the ROI is on any sport at UD beyond men's basketball that would justify their existance? UD chooses to fund the entire athletics program by men's basketball profits. Not all schools have that same option and choose to fund athletics in a different manner. Who is "right" relative to football, Richmond or Dayton? Fordham or Dayton? Obviously, it depends on you define "right".

Well yes, what you say is true here, but only if you're talking about money in exclusion. So, I guess it's fine that you ducked my question. Unless you can tell me something I don't already know, the evidence suggests that the costs far outweigh the benefits, even in a best case scenario. And an ROI calculation is nothing more than the relationship between benefit and cost.

So, let me spell it out more clearly since you missed the point. It was a metaphor. You suggest that the benefits of "upgrading" football would be much more substantial than the effort and money we'd have to spend to make it happen successfully. So prove it; lay it out. When do we see the benefits, and how long does it take before the continued "benefits", which you should spell out for us, actually come to fruition and begin to show themselves as "worth it?" That's the "return on investment" that I was asking for. Upgrading isn't cheap or easy.

This is probably the third straight year we've had this very discussion on the board, and I still haven't seen such. Makes me think the case continues to be very weak. So we're isolated. Big Whoop! Prestige you say? Go to Vegas and ask someone who the Division I football champion was last year, and that should give a sense of how much prestige is involved in going to scholarship FCS football. What's more, go there and ask them if they know if Georgetown plays football and see what kind of responses you get.

Right now, we continue to be able to put together a competitive schedule and teams that are competitve with good (not the best, but good) teams in FCS. Our setup gives players who might not otherwise have it an opportunity to play competitive college football at a reasonable level for their skills, abilities, and time commitment. What more do you want?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3-eavMSBnk

UACFlyer
05-20-2009, 02:11 PM
Chef is right; we have gone over this in prior years. Why? It's fun.

Dayton is in two conferences: The A10 and PFL. Both have faults and issues; both would benefit by upgrading their level of play. The top few teams in both conferences are very competitive within their respective levels, Div 1 BB and FCS football respectively. But the top programs in both leagues are adversely affected by the lack of commitment and competitiveness of bottom feeders. Why do the top programs put up with it? Since they do I suspect that the internal dynamics of athletics conferences are very different than any of us realize.

I'd love to hear TK's candid "take" on these issues.

chriscage
05-20-2009, 09:10 PM
More good points UAC!

All of us here would love to see a PFL team (especially UD) in the FCS playoffs.

Meanwhile, I'm just pleased that we've stopped beating up on the likes of Wittenburg, Ashland, BW and Frostburg State.

We can take pride in beating the better PFL programs, the 2007 PL champ Fordham and holding our own against Yale in 2004. Though their budgets may be modest, they are D-1 schools and worthy competitors.

If there is room for one "play down" game on our schedule it is Central State. Though they are D-2, they offer some scholarships and big local interest (as evidenced by attendance). They were a far better team in '07 than '06. It will be interesting to see how they fare against UD in 2010.

And let's bring on an FCS scholly team (like Youngstown) and an Ivy or PL team for the 2010 season! :singer:

udx2
05-21-2009, 05:08 PM
Are you the same Chris Cage that worked as the WVUD Program Director? If so, hope all is well with you.

DetroitFlyer
05-22-2009, 09:38 AM
Well yes, what you say is true here, but only if you're talking about money in exclusion. So, I guess it's fine that you ducked my question. Unless you can tell me something I don't already know, the evidence suggests that the costs far outweigh the benefits, even in a best case scenario. And an ROI calculation is nothing more than the relationship between benefit and cost.

So, let me spell it out more clearly since you missed the point. It was a metaphor. You suggest that the benefits of "upgrading" football would be much more substantial than the effort and money we'd have to spend to make it happen successfully. So prove it; lay it out. When do we see the benefits, and how long does it take before the continued "benefits", which you should spell out for us, actually come to fruition and begin to show themselves as "worth it?" That's the "return on investment" that I was asking for. Upgrading isn't cheap or easy.

This is probably the third straight year we've had this very discussion on the board, and I still haven't seen such. Makes me think the case continues to be very weak. So we're isolated. Big Whoop! Prestige you say? Go to Vegas and ask someone who the Division I football champion was last year, and that should give a sense of how much prestige is involved in going to scholarship FCS football. What's more, go there and ask them if they know if Georgetown plays football and see what kind of responses you get.

Right now, we continue to be able to put together a competitive schedule and teams that are competitve with good (not the best, but good) teams in FCS. Our setup gives players who might not otherwise have it an opportunity to play competitive college football at a reasonable level for their skills, abilities, and time commitment. What more do you want?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3-eavMSBnk

striving for mediocrity. One of the very fundamental concerns with our football program is the thought we are playing at a "level" that is somehow "good enough". As a proud UD grad, I'm confident that you clearly understand what happens in life when you strive to be "good enough" or put in my favorite terms, strive for mediocrity. UD football is not some charity that the school runs for wayward students that happen to play football. Student/athletes come to UD in order to obtain an excellent education, AND to play football at the highest possible level that their abilities allow. I have yet to meet a UD football player that has told me that his skills were only "Division III" level, but he figured what the heck I'll play some football while I am at UD.... These fine student/athletes are HEAVILY recruited to play for our Flyers, and virtually every one of them had options to play football elsewhere. Most could have played at other FCS programs.

Where would UD be in 2009 if the entire university was run using the current football model as it core charter? Would we be a top 120, give or take, national university, or would we still be a relatively unknown, mid-western regional university that was “good enough”?

Notice that I'm not saying that UD and the PFL need to all move to FBS or even that UD or the PFL need to begin awarding traditional, athletic scholarships. Keep the current funding model in place, but then strive to be the very best you can be in the FCS division of college football. (Obtain an automatic playoff bid). Striving for mediocrity as the PFL has done for 16 seasons has yielded exactly what one would expect. A league with exceptionally poor direction and absolutely no meaningful post season opportunity. By the way, how do you think the attendance numbers looked last year for football? I’m not really interested in hearing how we outdrew Saint Francis University of PA, just tell me what the trend for attendance for UD football is since say 2000 or so…?

Look, I can even buy the argument that football needed to be “parked” for a while as UD upgraded the rest of the athletic program. Today, virtually all UD athletic programs are on the rise. Granted, we still need to fund additional athletic scholarships for many of the programs, but we are far ahead of where we were 16 years ago…. It is time for UD football, (and the PFL), to stop striving for mediocrity.

UACFlyer
05-22-2009, 05:47 PM
DF, perhaps the UD athletics administration has a better feel for the reality of college football in Southeastern Ohio than we do. A few years ago with UD having a good team Yale came to Welcome Stadium,....an unusual happening to put it mildly.

Yale is one of the storied programs in all of collge football; only a few teams have won more games. If Dayton could not put 10,000 fannies in the seats for a once-in-a-lifetime FCS game like Yale, probably nothing would do it. As I understand it the Yale game filled about half of WS.

Just down the road Miami draws 15,000,...well below the NCAA requirement for FBS football.

I think that with creative marketing Dayton could average well over 5000 per game, compared to the current 3500. Maybe when the bridge and Stewart St. work is complete Tim will focus a bit more on football attendance.

With so much parking available and such easy access, getting to a Flyer game on a Saturday afternoon is a no-sweat experience. And it's cheap! That is a combination that seniors love. When I see attendance for a Flyer baseball game of 100+ on a beautiful Spring afternoon, with the team in first place in the A10, I see a very pleasant missed outing for seniors who are always looking for something to do. And living near a university means that "there is almost always something to do".

As I have said many times in the past, I think seniors represent an untapped market for football, baseball, etc. Attracting that crowd should not be a difficult thing to do.

Flyer Gramps
05-22-2009, 08:28 PM
It has to be an event not just a "game". It has to be the thing to do for the students, to get off their porch or front lawn on campus and get to the game because - well, because for so many it would be a social or expected thing to do. "Everybody's going to the game".

Until that culture changes, student attendence will be wanting not just at Welcome but many college stadiums.

Family/friends of players will come regardless of the league.

So to a bigger degree, the opponent or league or post season means more for alums. Amazing what a single Orange Bowl appearance did here for Wake Forest. They floated the idea for a new press box and loge addition to the stadium and ended up having to expand the original plan. ESPN loves the new spot and we'll see them in town to do more games. You can book a wedding in the new digs. With 4 players signed by pro football teams this spring, I'm sure the beat goes on for the alums as well as 5,000 undergraduates that are Demon Deacons. Playing in one Gridiron Classic didn't seem to help UD attendence but it got two signs hung on the railing, four flags in the corner of the end zones and a charter plane to the North Carolina opponent instead of the overnight bus ride the following season.

San Diego Flyer
06-03-2009, 10:13 AM
Look, I can even buy the argument that football needed to be “parked” for a while as UD upgraded the rest of the athletic program. Today, virtually all UD athletic programs are on the rise. Granted, we still need to fund additional athletic scholarships for many of the programs, but we are far ahead of where we were 16 years ago…. It is time for UD football, (and the PFL), to stop striving for mediocrity.

I couldn't disagree more. UD has positioned itself to give its fans football at an affordable, survivable level. The failing economy has hit all of college football hard and now is the worst possible financial climate to try to interest the administration in upgrading a football program.

Some would make the argument that if we wait a few years some Patriot-level schools may be adopting the UD model and fall into the lap of the Pioneer League.

Here's an article on the plight of CUSA:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/stories/060309dnspoconfwoes.403f1e6.html

And this demise is but a microcosm of what all fully funded football programs are facing. And of course, other university sports as well.

The Chef
06-04-2009, 11:14 AM
Striving for mediocrity? DF, you are so boxed into your mentality that it is beyond comprehension. You have so convinced yourself that you are right that it isn't even possible for you to look at this objectively.

So again, what makes the FCS playoffs so much better than where we are now? And why can't the status quo be considered as being excellent?

I think you pay way too much attention to what others think about UD. That doesn't matter to me at all. The old adage, "perception is reality," is certainly true. But, I would ask you this: Who's reality really matters? Theirs? ours? The UD administration?

Let's shift the paradigm from the gridiron to off the field of play. Why does UD have to be considered mediocre because it's doing what it always has? Why can't the existing tradition in and of itself be excellence if it is always done well? The fact is that we make the non-scholarship football model work better than anybody else. Those in the know wish to have a program just like ours but are afraid to try. I'd hardly call that "striving for mediocrity." In fact, what I'd call it is the attainment of success.

San Diego Flyer
06-04-2009, 02:38 PM
What sells me on our model is the caliber of student athletes we have attracted in huge numbers for the past 30 years. No falloff. Just excited, exhuberant football players that like what UD has to offer, and love to win. This is not some Hovenlob College that goes 2-8 every year. Our young men are proud of their accomplishments and happy to be doing what they do, and they do it really well.

And THEY are smart enough to stay off of message boards that banty around stuff that isn't even relevant to our continuing success. Our whole football program and the folks that make it go have a strong sense of "self". Our fans should mimic that.

It would seem that there are many football universities in the lower scholarship rungs that would give anything to trade places with UD right now if they didn't have to spend the 30 years building what we've got.

DetroitFlyer
06-04-2009, 03:41 PM
Look, if you want to be truly objective, then explain to me why non-athletic scholarship, FCS football is not thriving? After 16 years, why do we not have our own unique level of college football with a playoff system? If this "style" of football is so grand, why are there not schools lined up waiting to join up? Maybe you have not noticed, but this so called level of college football is barely hanging on.... For every Campbell, there is an Iona. Sure, maybe a few more schools will give it a go in the future, (Detroit Mercy, Xavier, Lipscomb or others), but what seems to happen is that teams move to the athletic scholarship model or fold in about the same numbers that non-athletic scholarship programs come on board, (if we are lucky). Perhaps your arguments made some sense 16 YEARS ago.... Just exactly how much longer should the dwindling fan base wait for the PFL to "take the next step"? Should we all just sit by while UD's attendance falls to 3000, then 2000, then 1000, then 0?

If you could really look at your comments objectively, you would see arguments that try to paint UD football as some kind of football charity that exists for the players that can do no better and the few fans than happen to enjoy UD Football.... In fact, your comments clearly spell out the problem.... Football is "good enough". It is "inexpensive" enough to keep around. It is "nice" that Johnny can continue to play football at schools like UD....

Again, from an objective point of view, what have you personally accomplished in your life by striving for medioricrity?

If I harken back to the days of Division III playoffs and National Championships, I clearly recall passion for UD Football and a much larger and stable fan base. Playing for REAL, NCAA sanctioned national championships does more for a program than you might care to admit. Playing for silly PFL championships or Gridiron Classic titles has done les than ZERO to build passion for UD Football and it has done even less to build the fan base.

OBJECTIVELY, the PFL and UD cannot continue to remain in a static mode of just hanging on in the fringe of the FCS world. WE ARE NOT NOW NOR WILL WE EVER BE THE IVY LEAGUE, no matter how much we wish to pretend othrwise.

By the way, I'm still waiting for the attendance numbers since say 2000 that clearly demonstrate that UD Football and the PFL are OK.... What is that trend again?

Objective? Yeah, give it a shot....

