Ouch pretty much says it all... it is not where Valpo football want to be.
You didn't mention the actual rating. Where are Valpo and other PFL teams rated so far?
202 San Diego
224 Dayton
237 Drake
243 Davidson
244 Marist
247 Butler
248 Stetson
252 Jacksonville
255 Morehead State
256 Valparaiso
256 would be DFL.
Interesting that San Diego lost and move up a few slots. Davidson won and moved down a few slots.
Central Connecticut is at 207 or around San Diego. They are about a 9 point favorite over Merrimack this week.
If the ratings are relatively accurate, at least the PFL should be very competitive.
yes, competitive in seeing who is the best in the worst conference in Div. 1 football. At least with Valpo you can say that it cannot get any worse.
Lol what do people expect , were a non scholarship football school with a new coach.
This is a year 0 if I've ever seen one. I forget where I heard this but great way to evaluate a coach program
Year 0: anything positive is a plus
Year 1: recruits are in see how young kids play
Year 2: show improvement from year 1
Year 3: young kids should be grown up can asess program
Year 4: be honest where program is at and going
I was mad about Chick taking Bucknell job because timing but he really failed to retain kids in '16,'17 which was why program was trending downwards
fb16 - didn't you think Valpo could win 6 games this year?
Yeah I'm not gonna say my alma mater is going to come out winless. They can and have the ability to win 6.
Valpo is 256 out of 256. :( :-[
BTW, Bucknell is 0-1 and 242 out of 256. That is only one slot ahead of Davidson. The Bison opened at the Linc in Philly against FBS Temple and lost 56-12 in front of 26k. They scored on a pick 6 and two FGs. Total Offense: Bucknell 211, Temple 695. Bucknell player of the game must have been their punter who averaged 51 yards per punt on 8 punts (6 of which were over 50). Without him the field position battle would been a massacre.
But water under the bridge. We have to concentrate on Valpo not old history.
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 03, 2019, 12:53:35 PMyes, competitive in seeing who is the best in the worst conference in Div. 1 football. At least with Valpo you can say that it cannot get any worse.
It just wouldn't be the college football season without usc4valpo's breaking news that the non-scholarship Pioneer Football League is the lowest rated conference in Div I FCS football. ;D
Quote from: VULB#62 on September 03, 2019, 07:51:29 PMValpo is 256 out of 256. :( :-[ BTW, Bucknell is 0-1 and 242 out of 256. That is only one slot ahead of Davidson. The Bison opened at the Linc in Philly against FBS Temple and lost 56-12 in front of 26k. They scored on a pick 6 and two FGs. Total Offense: Bucknell 211, Temple 695. Bucknell player of the game must have been their punter who averaged 51 yards per punt on 8 punts (6 of which were over 50). Without him the field position battle would been a massacre. But water under the bridge. We have to concentrate on Valpo not old history.
Temple's at 82. The only FCS schools ahead of them are North Dakota State, South Dakota State and Northern Iowa. So that score isn't surprising.
Bucknell did have the FCS play of the week:
https://twitter.com/NCAA_FCS/status/1168943698484387840?s=20
:deadhorse: (I know :-X) i also checked the play by play stats. If you follow them, you will notice a strange similarity to past Valpo play by play stats in games where we gave up a lot of points - e.g., Failure to run the ball (total net for the game = 21 yards), <.500 passing, delay of game after the pick-6 TD followed by a missed PAT.
JD24 - 2 items to address:
1. USD went up 2 notches likely because they were somewhat competitive in an 18 point loss to Cal Poly, who has had some playoff success in 1-AA football. Cal Poly, maybe 5 or 10 years ago, almost upset Wisconsin.
2. I think addressing the Sagarin is important as it is an indicator where this football program stands. Yes, it may appear negative, but over the years there have been posters on the board with grossly inflated positives about the program. Valpo is currently the worst rated team in Division 1 football and it is embarrassing - I work with and collaborate with alums who think the program should not exist, which sucks. As an alum, I would like to see the school strive for excellence rather than just maintaining a product that has low commitment. I am hoping there are tangible efforts in making this happen.
