Sun Belt is about to implode

[615dawg]

Marshall is reportedly leaving the Sun Belt to join James Madison in the American.

Reportedly, most of the Sun Belt East (App State, Coastal Carolina, Georgia Southern, et. al.) is putting out feelers.

Also, Delta State has a public forum this week on the future of their football team now that the Gulf South only has two football playing members.

 

[patdog]

Man the future looks pretty bleak for the smaller Mississippi football programs.

 

[MStateDawg]

Marshall is reportedly leaving the Sun Belt to join James Madison in the American.

I'm sure Marshall would love to join the American, but I highly doubt the American has much interest in Marshall.

 

[615dawg]

Man the future looks pretty bleak for the smaller Mississippi football programs.

Yep. Poor leadership is going to sink the athletic programs at Delta State and Southern Miss. Jackson State is in good shape, but Alcorn and especially Valley are financial nightmares. Millsaps is jumping conferences at the perfect time, and Belhaven is in a good position (Maryville, TN just left Millsaps conference to rejoin Belhaven's conference that they helped found)

I'm sure Marshall would love to join the American, but I highly doubt the American has much interest in Marshall.

Sounds like the deal is about to be announced. Miami-Ohio is also rumored to be going to the American, which you would think would require them to take someone else (App State? Old Dominion? Connecticut?)

 

[mstateglfr]

Its interesting to see some of these lower D1 conference changes because from afar, they seem largely lateral.

Miami-OH offering $40MM so they can leave the MAC and join the American? Is the American really THAT much better?
Neither seem particularly strong or impressive. The American has JMU, Tulane, Army, and Memphis...but it is tough to see why it is so enticing, especially considering the offered payment that was rejected.
Is Miami-OH going to suddenly surge and create massive revenue from just joining the American and paying $30-40MM?

And with the reformed Pac12 around, the American certainly isnt even the clear best of the rest.

 

[John Deaux VII]

Its interesting to see some of these lower D1 conference changes because from afar, they seem largely lateral.

Miami-OH offering $40MM so they can leave the MAC and join the American? Is the American really THAT much better?
Neither seem particularly strong or impressive. The American has JMU, Tulane, Army, and Memphis...but it is tough to see why it is so enticing, especially considering the offered payment that was rejected.
Is Miami-OH going to suddenly surge and create massive revenue from just joining the American and paying $30-40MM?

And with the reformed Pac12 around, the American certainly isnt even the clear best of the rest.

I was thinking the same thing - like Gordon Gekko would say "a dog with different fleas". However - if Chat is right, the average payout is $9.2 million per school in the American Conference, vs $1.74 million per school in the Fun Belt.

I'm sure they paid someone smarter than me good money to advise them on this, but I think dropping The Big East name for the American Conference was stupid.

 

[johnson86-1]

Yep. Poor leadership is going to sink the athletic programs at Delta State and Southern Miss. Jackson State is in good shape, but Alcorn and especially Valley are financial nightmares.

What did leadership at DSU and USM do? I'm sure they could have done things better, but seems like they are largely just being done in by demographics and location.

Millsaps is jumping conferences at the perfect time, and Belhaven is in a good position (Maryville, TN just left Millsaps conference to rejoin Belhaven's conference that they helped found)

Sounds like the deal is about to be announced. Miami-Ohio is also rumored to be going to the American, which you would think would require them to take someone else (App State? Old Dominion? Connecticut?)

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

No idea why smaller programs (Milsaps, Belhaven), I can’t imagine many prospective students attending either due to football.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

Yep. Poor leadership is going to sink the athletic programs at Delta State and Southern Miss. Jackson State is in good shape, but Alcorn and especially Valley are financial nightmares. Millsaps is jumping conferences at the perfect time, and Belhaven is in a good position (Maryville, TN just left Millsaps conference to rejoin Belhaven's conference that they helped found)

You correctly called the SAA falling apart.

With Millsaps and Southwestern gone in ‘27 & Maryville in ‘28, that’ll leave six in the conference with five playing football.

You count on Trinity leaving too since they’re well out of the SAA footprint…

 

[Allday.sixpack]

Hattiesburg is better equipped to be an SEC town than either Starkville or Oxford. Consideringtheir hotels and interstate.