UACFlyer
06-04-2009, 04:51 PM
DF, there are dozens and dozens of schools that want to play non-scholarship football, and do. They are Div III schools. UD used to be among their number.

But, a minority of those schools were Div 1 in other sports, most notably basketball. As you know the NCAA ruled that was no longer acceptable. So the Div 1 schools that were playing Div III football decided that "now we're playing Div 1 non-schollie football", although the level of play hardly changed, if at all.

There may be a slight difference in the level of play in the PFL from Div III; but the operative word is "slight".

The bottom line is that a handful of Div 1 schools want to play non-scholarship football,....a very small handful. And they do. All things considered, the PFL is doing quite well. If a few more schools join in the future, great.

As for attendance; UD could do a much better job of marketing the football program. But very few FCS scholarship programs that spend a few million on football draw 10,000 fans. There is no worse investment in all of college athletics than scholarship football at the FCS level.

San Diego Flyer
06-04-2009, 06:45 PM
The bottom line is that a handful of Div 1 schools want to play non-scholarship football,....a very small handful. And they do. All things considered, the PFL is doing quite well. If a few more schools join in the future, great.

As for attendance; UD could do a much better job of marketing the football program. But very few FCS scholarship programs that spend a few million on football draw 10,000 fans. There is no worse investment in all of college athletics than scholarship football at the FCS level.

I'm going to bump this summary up everytime it gets buried because it bears repeating.

And DF, if a team does as well as UD IN IT"S CHOSEN STRATA OF COMPETITION, and the athletes, administration, and 95% of the fan base are happy, what's the beef? To excel at a level of competition that you have chosen is NOT mediocrity. Why beat your head against a wall when NOBODY has a passion for the change? Why gamble the money when you don't have it, and you could end up with a non-competitive, money gobbling inferior product? You seem to gloss over the fact that the next level up for UD is expensive, gobbles up resources, and in and of itself is still lightyears below the Bigs level of play where the public actually cares.

If the majority of our fan base felt like you, I would say fine, we are going to Club Football. But they don't.

Avid Flyer
06-04-2009, 07:22 PM
Bump bump!

Actually what would make the UD style of football more interesting to the fans is known competition...like X, SLU, Marquette, etc.

UD could have donde what those other schools did, and that was fold their football program altogether. UD decided that they could excell at the non scho9llarship level and set the tone for other schools like UD.

Fans are clammering at SLU, X and Marquette for football, even if it is non-scholarship because they see that Dayton has succeeded.

Can you imagine the attendance increase if X, SLU and Marquette were our rivals. It wouldn't really matter that it was non scholli. The fans would turn out against known rivals.

So is it Dayon's fault that those afore mentioned schools didn't have the foresight to keep their football programs. Thee are a few university fans pushing for football (Dayton style) at their schools. I believe we will see it within the next ten years. X and Marquette already have club teams, just a simple commitment to upgrade to non-scholli and join the ranks of UD.

DetroitFlyer
06-04-2009, 07:28 PM
next level up in FCS.... We are an FCS school, in an FCS conference. We simply choose to pretend that we are not an FCS conference. As for Division III, the PFL and schools like USD and UD are head and shoulders above the lion's share of Division III. Today, Mount Union would lose to our Flyers 8 out of 10 times IMHO. We are getting FCS level athletes today, as is USD, JU, and most other PFL programs. It seems like USD is sending players to the pros almost every year. Pro scouts are showing more interest in PFL players every season. We need playoff access, pure and simple. We should be able to gain access today, without spending a dime.... We simply need the league to step up the plate and get er done.

San Diego Flyer
06-04-2009, 07:34 PM
Has a PFL player ever made the FINAL roster of an NFL team? Is there even ONE on an NFL team today? Does a PFL university even have that as an objective? Do we really care about the NFL?

The Chef
06-05-2009, 09:36 AM
Has a PFL player ever made the FINAL roster of an NFL team? Is there even ONE on an NFL team today? Does a PFL university even have that as an objective? Do we really care about the NFL?

To answer your first question, I don't believe there has been a player that has made the final 53-man roster on an NFL team. Josh Johnson didn't make Tampa Bay's 53 man playing roster, but he did make and was on the scout team this past season.

I don't think PFL does or should care about the NFL. If you care about that, you should be playing FBS football because that level of play gives you the best chance.

To get this back on topic, if it really is in UD's best interest to make the playoffs (and I want to make it clear that I don't agree with that premise; UD doesn't, hasn't, and will never NEED the FCS playoffs. UD doesn't even NEED to have a football program.), making a play to join the Patriot League is NOT the answer. Going to a scholarship model of any kind is not the answer either. I'm not even sure that lobbying for an automatic bid for the PFL is the answer. Who's going to listen?

I think the answer is to shut up, prove your worthiness on the football field, and let the rest sort itself out. Just play and play to win. If you're good enough, it will show. If you're not, don't pout about it. Just go back to work and try to show it all over again year after year. That's how you build the respect that leads to recognition without subjugating your values or striving for mediocrity.

And again, I have to bring this up. Whose perception matters here? And WTH does "good enough" mean? How is it that being Division III champions is somehow a virtue whereas having been the consensus best team amoung I-AA/FCS non-scholarship is somehow less than acceptable? We play better football, play and beat better competition, and we do it in a style that represents our University and comunity well. And yet, that's not "good enough?" Where does the line get drawn? Maybe we're not good enough until we can get on Ohio State's football schedule. Maybe we're not good enough until we can join the MAC. Maybe we're not good enough until we make the BCS championship game.

So, where's the line? And more importantly, whose line is it anyway? (Sorry Drew Carey!) ;)

Lurking Dog
06-05-2009, 12:42 PM
To answer your first question, I don't believe there has been a player that has made the final 53-man roster on an NFL team.


Drake's Billy Cundiff had a five-year NFL career with the Cowboys and Saints. For four years, he shared the NFL record for most field goals made in a game (7).

I believe a couple of San Diego alums have made brief, mid-season appearances on NFL active rosters. A Jacksonville player--whom I believe was on a basketball scholarship in JU's pre-PFL days--also played in the NFL.

DetroitFlyer
06-06-2009, 02:00 PM
Josh was the first ever player DRAFTED by the NFL. Gruden took him in the fifth round! He was absolutely on the final roster and is currently under contract.

Eric Bahktari, (probably spelled wrong), was on the Chargers and 49ers scout teams all of last season. He is currently under contract, (2 year deal), with the Chargers. He has an excellent shot on making the final roster this year. John Matthews just signed a free agent contract with Indy and will be competing for a roster spot. Fair chance that he makes it. Several other PFL players had NFL tryouts this year. USD has had players on ACTIVE rosters within the past 5 years.