I have heard from people internal to the Athletic Department, that MLB's two major priorities are, in order, MBB and FB. While FB receives no athletic scholarships, it gets priority funding in most other respects, especially coaching (10 on staff), as well as dibs on facility use. Add in a travel budget for 45 athletes + staff that flies coast to coast. WBB and VB, I am told, are the next tier as they both receive the full allotment of permitted scholarships. The remaining sports are, as I understand it, not at full NCAA limits and scramble for whatever they can get. I'm sure this is an oversimplification, but if you look at this from, say, 10,000 feet, it's pretty much generally accurate.
That sounds about right to me as well.
Football is a key piece in male recruitment and retention(I mean what it brings in 20-30 new male students a year?) and brings in tuition dollars so it's probably the sport that does the most to serve the overall needs of the university, Basketball is the marquee sport and your best bet for turning into a money maker.
If I were to guess, the only really significant additional investment in the FB program that remains is to complement the new track and turf surface with a D-I level home grandstand and expanded press box. Many FB recruits from good sized high schools play in bigger and better HS stadiums.
We recruit many of the same kids as Butler and Drake, and, all other things being equal, until our facility is comparable to Butler Bowl and Drake Stadium, we will lose a few kids who could be difference makers to these schools
But an upgraded stadium will not happen before the ARC arena is redone and upgraded. That is, unless a rabid, wealthy FB alum/fan comes up with $2 million and earmarks it exclusively for stadium improvement.
62 - I agree. So Butler, Stetson, Drake, San Diego and other schools can upgrade their facilities but Valpo cannot. I understand the athletic department is focusing on MBB and football, but once again at a higher level the university is not on board.
Since 2012 we have installed turf and track. I would like to see the scoreboard updated but I think that can stay the same. What I would really like to see is the home side stands updated. Things to include.
-Meeting rooms
-Bathrooms
-Have a capacity of 5,000 on home side
EKU does not have an outstanding visitor's section however their home side is what you would expect from an FCS school. This is a half stadium renovation and should be feasible through donations, football's athletic money.
Here we go off on Facilities again ;D. Love it. If the home side were to include a chairback section and, say 30 rows instead of the 17 presently you'd have a really nice 3,500 capacity on that side. ( then add in the 1,500 already on the visitor side and you'd have a really legit 5,000 stadium capacity. Then, I'd like to see a two story press box with a President's club level for entertaining alums and the like. Above that a fully functional press box with ample space for really good game day operations. Depending on the available footprint, underneath better concession stands, rest rooms, and possibly one (or maybe two) team room(s) so that at least Valpo doesn't have to trudge all the way back into the ARC.
a press box is desperately needed. That is really pathetic. I cant believe they still use that.
Other teams in the Pioneer or in their status can renovate - why can't Valpo?
With all due respect to usc4valpo and others (who are clearly thoughtful and care a great deal about Valpo), I do not understand why the football program continues to exist. It is a major cost center in an environment where there are other priorities (including improvement in the ARC). From my perspective, there are two reasons given that attempt to justify why this program exists: 1. it can generate enthusiasm and identification among the student body, and 2. it attracts male students who might not otherwise attend Valpo.
To point 1: what is the actual interest from the student body? My opinion is that there would only be significant interest if the team, at its competitive level, was among the very best (i.e., winning the conference and going to the FCS playoffs at least every other year). This is extraordinarily unlikely, even if there were more financial investment.
To point 2: (the economist's view) if you took all of the money spent on the football program and used half of it to attract students (via scholarships), do you end up at the same enrollment with less cost? Alternatively, if you replaced football with a sport like lacrosse, do you attract more students (because the sport can have male and female teams) at the same or less cost?
