|
Post by Bornthrilla on Apr 1, 2009 9:03:27 GMT -5
This is another thread inspired by my friend Dooms.
What do you think we are currently gaining by being D1 in football rather than going back to D2.
Money? Exposure?
Please give me your thoughts.
|
|
DECKS
Official BDF member
2008 Poster of the Year
Charter Member of the BDF
Posts: 10,411
Member is Online
|
Post by DECKS on Apr 1, 2009 9:25:19 GMT -5
From a competitive and financial standpoint we have no business being D-I. We'd possibly be more competitive at the D-II level but what would that mean since D-II championships carry zero exposure? Other than track and an occasional run in basketball by a CIAA school, D-II HBCU's usually get trounced just like we do.
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Apr 1, 2009 9:28:51 GMT -5
Has our attendance benefited from being D-1AA? Do you think we are able to attract more corporate sponsors because we are D-1AA?
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Apr 1, 2009 11:24:30 GMT -5
i rather look at it as d1 vs. d2. that way all sports are included.
for me, from an athletics perspective, prestige has a lot to do with competing at the d1 level as opposed to d2. of course, i can't put a dollar figure on prestige. but for me, i feel much better about donating funds to a&t when i feel good about the "stature" of my alma mater. the way i see it, pride and prestige go hand in hand.
on the other hand, i don't feel that a school of our stature belongs at the d2 level. moving down to d2 is like going from varsity to jv. winning a d2 championship does absolutely nothing for me. only d2 schools care about d2 championships and d2 athletics get far less media coverage than d1. i can't get excited about playing football against schools like livingstone, st. paul's, st. aug or chowan. to me, that's not where we belong. we identify more with the howards, famu's, tennessee state's and southern university's of the world.
sure, we'll never be competitive in football at the fbs level. so d1-aa (fcs) is the next best thing and we can be competitive at that level. exposure at the d1 level gives some credibility to our university. i mean, whenever i see a&t's name on espn victorious over schools like duke (in "any" d1 sport) such as baseball or victorious over depaul or smu in basketball, it gives the perception that we are, to a certain extent, on their level athletically. it gives the impression that we are peers as academic institutions...
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Apr 1, 2009 12:57:01 GMT -5
If the entire MEAC moved down to D2, would our conference attendance be affected?
Except for not having our scores appear on the ESPN scroller, how would our overall media coverage/exposure be affected?
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Apr 1, 2009 13:59:39 GMT -5
to me, the espn ticker provides "major" exposure. espn is the worldwide leader in sports and that ticker runs all day and all night, "nationwide". to me, that's a major benefit of competing at the d1 level. that's free national publicity on the most watched sports network in the country. we also get coverage from the major networks' web sites like espn, cbs sports, etc.
if the entire conference dropped to d2, i don't think our attendance figures would change very much because the same schools and their fans will come to greensboro. but if we dropped on our own, we'd have the likes of st. paul's, st. aug, shaw, livingstone, and jcsu visiting aggie stadium. for me, that's not worth a 5 hour drive...
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Apr 2, 2009 10:29:35 GMT -5
Tuskegee seems like a D2 HBCU program that has established some long-term success in football. They might be a good model to study.
|
|
|
Post by aggiejazz on Apr 2, 2009 11:31:08 GMT -5
i rather look at it as d1 vs. d2. that way all sports are included. on the other hand, i don't feel that a school of our stature belongs at the d2 level. Could you expand on what stature A&T has that says they are D-I? A&T hasn't been relevant in Div I since the late 1980's and that was only in men's basketball. Any national exposure that A&T had received was always tied to the major D-I opponent it plays. MEAC is so irrelevant that Vegas doesn't even take betting on games within the conference. having a team make it to a NCAA one time doesn't mean A&T has the stature of D-I program either, takes more than one trip to the nationals.
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Apr 2, 2009 11:46:52 GMT -5
yeah, but the only folks who know anything about tuskeegee's success are primarily folks associated with the siac and hbcu football geeks. but they have not made a dent nationally at the d2 level. so what does that mean about tuskeegee football?
it means they dominate siac football (and could dominate ciaa football too) but they're not the best hbcu team and they're not the best d2 team. the only folks who know about them are siac folks and hbcu football geeks. there scores do not appear on espn or any other national sports network, so there minimal national recognition for there program.
however, grambling and hampton football are much better known on a national basis. yet, their records in recent years can't touch tuskeegee's and neither grambling nor hampton has won a playoff game. even scsu football is more nationally known than tuskeegee, especially after the tv exposure they got last year in the playoffs against app. state.
and don't forget that all 3 (grambling, hampton, scsu) probably have more pro prospects than tuskeegee which is another avenue for national exposure. everytime mo hicks was on the nfl highlights returning kickoffs for touchdowns, a&t got big time exposure when they announce where he went to school. so the number of pro's produced at an hbcu also contributes to national exposure. that's how grambling became so widely known...
|
|
B&GMM 80
Official BDF member
An Official Blue Death Family Member
Posts: 1,097
|
Post by B&GMM 80 on Apr 2, 2009 18:54:11 GMT -5
are you referring to the Women's Program?
Even though the Men haven't been in a while, I think we lead HBCU'S as participants in the NCAA'S
I prefer Division IA(FCS)!!! from "1980" to the Present, we've come along way, why would u want to turn back NOW!