 

[bolddogge]

Hattiesburg is better equipped to be an SEC town than either Starkville or Oxford. Consideringtheir hotels and interstate

They have a Target?

 

[goindhoo]

Hattiesburg is better equipped to be an SEC town than either Starkville or Oxford. Consideringtheir hotels and interstate.

Is it? This town is at max capacity during a soccer tournament at Tatum.

ETA: we do have an interstate

 

[Dawg Raid]

Hattiesburg has like 3 hotels

 

[InTheIttaBenaHotSun]

They have a Target?

The top Target in Southeastern MS

 

[dudehead]

They have a Target?

Or a Buc-ee's?

 

[Barkman Turner Overdrive]

Hattiesburg is better equipped to be an SEC town than either Starkville or Oxford. Consideringtheir hotels and interstate.

Those highways and interstates help get those Mississippi Southern students back home every weekend to mawma n diddy‘s house in places like Laurel, Lumberton, Brookhaven, Gautier, and Bogue Chitto. Mississippi Southern is lucky to be where they currently are, whatever conference that is.

 

[Called3rdstrikedawg]

I can assure

Hattiesburg has like 3 hotels

I can assure you that I have seen many a high income State fan staying at the Days Inn or the Clarion Pointe hotel out on 182 because there are not enough quality hotels in Starkville and they are paying nearly $300 a night at the Days Inn, bless their hearts. There are more hotels in one little pocket in Hattiesburg on 98 west than Starkville and West Point and Mathiston combined.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

I can assure

I can assure you that I have seen many a high income State fan staying at the Days Inn or the Clarion Pointe hotel out on 182 because there are not enough quality hotels in Starkville and they are paying nearly $300 a night at the Days Inn, bless their hearts. There are more hotels in one little pocket in Hattiesburg on 98 west than Starkville and West Point and Mathiston combined.

Starkville hotel prices…

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Hattiesburg has like 3 hotels

You ain’t been there lately

 

[ETK99]

Hattiesburg has like 3 hotels

But those motels.....

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

From the Bottom UP, we are going to see more, and more of this.
Thank you NIL....

 

[The Cooterpoot]

Sounds like the deal is about to be announced.

 

[She Mate Me]

Miami-Ohio is also rumored to be going to the American

That move would break up a long unchanged run for the 9 MAC core members which is basically Miami, Ohio U, Bowling Green, Toledo, Kent St, Ball St and Central, Eastern & Western Michigan. All have been together since the early 70’s and Miami has been in the MAC nearly 80 years.

Northern Illinois has had a couple of long runs in that span and Akron and Buffalo have been in since the 90’s.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

So why don't they just go D3?

Plenty of ways to cut costs.

 

[615dawg]

So why don't they just go D3?

Plenty of ways to cut costs.

The Division I-AAA model that was turned down in the middle of the night by D2 sure looks good today. Basically a Division I subdivision that has no scholarships for football but keeps access to March Madness and other D1 Championships.

It was set to pass and then a group of D2 schools led by North Alabama convinced all of D2 to vote against it en masse. Years later, most of those D2 schools went FCS. One of the most fascinating "what-ifs" in college sports history.

D3 - especially in the South - just is not receptive to public institutions. That's why MUW is having trouble finding a suitable conference home in D3. When you don't give scholarships for athletics, cheaper public school tuition becomes an advantage. There is a conference full of small regional public schools in D3 and they have a lot of success.

 

[40 acres and a mule]

Why do college athletics below Division 1 even exist?

 

[mstateglfr]

Why do college athletics below Division 1 even exist?

For competition, entertainment, experience, etc.

You question could also be asked of many D1 conferences.
Why do college athletics below the top 16 conferences exist? Why do all the teams in conferences 17-32 even exist?

 

[Ranchdawg]

Why do college athletics below Division 1 even exist?

Really??? Did the OM QB play at a lower level school. Ask EMCC to give up their NCs and see what they say.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

Why do college athletics below Division 1 even exist?