Look for more PFL players to show up on NFL rosters in the future.




To answer your first question, I don't believe there has been a player that has made the final 53-man roster on an NFL team. Josh Johnson didn't make Tampa Bay's 53 man playing roster, but he did make and was on the scout team this past season.

I don't think PFL does or should care about the NFL. If you care about that, you should be playing FBS football because that level of play gives you the best chance.

To get this back on topic, if it really is in UD's best interest to make the playoffs (and I want to make it clear that I don't agree with that premise; UD doesn't, hasn't, and will never NEED the FCS playoffs. UD doesn't even NEED to have a football program.), making a play to join the Patriot League is NOT the answer. Going to a scholarship model of any kind is not the answer either. I'm not even sure that lobbying for an automatic bid for the PFL is the answer. Who's going to listen?

I think the answer is to shut up, prove your worthiness on the football field, and let the rest sort itself out. Just play and play to win. If you're good enough, it will show. If you're not, don't pout about it. Just go back to work and try to show it all over again year after year. That's how you build the respect that leads to recognition without subjugating your values or striving for mediocrity.

And again, I have to bring this up. Whose perception matters here? And WTH does "good enough" mean? How is it that being Division III champions is somehow a virtue whereas having been the consensus best team amoung I-AA/FCS non-scholarship is somehow less than acceptable? We play better football, play and beat better competition, and we do it in a style that represents our University and comunity well. And yet, that's not "good enough?" Where does the line get drawn? Maybe we're not good enough until we can get on Ohio State's football schedule. Maybe we're not good enough until we can join the MAC. Maybe we're not good enough until we make the BCS championship game.

So, where's the line? And more importantly, whose line is it anyway? (Sorry Drew Carey!) ;)

DetroitFlyer
06-06-2009, 02:04 PM
To answer your first question, I don't believe there has been a player that has made the final 53-man roster on an NFL team. Josh Johnson didn't make Tampa Bay's 53 man playing roster, but he did make and was on the scout team this past season.

I don't think PFL does or should care about the NFL. If you care about that, you should be playing FBS football because that level of play gives you the best chance.

To get this back on topic, if it really is in UD's best interest to make the playoffs (and I want to make it clear that I don't agree with that premise; UD doesn't, hasn't, and will never NEED the FCS playoffs. UD doesn't even NEED to have a football program.), making a play to join the Patriot League is NOT the answer. Going to a scholarship model of any kind is not the answer either. I'm not even sure that lobbying for an automatic bid for the PFL is the answer. Who's going to listen?

I think the answer is to shut up, prove your worthiness on the football field, and let the rest sort itself out. Just play and play to win. If you're good enough, it will show. If you're not, don't pout about it. Just go back to work and try to show it all over again year after year. That's how you build the respect that leads to recognition without subjugating your values or striving for mediocrity.

And again, I have to bring this up. Whose perception matters here? And WTH does "good enough" mean? How is it that being Division III champions is somehow a virtue whereas having been the consensus best team amoung I-AA/FCS non-scholarship is somehow less than acceptable? We play better football, play and beat better competition, and we do it in a style that represents our University and comunity well. And yet, that's not "good enough?" Where does the line get drawn? Maybe we're not good enough until we can get on Ohio State's football schedule. Maybe we're not good enough until we can join the MAC. Maybe we're not good enough until we make the BCS championship game.

So, where's the line? And more importantly, whose line is it anyway? (Sorry Drew Carey!) ;)


why exactly does the NCAA exist and have playoffs for various athletic events? I guess they were just bored and decided to do the playoff thing in their spare time? Why not just have ALL sports as club sports using the logic above? Just how interesting would women's volleyball and basketball be if they were not striving for playoff opportunities?

UACFlyer
06-07-2009, 12:55 AM
The exchange between Chef and DF suggests more disagreement than actually exists.

The absence of a PFL playoff spot in the FCS championship doesn't make the PFL a failure. But, at the same time petitioning for a slot wouldn't be harmful to the league in any way, would it? I can't think of a reason.

So, why hasn't the PFL done so? Is the league commissioner incompetent and/or negligent? Are the league ADs failing in their responsibilities? Is the entire PFL leadership group unaware of the benefits of a playoff slot, while only DF sees the benefits? Clearly, the answer to these questions is "no".

Just as clearly there are reasons why the PFL leadership has not taken the step that DF feels is so important. The truth is that no one on this board knows what those reasons are. But, Tim Wabler does and I'm sure would be glad to explain the reasons. DF, for the sake of our enlightenment I request that you communicate with Tim and ask him to explain why the PFL does not work to obtain a spot in the FCS playoffs.

Thanks in advance.

Lurking Dog
06-08-2009, 12:02 AM
50 cents says that question gets referred to Mrs. Viverito.

The Chef
06-08-2009, 03:13 PM
why exactly does the NCAA exist and have playoffs for various athletic events? I guess they were just bored and decided to do the playoff thing in their spare time? Why not just have ALL sports as club sports using the logic above? Just how interesting would women's volleyball and basketball be if they were not striving for playoff opportunities?

The NCAA playoffs exists because the schools that participate in the playoffs chose this way to sort out its teams. It doesn't require that all teams participate, and it isn't out of need to find the best team. It is only of choice. And most importantly, no one's choice is better or worse than anyone else's choice.

And as such, the PFL exists because the schools that participate want it to exist. If Dayton wanted to leave the PFL or football altogether, it could. And furthermore, if the institution saw it in its best interested to do one or the other, it has a obligation to do so.

Let me draw a (long winded) analogy:
Why does the Electoral College exist? So that someone can be president of the US, right? Well no, that wouldn't be quite right. There are lots of ways that someone could have been elevated to the position of POTUS. The Senate could just elect the POTUS from among its members. The American people could just elect the POTUS directly. The State Legislators could cast votes for POTUS. Each state could get one vote and the person that one the majority of states' popular elections could be elevated to the Presidency. Any of those ways would work in choosing a POTUS. It's just that our Consitution selected this way.

So back to my question: Why does the Electoral College exist? Well, the real reason is because our Founding Fathers thought it would be the best system to choose the President. No other reason. That's it.

