Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: The future of the program

  1. #11
    The pressure on Rick Costello (Milwaukee's AD) to bring football to campus is heavier than any type of pressure on any athletic director we've had in any situation. Rick is our fourth AD in the past three years (Bud retired June '09, George April '09-April '10, Dave Gilbert April '10-February '11, Costello February '11-present).

    The rules for starting a football program and going to I-A are as such: you start in I-AA as an independent for two years. After those two years, if you have an invitation from a I-A conference, you can move up. You cannot move to I-A without an invitation from a conference. UMass could not have moved up to I-A without an invite from the MAC. UConn, as you may be aware, played as an independent from 2000-2003, but had an invitation from the Big East to move up so they were able to do so.

    So, any road to the Football Big East or Big 12 would have to go through the MAC. What I know is that the mix of market, enrollment, endowment, and academic standing put Milwaukee at the head of the pack should they join the MAC. One or two schools have bigger enrollments, a couple have bigger endowments and thus higher academic standing, but no team in the MAC can match the Milwaukee market and no team is near the top of the MAC in each of those categories. So you see that Milwaukee has a lot to offer the MAC, as well as down the road to a BCS program.

    The Big 12 does not have a presence in the Milwaukee media market, which is the 35th largest media market in the country and would be the fourth-largest media market in the Big 12 after #5 Dallas/Ft. Worth (TCU, many B12 fan bases), #23 Pittsburgh (WVU's market), and #31 Kansas City (KU/KSU). It's an enviable market to have - which, as you know, media market is the driving force behind adding any program. MU got into the Big East partly because of the media market.

  2. #12
    I do know Milwaukee may be in better shape from a schollie standpoint to address football than MU is at this point, that is not my question.

    It does appear that this is something on the thought process of those in charge at UWM. Do you know if there is any discussion on where they would even play?

    For MU, that is the big issue as revenue from the expected next Big East football contact would likely double tuition costs of athletes, but the expense of a stadium could be significant and that could be a hold up.

    Not sure that Milwaukee would be an option for a conference such as the Big 12 for a long time. At this point, even if they had football, would Milwaukee actually generate an additional $20 million in revenue for the Big 12? I doubt they would bring even half that amount.

  3. #13
    Football teams in the Big East get a bigger portion of the TV money, but if they split off on their own to create a "Football Big East," their next TV deal wouldn't be significantly less than the current one. It would be less - but enough to keep them floating. The remnants, which would be the basketball schools, would easily be the largest TV contract ever signed by a non-football conference - however, it won't come near the deal they'd get if they had football schools to latch onto that provide three more months of programming. That would be offset by the fact that everyone gets a bigger piece of the pie, and it's still better than any other option. Take the basketball-only schools, snap up some good Jesuit schools in Xavier, Dayton, Creighton and Saint Louis, then strike out on your own.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goose85 View Post
    I do know Milwaukee may be in better shape from a schollie standpoint to address football than MU is at this point, that is not my question.

    It does appear that this is something on the thought process of those in charge at UWM. Do you know if there is any discussion on where they would even play?

    For MU, that is the big issue as revenue from the expected next Big East football contact would likely double tuition costs of athletes, but the expense of a stadium could be significant and that could be a hold up.

    Not sure that Milwaukee would be an option for a conference such as the Big 12 for a long time. At this point, even if they had football, would Milwaukee actually generate an additional $20 million in revenue for the Big 12? I doubt they would bring even half that amount.
    The discussion is obviously there as far as location. The preference, as it would be for any school, would be to play in the campus neighborhood. However, about 30% of all I-A FBS schools play two or more miles off of campus. On-or-near campus, there are few options, the best of which is that same Wisconsin Paperboard Corporation space that the neighborhood association wants to turn into an arboretum. That space, as I've illustrated elsewhere, could be re-appropriated to house a basketball/volleyball/hockey arena, a practice barn like YSU's WATTS, and a football stadium. Surprisingly, that's with considerable space to spare. If they committed to buying up more land in the area, they could even add other facilities or additional parking. Let's say that doesn't work. In the 11 miles from Hawaii's campus to Aloha Stadium, the university could find...what, 15-20 spaces where they could build a stadium? On-campus is preferable, but football at all is the goal.

    You say that MKE likely would not be an option for the Big 12 for a long time. You're right. My expectation is that 2030 is the earliest a Milwaukee football program could find itself in a BCS conference. That is if the BCS exists then. That time is 18 years from now; 18 years ago, Milwaukee joined the Midwestern Collegiate Conference, actually averaged about 100 fans, and was the lowest of low-majors. Now look where we are. The idea that another 18 years will mean only marginal advancement is...unlikely.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •