3. Bringing Va. Tech, Northwestern, et. al., to Peden is a certain money-loser, something we simply cannot afford. We would be forced to discount prices to fill the stadium yet still face a sizable minimum outlay to the visiting team. I'd much rather minimize these financial disasters so we can position ourselves to (finally) build and maintain an IPF.
While I agree that these games are presently money-losers, the fact of the matter is that Ohio's entire athletics endeavor is currently a net money-loser. Therefore, the issue is simply deciding how to prioritize the financial losses. Given that student fees constitute a significant portion of the Athletic Department's budget, an argument can be made that scheduling compelling, entertaining matchups for the students provides a much more reasonable basis for losing money on athletics than does building an IPF which will do little to improve our standing in the Division I food chain.
In my mind, the biggest problem we face is reconciling the disconnect between the fact that an overwhelming majority of Ohio alumni share a great affinity for the university in general, but yet are largely disinterested in Ohio athletics. With respect to the football program, some of that disconnect is undoubtedly due to the fact that we were the worst program in the country for nearly a quarter of a century. But I think the problem goes beyond that, as the basketball program has been relatively and consistently successful during that same period, without drawing the type of support one would expect for an alumni population with an affinity as strong as ours for the university.
Ultimately, the most important thing that the athletic department can do to ensure its long-term viability is to instill current students with a sense that Ohio athletics are worth following after they leave Athens. As clich
éd as it may be, the current student body are the future of the university. While reengaging with existing alumni is also important, connecting with alumni that rarely return to Athens, and are infrequently able to watch our teams play on television, is a difficult task. Today's students provide a much more easily reached audience (although I realize that they are not completely captive given the many competing forms of entertainment today).
So how do we do a better job of ensuring that today's students will continue to remain loyal (i.e. contributing) fans of Ohio athletics? While winning will certainly help instill a lasting sense of enthusiasm for Ohio athletics, I think that the Love is closer to the mark than many are willing to admit in Point One of his treatise when he argues that people simply don't care much about winning the Mid American Conference. Winning your conference is only a significant accomplishment when you play in what is viewed to be a competitive league, and unfortunately the MAC is a second-rate conference. Therefore, if you really want to grab the attention of current students (and alumni for that matter), you need to play - and defeat - quality OOC competition. And to really reach the current student body in significant numbers, some of those games need to be at home.
The current football scheduling strategy thus strikes me as being penny-wise and pound-foolish. While we avoid losing money on home games with lower-level BCS opponents, we also lose any opportunity to instill excitement for Ohio athletics with students (and alumni). I recognize that the budget situation is difficult at present, but the lost opportunity costs that we are incurring every year we fail to engage the students with Ohio athletics are also quite significant. Perhaps we simply can't afford to provide a more attractive schedule than the status quo, but in that case I wonder when will anything ever change, and thus what exactly is the point of this whole Division I football exercise?
Last Edited: 7/28/2010 5:45:21 PM by Flomo-genized