Now, to this very day, the Electoral College system draws great scrutiny, and yet it still continues to function. A very small minority of people continue to believe that it would be the best way to elect a POTUS based on today's technology. Many want to change it. Who knows what will happen. (For purposes of this analogy, let's call the USA "NCAA Division I football", the Electoral college, " The Championship Playoff System" and the POTUS "The Champion")

And then there's Puerto Rico, A U.S. territory. (Let's equate them to Dayton.) Puerto Rico is part of the United States.(i.e., Dayton participates in the NCAA Division I football system) Puerto Rican residents are U.S. citizens. They travel with U.S. passports and visas, have free reign to travel anywhere in the U.S., can participate in the US military, select their own form of "state" government and operate essentially independently although they are a part of the United States. One exception is that they don't pay federal income taxes. (Let's call those "Scholarships"). POTUS is the chief leader in Puerto Rico. And yet, they have no say in who is ultimately elected as POTUS (unless they register as a resident in a US state), and they have no representation in the US Congress (let's call that the "automatic bid"). But don't feel sorry for them. There have been three different opportunities for Puerto Rico to vote in favor of becoming a full-fledged US State since entering into its current status as a Commonwealth territory of the US. In all three cases (1967, 1993, 1998), the people of Puerto Rico voted against statehood (and therefore against an opportunity to participate in the "Playoffs") and also against independence (which would be the equivalent of dropping football altogether). I would venture to suggest that they did so because they saw it in their best interests to maintain their current status.

Now, would look into the face of a boriqua and say to them that they are striving for mediocrity, splitting the baby, riding down the middle of the road, trying to have their cake and eat it too, or whatever cliche you wish to use? Or rather, would accept that they are making a judgement based on the realities of the current situation and doing what they feel will work best for what they want because maybe, just maybe, statehood really doesn't make a whole lot of sense for them?

Is being a state really any better than being Puerto Rico, one of just five organized US Territories? Does the fact that they are a select few US organized territories make Puerto Rico a failing state? Hardly!

Give it some thought.

chriscage
06-08-2009, 11:52 PM
Chef, I feel like I've been taken on a long cruise to nowhere!

When one resorts to electoral college politics to explain FCS football, it serves as evidence as to how convoluted the situation has become. Think about this...the FBS non-BCS schools have a similar problem. They have no shot at a national title. The best they can hope for is an invitation to some minor bowl and a little poll action.

Yeah, count me curious as to why "Patty V and the PFL" (sounds like a punk rock group) haven't petitioned for an auto bid to the playoffs.
Possibilities: Patty and or the AD's think we'll embarass ourselves? ......OR.....
She and our the PFL schools still think we should compete in a separate "class"; that is is unfair to expect our schools to compete against scholly programs?

On a hopeful note...Coach Chamberlin has told me personally that he expects the PFL to apply within the next two years. :singer:

The Chef
06-09-2009, 11:42 AM
Chef, I feel like I've been taken on a long cruise to nowhere!

"Now there's a man with an open mind... You can feel the breeze from here!" :p

http://www.philanthromedia.org/archives/GrouchoMarx.jpg

Aristotle once said, "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Somehow, I don't think you really did the former.

"The eye sees only what the mind is prepared to comprehend."

Incidentally, the threat levied by Fordham that was mentioned in the originating post has apparently been followed through upon.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/college/2009/06/06/2009-06-06_fordham_football_awards_scholorships_for_the_fi rst_time_since_1954.html

http://statistics.ncaafootball.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=ncaa-football&page=cfoot2/news/newstest.aspx?id=4235892

In my reading of the articles, it appears that this had more to do with the re-establishment of historical rivalries as it does with playing for a championship, which it already had access to because the Patriot League has an auto bid. Keep in mind however that no such move would have a similar benefit in our case. Most of our historical rivals from the scholarship days either no longer play intercollegiate football (_avier, Marquette, DePaul) or will not play us even if we went to 63 scholarships (Louisville, Cincinnati).

SDF's economic argument also comes into play here.

The Patriot League currently has 7 teams with Fordham. Having a six team football conference is not unworkable, and would probably be better than the current state from a scheduling standpoint. If the PL wanted to add a team and stay with the need-based model, then I would think that Duquesne and/or Albany would actually be the logical choices. Yes, they are bigger schools, but they are more aligned with the football spending model of the PL than UD would be.

UACFlyer
06-09-2009, 12:57 PM
FU's decision is strange to say the least. Here they are in a very good league with prestigious schools;....and they decide to move in the most financially disadvantageous direction possible. All the while their Div 1 men's BB program is an embarrassment.

And they won't have to enlarge their 7000 seat stadium; that's about the average for FCS attendance.

Now when smart people (FU) move in a direction entirely opposite to that of other smart people (UD, the Ivies), all having the same facts, maybe they know something the rest of us don't.

Perhaps FU has a 10+ year strategic plan to move to FBS football. First FCS scholarship for 3-5 years; if that goes well 3-5 years as an FBS independent;.....AND THEN,.....the Big East. The BE needs teams and a team in NYC would be a terrific addition. FU would then join the ranks of BC and ND and the only FBS Catholic schools.

The step FU is taking, viewed in isolation, makes no sense whatsoever. As the first step in a process it makes sense.

bobber
06-09-2009, 01:18 PM
I agree, UAC. This move by Fordham makes no sense. Also a head scratcher is the statement by the Hofstra AD that they would like to be in the A10 eventually!!!!!

Makes no sense at all, unless there is something afoot that we know nothing about, but the insiders can see coming. Otherwise, why would the Flying Dutchmen risk upsetting their CAA brethren with a statement like that?

Is a puzzlement!

UACFlyer
06-09-2009, 02:25 PM
bobber, re the possibility that FU has its eye on FBS football, while I mention that as a possibility, the start-up cost so great, even if a big-time stadium is available.

For FBS football a football-specific facility is needed; UConn's cost $45 million. Coaching and staff salaries are $2+ million. That's big money for a private school, which is why there are so few of them at the FBS level.

Maybe FU is looking at its entire athletics program and has concluded that unless you play FBS football you'll always be second rate at everything else.

It's really hard to understand;....as is Duquesne's decision to offer scholarships. Surely DU has no intentions beyond FCS football.

UACFlyer
06-09-2009, 03:36 PM
FU's web site has a Q&A section including a question re the cost of scholarships.
The FU AD says that there will be "no additional cost", going on to explain that the scholarships will cost FU no more than the current need-based grants. He say no new monies will be needed.

Amazing! One can go from a no scholarship model to scholarship FCS football with no cost. Anyone believing that is an idiot.

FU's claim to want to renew long-time rivalries with Army, Villanova, etc., is credible. Apparently FU would prefer to be beaten by a better class of school than UD. (Navy and UConn are also on future schedules.)

The Pat League won't miss FU, in my opinion. They play the Ivies. And, again in my opinion, this is a good opportunity for UD to schedule Pat schools.

chriscage
06-10-2009, 01:30 AM
Chef, please oh please, quell the breeze.

Fill the holes in our heads with your wisdom!