Might as well ask why does the MAIS have athletics? **

 

[johnson86-1]

For competition, entertainment, experience, etc.

You question could also be asked of many D1 conferences.
Why do college athletics below the top 16 conferences exist? Why do all the teams in conferences 17-32 even exist?

I think the question is why do they spend lots of money subsidizing it? I think it's a very reasonable argument that there shouldn't be college scholarships for athletic departments that are not profitable unless they are endowed by private donors. If the school is spending money on a sport, getting the play the sport is a benefit that other students don't get and a much more expensive one than most student clubs or activities.

 

[johnson86-1]

Hattiesburg is better equipped to be an SEC town than either Starkville or Oxford. Consideringtheir hotels and interstate.

Hattiesburg is possibly the worst laid out town ever though. It certainly has some advantages being larger than Oxford and Starkville, so there would be some ways in which it would be better equipped to handle an influx of 40-60k people. But the 17ed up way it has developed would negate pretty much all of those advantages on traffic alone.

But ignoring that, yes, it would have had a lot of advantages if MSU had been there from the get go. Probably should have had UM at Winona and MSU in Hattiesburg. That would provide reasonable access to the entire state (not sure about how good or not Hattiesburg would be for a land grant institution or where it would have needed to be compared ot the current USM campus) and would have left both schools and the State better off. And maybe not being in a town named oxford would have somewhat limited the number of insufferable pricks that UM produced.

 

[mstateglfr]

I think the question is why do they spend lots of money subsidizing it? I think it's a very reasonable argument that there shouldn't be college scholarships for athletic departments that are not profitable unless they are endowed by private donors. If the school is spending money on a sport, getting the play the sport is a benefit that other students don't get and a much more expensive one than most student clubs or activities.

This once again goes back to just a disagreement as to what is 'valuable' and 'justifiable' when it comes to spending.
There are hard benefits(athletics is financially profitable) and soft benefits(athletics create and sustain school identity, are entertainment for students and alum) when it comes to college sports.
You clearly view only the hard benefit as worthy of spending. Cool...but others view soft benefits as potentially worthy of spending.

A D2 university hosting 5 football games, 15 volleyball matches, 15 mens basketball games, 15 womens basketball games, 10 womens soccer games, 20 mens baseball games, 20 womens softball games is a way to create involvement and activity on campus through the year.
That can be valuable, even if it is a financial net loss.

I fully reject the concept that a university should only offer events/sports/activities/areas which are profitable. It must be viewed as OK for institutions to have areas or departments that show as a loss on the books. Not everything needs to be a profit center or even a revenue generator for it to exist.
- Hosting student activity event nights can be good, even if they arent profitable.
- Hosting athletic competitions can be good, even if they arent profitable.
- Running intramural sports can be good, even if they arent profitable.
- Having a library can be good, even if it isnt profitable.

Now this doesnt mean I think every program should be a $20MM burden to every university. You obviously need to balance the sports you offer with laws and financial realities.

 

[mstateglfr]

I think the question is why do they spend lots of money subsidizing it? I think it's a very reasonable argument that there shouldn't be college scholarships for athletic departments that are not profitable unless they are endowed by private donors. If the school is spending money on a sport, getting the play the sport is a benefit that other students don't get and a much more expensive one than most student clubs or activities.

Its interesting that many smaller universities have leaned into athletic offerings this decade, as a way to attract students in a time of steep competition for enrollment numbers.
Offering financial packages that mix athletic and academic incentives seems to be a popular way to stabilize enrollment because it is working at a lot of universities I have read about- it gets kids to the universities in the end, and that is the biggest hurdle.

To be clear, if 600 colleges and universities around the country went D3(so non-scholarship) next year, I wouldnt hate that. Of course revenue shrinks when you drop down, so schools that are doing well and arent burdened by being too much in the red would likely experience a reduction in funds flowing in. So that could mean they experience the opposite of what they hoped for.

 

[FlotownDawg]

Why do college athletics below Division 1 even exist?

Why do city park and rec departments even exist? Golf courses? City parks? None of them are generally profitable. It’s a quality of life thing. If you only do things that make money then you cut out a lot of quality of life stuff.