Virginia Union was once considered a powerhouse in NCAA II in Basketball and Football, I been to that Campus, and I haven't seen any of the Benefits they've reaped from NCAA II
I prefer to stay in NCAA 1A (FCS)
|
|
holdum
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by holdum on Apr 3, 2009 7:25:07 GMT -5
I think the argument that we get national exposure based on the espn ticker is a bit biased. Let's be honest, aside from the aggie nation no one is watching the sport ticker for A&T scores. The ones that do watch, stop looking once the top 25 roll by unless they are interested in their own team from the ACC/Big 10/Big 12, etc that are not ranked. And those of us who sit there and watch for that A&T score know that it takes awhile to get to MEAC scores as the ticker rolls by. So IMO we are not getting as much "national exposure" as some are suggesting based on that ticker.
|
|
DECKS
Official BDF member
2008 Poster of the Year
Charter Member of the BDF
Posts: 10,411
Member is Online
|
Post by DECKS on Apr 3, 2009 7:40:25 GMT -5
I think we're in a "damn if we do" ; "damn if we don't" situation. We're waaaaay overmatched at the D-I level and we'd be overmatched at the D-II level unless we were able to maintain the same budget we have now. Of course, I don't think would happen. Realistically our best opportunity for championships in the major sports is to play for HBCU championships.
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Apr 3, 2009 7:49:27 GMT -5
I think the argument that we get national exposure based on the espn ticker is a bit biased. Let's be honest, aside from the aggie nation no one is watching the sport ticker for A&T scores. The ones that do watch, stop looking once the top 25 roll by unless they are interested in their own team from the ACC/Big 10/Big 12, etc that are not ranked. And those of us who sit there and watch for that A&T score know that it takes awhile to get to MEAC scores as the ticker rolls by. So IMO we are not getting as much "national exposure" as some are suggesting based on that ticker. obviously, you're not a sports fan based on your comment because clearly you don't get it. but you're right about one thing, no one turns on espn just to watch the sports ticker. and that's the comment that tells me you're not a sports fan. folks turn on espn to watch sports just like folks turn on cnn to watch the news. but both networks run tickers all day and night. in fact, almost all sports and news networks run tickers. have you ever wondered why? the reason is because folks read those tickers at the same time they watch sports and news programming. so you're right, no one turns on espn solely to watch the ticker. they turn on espn to watch a game or some other program. while they're watching the game or program, they read the ticker. and bare in mind that most games last on average about 3 hours. and sports geeks like myself can watch 2 or 3 games consecutively. i don't know how many times a&t's scores are displayed in a 3 hour period but i tend to think at least 20 or more times. and keep in mind it runs all day and night! and guess who else watches sports on espn? how 'bout ford motor executives and belk executives. the same folks who sponsored lights and track facilities at aggie stadium. yes, corporate america watches espn and most other major sports networks as well. where do you think the sports networks get their advertising dollars from? so yes, the ticker means a lot. and unless you're a d1 school, your school's name will not be displayed. there are a lot of schools that i would have never heard of had it not been for the ticker. i mean schools that are not widely known like monmouth, drexel, hostra, etc. but i've heard of these schools because they have d1 programs and i see their names all the time on the ticker. there's some kid in california that's never heard of a&t, but if he's a sports geek, he's probably heard of a&t because he see's our name on the ticker all the time. advertising is about repetition. the more you see it, the more you remember it. that's the value of the ticker. it reaches the entire country and it puts us on the "national" map. its a very valuable exposure tool...
|
|
holdum
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by holdum on Apr 3, 2009 8:21:39 GMT -5
Dude, I purchased the direct tv march madness package and left it on the main screen so I could watch all the games as they were being played. I watched the entire last round of the Bayhill tournament, by the way did anyone have any doubt that Tiger wasn't going to make that putt, I watched the McDonald's all american game the other night and the high school dunk contest before hand, hell I even watched the WBC whole final game between Japan and S. Korea so let's not get into a pissing contest over who is a sports fan and who isn't. I agree with you that we need to stay at this level and going DII would be like moving backwards and me as an aggie would feel insulted. But you are really kidding yourself if you think others outside the aggie nation/MEAC really pay attention to our scores on the ticker once the top 25 scores roll by. Yes it rolls 24/7 and if I'm watching a football game on Sat night or ESPN news Sunday morning our score will eventually roll by and I'll see it but those outside the HBCU circle aren't looking, seriously, they are not looking. You are right that exes might see it and if they want to give more money becuase of that then huge plus for aggie athletics, but there is no way to measure that unless we go survey all those who gave money to the T.
I agree with you that there is a certain amount of pride that comes from seeing NCAT roll across, but national exposure to A&T......., we will have to agree to disagree on that one. National exposure will come from us making it into more national tournaments and getting pup time on pregame/postgame shows, like the WBB team got before/halftime/after the FSU game. Aside from beat down, we need to get more of our teams to that level.
|
|
|
Post by aggiejazz on Apr 3, 2009 9:10:54 GMT -5
The best thing about A&T being in Div I, came about in the 1980's when A&T had a dominate basketball program and Coach Corbett's team visits to the NCAA Tournament pulled A&T's godforsaken athletic department out of debt because its alumni were only giving pennies to the University. A&T's dumb leadership never thought about pouring money into the men's BB program to ensure that the golden goose will keep laying golden eggs as the cost of doing business rose.
Coach Corbett's budget never changed and the world of college basketball passed A&T, never to be seen again. A&T later caught hot in two straight tournaments but A&T lost a very good coach in Capel due to low salary and zero support -I may add and due to some stupid old Aggies who were mad over a damn Duke cap-wearing gesture that any loving father would have done in support of their son.
Div I is strictly a personal pride for some Aggies and only some as you can tell by the amount of donation the athletic department receives. As far as business support, I guess some of y'all couldn't see the scoreboard blank placards the last 4 years or walked into Corbett's Gym saw the few corporate signs. Corporate support has been minimum and will be worse this year.
Put A&T in Div II come fall of this year and wait three years. I guarantee, you will not be able to tell the difference in support, in fan attendance and financial giving, between 2009 and 3 years later in 2012.
|
|