Now that you've heard from the electoral college, what does Nostrodamus predict for the PFL? :singer:

The Chef
06-10-2009, 03:41 PM
The step FU is taking, viewed in isolation, makes no sense whatsoever. As the first step in a process it makes sense.

I disagree with this. Looking purely at their football program, I think you can rationalize moving to a FCS scholarship model. There is no question that Fordham is taking a risk by what they are doing. But, I also don't think this entirely about money. So, when you look at it this way, you can make a judgement that this is about which institutions they wish to consider their peers and can envision a scenario where playing in the CAA football conference (or a Patriot League with a full athletic scholarship complement) added with the opportunity to play Army, Navy, Columbia, and Connecticut, and all of a sudden you have their ideal scenario in football. As such, they could get to a stable and happy medium in this state with much less investment (and probably much less relative monetary return as well although they should be able to get a payday from Connecticut and some better gate revenues with games against the other historical rivals) than if they went on to FBS. And if you make the case that this move isn't all about money (taking them at their word that they would stay part of the PL if the conference gave athletic scholarships), then there's a case to be made.

There will be costs, but not related to scholarships. I read somewhere that Fordham's need-based scholarships cost out to 55 full athletic scholarship equivalents. With that said, this will not be expense-neutral, unless they want to look the same as they did before, which wasn't that great except for 2007. They talk about expanded recruiting; that isn't going to be free. The coaching and staffing fees, team travel, facilities, etc. will all require a markup to compete. Oh, and we haven't even gone into Title V related costs.

Taken in the whole context of their entire athletic program, this makes no sense at all. Fordham athletics are horrible across the board. They are going to make this big investment in football, but they aren't going to do squat to improve their other programs, especially men's and women's hoops, where they are poised to get the biggest bang for their buck? Now that makes no sense! Their A-10 brethren should serve as excellent role models to show them that they can have first rate programs in other sports without having scholarship football.

Oh, and I just checked with Nostradamus and he told me that the PFL will last at least until the fall of all governments just prior to the end of the world. But, that was supposed to happen last year, so he's recalculating. I'll get back to you.

San Diego Flyer
06-10-2009, 06:10 PM
Now when smart people (FU) move in a direction entirely opposite to that of other smart people (UD, the Ivies), all having the same facts, maybe they know something the rest of us don't.

.

Reminds me of the old joke about the guy going the wrong way on a freeway. His wife calls him from home on his cell and tells him that the tv shows a car heading East on the Westbound lanes of Interstate 80, and to be careful. He says, "What do you mean one car?! There are dozens of them!!" :)

chriscage
06-10-2009, 07:23 PM
Chef, are you suggesting that the A-10 will return to football? :singer:

bobber
06-11-2009, 12:19 AM
I disagree with this. Looking purely at their football program, I think you can rationalize moving to a FCS scholarship model. There is no question that Fordham is taking a risk by what they are doing. But, I also don't think this entirely about money. So, when you look at it this way, you can make a judgement that this is about which institutions they wish to consider their peers and can envision a scenario where playing in the A-10 football conference (or a Patriot League with a full athletic scholarship complement) added with the opportunity to play Army, Navy, Columbia, and Connecticut, and all of a sudden you have their ideal scenario in football. As such, they could get to a stable and happy medium in this state with much less investment (and probably much less relative monetary return as well although they should be able to get a payday from Connecticut and some better gate revenues with games against the other historical rivals) than if they went on to FBS. And if you make the case that this move isn't all about money (taking them at their word that they would stay part of the PL if the conference gave athletic scholarships), then there's a case to be made.

There will be costs, but not related to scholarships. I read somewhere that Fordham's need-based scholarships cost out to 55 full athletic scholarship equivalents. With that said, this will not be expense-neutral, unless they want to look the same as they did before, which wasn't that great except for 2007. They talk about expanded recruiting; that isn't going to be free. The coaching and staffing fees, team travel, facilities, etc. will all require a markup to compete. Oh, and we haven't even gone into Title V related costs.

Taken in the whole context of their entire athletic program, this makes no sense at all. Fordham athletics are horrible across the board. They are going to make this big investment in football, but they aren't going to do squat to improve their other programs, especially men's and women's hoops, where they are poised to get the biggest bang for their buck? Now that makes no sense! Their A-10 brethren should serve as excellent role models to show them that they can have first rate programs in other sports without having scholarship football.

Oh, and I just checked with Nostradamus and he told me that the PFL will last at least until the fall of all governments just prior to the end of the world. But, that was supposed to happen last year, so he's recalculating. I'll get back to you.

I think we can all agree, Fordham is off in never-never-land. Their overall athletic program is in terrible shape, yet they are going to give out 60 football scholarships!!!

Someone get that drunken sailor out of here.

DetroitFlyer
06-12-2009, 09:31 AM
There seems to be a general misunderstanding of PL aid here. Not surprising, as this topic is about as confusing as it gets....

TODAY, Fordham is providing 58 athletic scholarship equivalents according to the NCAA. All PL aid for football is viewed as atheltic scholarship equivalents by the NCAA. TODAY, Fordham spends enough on football to be at the very top of FCS or at least in the top 5. Let's just say that it is not hard to make an argument that they have not been getting their money's worth out of football....

To call the PL aid, "non-athletic scholarship" is simply not true. The aid is basically athletic scholarship with some very difficult restrictions.... The aid can only be awarded by a "needs" test, (FAFSA). So, middle class families that might want their son to attend a PL school typically do not qualify for much "need based" aid. If, however, a family qualifies for a bunch of need based aid, they can obtain a free ride to a PL school. Now, here is the kicker.... The PL also has an academic indes, (AI), to ensure that football players admitted are representative of the entire student body for academics. The AI is a tool the PL uses to make sure no one is "cheating" by admitting poor students. Originally, it was based on the Ivy League AI. So, the better students are typically from middle and upper class families and cannot qualify for aid. The students that can easily qualify for aid are not usually the better students.... So, the recruiting pool is pretty small for the PL. This is why the PFL can recruit and win against the PL. Our aid model is absolutely competitive for middle and upper class families.... I think we can also do OK with the high need families as well. The PL "tweaked" the AI last year in a way that is reported to have hurt Fordham more than the other PL schools. I do not understand all the details, but Fordham felt backed into a corner and decided to act.

Basically, Fordham funds football today as a full, athletic scholarship program. They just cannot recruit kids because of all of the PL restrictions in order to be consistently competitive in the league.

The PL is struggling with wanting to be the Ivy League while being able to compete with the State U's of the world in football. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.... If they go traditional "athletic scholarship" will an AI remain in effect? If not, does the PL really want kids that cannot excel in the classroom? Will they "retreat" and adopt a true "Ivy League / PFL" model?