 

[johnson86-1]

This once again goes back to just a disagreement as to what is 'valuable' and 'justifiable' when it comes to spending.
There are hard benefits(athletics is financially profitable) and soft benefits(athletics create and sustain school identity, are entertainment for students and alum) when it comes to college sports.
You clearly view only the hard benefit as worthy of spending. Cool...but others view soft benefits as potentially worthy of spending.

A D2 university hosting 5 football games, 15 volleyball matches, 15 mens basketball games, 15 womens basketball games, 10 womens soccer games, 20 mens baseball games, 20 womens softball games is a way to create involvement and activity on campus through the year.
That can be valuable, even if it is a financial net loss.

I was specifically talking about scholarships although the original post you were responding would seem to go further. I agree that is it reasonable for the university to spend on sports, just like it's reasonable to spend on rec centers, theatre clubs, concerts, etc. I was just pointing out that if you are getting to play a sport where the university is paying for equipment and coaching and travel, etc., you are already the beneficiary of a disproportionate amount of spending. Of course, like you say, there area lot of real but not easy to quantify benefits of sports that could justify providing scholarships also because winning increases those hard to quantify benefits (and the quantifiable ones, if maybe not enough to cover the costs directly). But I think it'd be better if non-profitable sports had rules restricting scholarships, because without that, it's pretty clear that we will have athletic departments thorwing money at obvious things that obviously dont' pass the cost/benefit analysis.

I fully reject the concept that a university should only offer events/sports/activities/areas which are profitable. It must be viewed as OK for institutions to have areas or departments that show as a loss on the books. Not everything needs to be a profit center or even a revenue generator for it to exist.
- Hosting student activity event nights can be good, even if they arent profitable.
- Hosting athletic competitions can be good, even if they arent profitable.
- Running intramural sports can be good, even if they arent profitable.
- Having a library can be good, even if it isnt profitable.

Now this doesnt mean I think every program should be a $20MM burden to every university. You obviously need to balance the sports you offer with laws and financial realities.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Hattiesburg is possibly the worst laid out town ever though. It certainly has some advantages being larger than Oxford and Starkville, so there would be some ways in which it would be better equipped to handle an influx of 40-60k people. But the 17ed up way it has developed would negate pretty much all of those advantages on traffic alone.

But ignoring that, yes, it would have had a lot of advantages if MSU had been there from the get go. Probably should have had UM at Winona and MSU in Hattiesburg. That would provide reasonable access to the entire state (not sure about how good or not Hattiesburg would be for a land grant institution or where it would have needed to be compared ot the current USM campus) and would have left both schools and the State better off. And maybe not being in a town named oxford would have somewhat limited the number of insufferable pricks that UM produced.

Most ideal is the capital and one university in Vicksburg or that general area. But MS doesn't roll that way so there was always going to be division, so considering Oxford/Jackson would have been chosen, to me it was an MSU mistake and we should have been located in either Vicksburg, Jackson Metro or Meridian. I doubt USM would have ever even existed had we done that, as well as a few others.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

I was specifically talking about scholarships although the original post you were responding would seem to go further. I agree that is it reasonable for the university to spend on sports, just like it's reasonable to spend on rec centers, theatre clubs, concerts, etc. I was just pointing out that if you are getting to play a sport where the university is paying for equipment and coaching and travel, etc., you are already the beneficiary of a disproportionate amount of spending. Of course, like you say, there area lot of real but not easy to quantify benefits of sports that could justify providing scholarships also because winning increases those hard to quantify benefits (and the quantifiable ones, if maybe not enough to cover the costs directly). But I think it'd be better if non-profitable sports had rules restricting scholarships, because without that, it's pretty clear that we will have athletic departments thorwing money at obvious things that obviously dont' pass the cost/benefit analysis.

Education should be viewed as investment rather then a for-profit business. Unless the losses are just egregious.

That's why this whole consolidation stuff everybody throws around is garbage, unless it truly equates to increased educational opportunities for all involved. The only decent argument for consolidation I've seen, is that it puts more support in the hands of MSU (for example, since we're all fans). Not because it saves some theoretical amount of taxpayer money that will just be spent elsewhere.