Time will tell....

The "struggle" speaks to the need of a I-AAA classification. Unfortunately, the NCAA does not want this and will NEVER support it. Too bad as a "division" including the Ivy League, Patriot League, PFL, and probably other schools that would join up would be very interesting....

longtimefan
06-15-2009, 05:19 PM
I can't see putting over $2 million more into the UD football program. To me it would make no sense. What would they do, raise seat license fees again? Basketball is UD's flagship sport. Any money lying around should go into basketball - video boards for the arena, etc. I know I am not that interested in UD football like Detroit is, but I think with money being as tight as it is, UD should concentrate on basketball. I think most people would agree. I don't think many people really care that much about UD football.

UACFlyer
06-15-2009, 05:25 PM
DF, I am under the impression that UD financial aid is provided on a "need" basis, for all students, including football players. If that is the case, how does UD's "family need" formula make it possible for a kid from an upper income family to qualify for financial aid as you indicate?

I know this, one of my kids went to an Ivy,...a staggering expense,.....and I didn't come within a mile of qualifying for aid. Indeed, I have a close friend who had two kids in Ivy schools at the same time and recieved about $1000 from each school. And believe me, we were both "middle income". That was about twenty years ago; perhaps schools are more generous with aid these days.

In those days the middle income families really got the shaft. The well-to-do didn't need aid; the poor got all they needed; and the middle income people like me got nothing, nothing.

Now the fact is that most Ivy families receive not a dime; the majority pay their own way and also for those that get free rides. While families from all economic levels have kids at Ivy schools, the fact is that most kids are from upper income families (there is a correlation between family income and bright kids). A statistic that amazes me to this very day re the freshmen class profile the year my son started at an Ivy is this: In his class 25%, one in four, of the incoming freshmen had at least one parent that was a physician. Indeed, his freshman roomy was the son of a surgeon.

Prudent, financially conservative families plan for college just as they plan for their retirement. I know I did, as did my friends. Why, then, does such a large fraction of UD students need aid? I never understood this. UD is very inexpensive compared to its peers. A middle income family with two kids, let's say, should have no trouble affording a UD education without aid, with the possible exception of both kids being in college at the same time. Even then the total cost is the same as if the kids were not in college together; it just requires planning a bit differently.

I know the answer. Take a look at government data for family savings rate as a percentage of disposable income. From 1954, when the government first started to report the data, to about 1984, a thirty year span, the savings rate varied between 8% and 12% and averaged very close to 10% over the entire period. In the late 80s the savings rate started to decline steadily reaching "zero" around 2000 and actually falling below zero some years since. (Now that everyone is scared to death the annualized rate has jumped to about 6% overnight.)

But, the damage is done. After many years of an absymal savings rate,....but plenty of 5000 sq ft houses with three car garages; flat screen TVs in each room; new cars every few years;.....now everyone needs financial aid to send junior to college. Big surprise.

chriscage
06-15-2009, 10:42 PM
I can't see putting over $2 million more into the UD football program. To me it would make no sense. What would they do, raise seat license fees again? Basketball is UD's flagship sport. Any money lying around should go into basketball - video boards for the arena, etc. I know I am not that interested in UD football like Detroit is, but I think with money being as tight as it is, UD should concentrate on basketball. I think most people would agree. I don't think many people really care that much about UD football.
Longtimer...Money may not be the answer. Last weekend I partied at a reunion with my UD Delta Tau Nu fraternity brothers. The perception is "UD never plays "anybody"...therefore there's no interest. Without scholarships, we'll never schedule FBS schools like Miami, UC or Louisville. HOWEVER their reaction to playing "X" was universal. As some have posted here, if the PFL could attract historic UD rivals like Xavier and Marquette, fans might just catch the fever.

forego1
06-27-2009, 09:24 AM
On whim I came to this thread. I read most posts here. I'm a recent UD basketball fan and appreciate the rich history, but I am a big fan of football generally.

My gut impression: The word "dynamics" is key. I have no answer here,
only the observation that I sense there is not a fundamental 'working
dynamics' for football at Dayton. Not much happens by chance in the context
here, and at the roots you are talking about a few committed individuals who would bring change like supposedly at Fordham.
However, dynamics and ROI can't be too far separated. Those individuals at Fordham may come up short for everyone else. (no opinion here)
For Dayton, I just don't imagine bridging (what I perceive) the disparity
between "live dynamics" (if they exist) and ROI.
As mentioned, (excepting few major programs) football kills a budget for
all else. (When I hear aspirations of getting UP to 5,000 attendance, all I
could think was how unreal). {5,000=WHAT> pay for 1/3 cost (if that) of running a football program?}
But, I for one encourage individuals with dreams. You are talking herculean
if not unrealistic efforts needed. ADD> to make it pay off!
No one asked me, but I would think athletic recources that don't go enlarge
BACK to basketball at Dayton are to be seriously questioned.

UACFlyer
06-27-2009, 10:31 AM
forego, once in a while someone suggests that basketball is being shortchanged by spending money on football or anything else. Your comment reminds me of that.

Men's basketball at UD brings in millions more than is needed to fund the program at the very highest level, e.g., coaches salaries, recruiting, facilities, travel, etc. You name it and men's BB can pay for it and has it with millions left over to fund other athhetics programs.

As for mentioning attendance of 5000+ as a possibility, that was in the context of game-day atmosphere, not revenue generated. Indeed, some have suggested (me) giving tickets away as a means of increasing football attendance.

Someone suggested that more natural football rivals would help attendance. That is a key factor in my judgment;....the same rivals that we have or would like to have in basketball. I don't think UD would have an attendance problem if gridiron matches were against Xavier, Saint Louis, Marquette, Detroit, Notre Dame (only kidding!) in addition to PFL rivals. Trouble is those schools don't play FCS football. That may change; but I'm not holding my breath.

Avid Flyer
06-28-2009, 01:03 PM
Help is on the way. By that I mean two sports are increasing their attendance with a possible 3rd on the horizon as well.

With the current play and recruiting of vball players I would expect 2000 in attendance at home games.

Womens basketball is on the rise and I can see in a very short period of time filling the lower bowl for home games on a consistent basic. These two sports could start to carry their own weight and greatly help the overall athletic budget.

Mens and womens soccer is also on the rise (mens baisicly, as womens have been there) and with proper scheduling and marketing could well be over a 1k at home games. (By scheduling i mean not having soccer playing at the same time vball is playing and vise versa). This is especially true for these sports as the venu's are adjacent to one another. It is nearly impossible for "Red Scare" for example to be at and support both teams or programs when they are playing at the same time.

As each team begins to carry their own weight or at least increase their attendance the athletic budget will grow and more things such as video boards, etc could be added without too much fanfare. Also more aid could be available for student athletes.

While most UDPride fans are basketball (mens) fans only a few of us who do follow all UD sports see a yearly increase in attendance at these other sporting events.

On the football side some schools have already taken the first step to bring football back. The Dayton model shows that these schools could have a program that would not set their athletic program back financially.

Here in St Louis there is a big push for a club team with interest for a 1A team in near future (ten years). No doubt UD could generate 9k attendance for games against familiar fores.

UACFlyer
06-28-2009, 01:35 PM
Avid, surely you meant SLU nterest in a 1AA team in ten years, not 1A. And a school that has any serious interest in NCAA football at any level doesn't need a "push" to get cluib football started.

I think Campbell is a good example. They had serious interest in non-scholarship FCS football, lined up a conference, raised the money, built facilities,...all in a relatively short time.

A school like Detroit that has club football, I believe, and "talks" about the next item on the horrizon is transitioning to 1AA non-schollie, really has very little serious interest in doing so. Either you want to do it...and do it,....or you don't,...and maybe you talk about it.

It's interesting how different the view of this subject is from school to school. Many of the MAAC schools just pack it in; others like Marist decide to stay the course; still others have club teams; and others won't even discuss the subject they are so set against it. I think the alumni play a role,....the past history,.....health of other sports,....locale, etc.

It would really be nice to see a few schools that are UD peers decide that football enhances campus life and student athlete opportunities to the point that it's worth a few million to get started and a million, or so, each year to keep the ball rolling.

Perhaps the most discouraging example I can think of is Fairfield University, a school with money. About ten years ago FU made all the right moves...did all the right analyses....started a program....did quite well quickly. Then after just a few years (< 5) dropped the sport. I don't recall the reason. But it must have been that the envisioned benefits and fan interest never materialized. FU didn't have to spend a dime for a facility; they have one on campus. So operational costs were the only financial issue. And a conclusion was reached that the ~ $1 million could be better spent elsewhere.

Such a decision is not lost on other similar schools that may have been thinking of football.

Avid Flyer
06-28-2009, 06:37 PM
Avid, surely you meant SLU nterest in a 1AA team in ten years, not 1A. And a school that has any serious interest in NCAA football at any level doesn't need a "push" to get cluib football started.



Guess I should have been more on point.....it is the FANS that are pushing for football.....not the school. So there is your difference. Actually didn't think I had to spell it out that much since this is a fan board and the discussion about football at SLU is on their fan message board. But you are right, if the school wanted it they could build the facilities etc and have a football team.

My bad, meant 1AA. Right now the push is to get a club team which takes money etc and the fans will have to do it themselves. IF and I say IF, they are successful putting together a club team with a fair amount of fan attendance then they might get the school to at least consider it. But for now, it is ONLY the FANS who are pushing for it.

It is my opinion that interest first come from the fans then up through the administration, athletic and academic. Few schools if any just go out and say we are going to build a football program with stadium etc without knowing what the fans are thinking and if the fans will support it. Football is a hard sell, especially in hard times but if Dayton can do it and be as successful as they have been the schools like SLU, X, Marquette can too.

What would be easier for SLU is having (name recognition) peer schools joining Dayton in a similar conference. If the likes of SLU, X, Marquette etc do go forward we are still looking at ten years before it would become a reality. Even with non scholarship football the fans will come if and only IF they play known peer schools. Hard to buld a program if you are playing some of the present day PFL schools.

UACFlyer
06-28-2009, 06:59 PM
I agree that schools like X, MU, SLU on UD's schedule would pump up interest to another level. Having said that, schools like Drake, Butler, Valpo, San Diego and even Davidson are mighty fine private institutions that have much in common with UD.

DetroitFlyer
07-01-2009, 02:45 PM
Dayton has been an extremely successful I-AA, (now FCS), team since 1993. That is 16 years.... During that time, few schools have rushed to join the ranks of non-athletic scholarship FCS football. A few have joined, more have left.... To think that after 16 years there will ever be a rush to follow the Dayton model is optimistic at best. Until the PFL decides to work to become a fully engaged member of FCS, (as in auto-bid to the playoffs), it will struggle to win over fans and support. I do think that it just may happen one day. There have been comments attributed to Rick that one day the PFL will have an auto-bid to the playoffs. The other interesting thing is that we may just have our first true FBS transfer into Dayton since the Division III days this season. I will believe it when I see it, but I think it just might happen this year. We just missed on an FBS receiver, but we may just land the defensive lineman from the ACC!! This could be a trend pointing to a higher level of play, (although I think we are already there, the coaches may not agree), if we are going to actively "recruit" FBS transfers going forward. Mike Kelly did not seem to go after these guys, Rick seems to have a different thought.... Maybe being open to FBS transfers is looking towards a future playoff bid....

UACFlyer
07-01-2009, 03:43 PM
DF, you are ever the optimist....good for you.

To me what would signal a very positive turn of events would be if a UD peer institution that does not play football decided to follow the UD model, e.g., X, MU, SLU,....sort of like Campbell.

The MAAC teams that dropped the sport had very weak programs, nothing like UD. Duquesne knew that and went elsewhere. It's a shame DU choose the NEC instead of the PFL. DU would have made a nice addition and a natuaral rival for us.

Back to the peers i've mentioned. They have all the same info we do and finances similar to UD's;...and X and MU already play club football. So, much is in place for a move to the UD model. So long as those schools fail to take the step there is an important message, i.e., there is just no interest among their alumni, fan base, communities, etc.

Lurking Dog
07-01-2009, 11:55 PM
Is Detroit Mercy considered a peer?

DetroitFlyer
07-02-2009, 08:47 AM
Is Detroit Mercy considered a peer?

UDM would be a great addition to the PFL, but I do not think that many Flyer fans would get too excited about playing UDM in football. It is kind of odd to me that we are not more "natural" rivals.... Both schools are Catholic, both are in rust belt type cities, both have some great strengths, etc. I would think that UDM would be more similar to UD than Xavier.... Maybe that is the problem.... UDM might be too close of a competitor for UD.... I mean come on, UD or Xavier for a student...? EASY choice! Frankly it is a good thing that there is a safety school in Cincy for kids that do not get to attend UD! Heck, at least those kids can watch some club football if they so desire....

I am always amazed at the number of Detroit area kids that choose Dayton over UDM.... Maybe UDM is just too close to home?

Oh well, it would help if we could build up a basketball rivalry with UDM, but given today's scheduling challenges I do not see it happening. As for football, it might become a bit of a rivalry, but nothing too intense. As for me, I am really looking forward to being able to see my Flyers play here in my home town!