Other relevant points to this discussion:
-Of course, there is a small set of alums who would not donate any further money to Valpo if football were eliminated. Most donors have one or two things that, if they changed or were removed, they would eliminate their donations. Always a big problem for any non-profit institution.
-Costs sunk (another economic view) should never figure into decisions of how to move forward. There is no valid argument for, "we already did ________, therefore we must do _________ or continue _______."
-Given safety concerns, the number of high school football players is likely to continue to decline. Indeed, there are more and more high schools that cannot field enough players for a team.
Then the overwhelming majority of sports programs at every major university, college, small college and junior college should probably be ended.
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 04, 2019, 07:43:14 AMJD24 - 2 items to address: 1. USD went up 2 notches likely because they were somewhat competitive in an 18 point loss to Cal Poly, who has had some playoff success in 1-AA football. Cal Poly, maybe 5 or 10 years ago, almost upset Wisconsin.
There probably is no logic to it at all as one game into a season in which not all teams have played a game to this point really doesn't affect much in terms of rankings with a couple of placing moves. I only pointed it out as a point of interest and not for analysis purpose.
Quote2. I think addressing the Sagarin is important as it is an indicator where this football program stands. Yes, it may appear negative, but over the years there have been posters on the board with grossly inflated positives about the program. Valpo is currently the worst rated team in Division 1 football and it is embarrassing - I work with and collaborate with alums who think the program should not exist, which sucks. As an alum, I would like to see the school strive for excellence rather than just maintaining a product that has low commitment. I am hoping there are tangible efforts in making this happen.
I don't think anyone who posts on this board has any overinflated view of the football program or the conference they play in. For whatever reason it seems to float your boat to point it out every year.
Quote from: VULB#62 on September 04, 2019, 01:29:20 PMHere we go off on Facilities again ;D. Love it. If the home side were to include a chairback section and, say 30 rows instead of the 17 presently you'd have a really nice 3,500 capacity on that side. ( then add in the 1,500 already on the visitor side and you'd have a really legit 5,000 stadium capacity. Then, I'd like to see a two story press box with a President's club level for entertaining alums and the like. Above that a fully functional press box with ample space for really good game day operations. Depending on the available footprint, underneath better concession stands, rest rooms, and possibly one (or maybe two) team room(s) so that at least Valpo doesn't have to trudge all the way back into the ARC.
As much as I'd like to see the football program upgraded, if the university has money, I think it should be used mostly elsewhere.
It floats (actually sinks) my boat because seeing us dead last in the nation, even as a nonscholarship football program, is embarrassing to the university. Where is the progress? Where is the pride from the university? Why accept this over such a prolonged period and think this is acceptable? How the heck did Valpo drop down after being 6-5?
Quote from: vu84v2 on September 04, 2019, 03:25:26 PM
With all due respect to usc4valpo and others (who are clearly thoughtful and care a great deal about Valpo), I do not understand why the football program continues to exist. It is a major cost center in an environment where there are other priorities (including improvement in the ARC). From my perspective, there are two reasons given that attempt to justify why this program exists: 1. it can generate enthusiasm and identification among the student body, and 2. it attracts male students who might not otherwise attend Valpo.
To point 1: what is the actual interest from the student body? My opinion is that there would only be significant interest if the team, at its competitive level, was among the very best (i.e., winning the conference and going to the FCS playoffs at least every other year). This is extraordinarily unlikely, even if there were more financial investment.
To point 2: (the economist's view) if you took all of the money spent on the football program and used half of it to attract students (via scholarships), do you end up at the same enrollment with less cost? Alternatively, if you replaced football with a sport like lacrosse, do you attract more students (because the sport can have male and female teams) at the same or less cost?
Other relevant points to this discussion:
-Of course, there is a small set of alums who would not donate any further money to Valpo if football were eliminated. Most donors have one or two things that, if they changed or were removed, they would eliminate their donations. Always a big problem for any non-profit institution.
-Costs sunk (another economic view) should never figure into decisions of how to move forward. There is no valid argument for, "we already did ________, therefore we must do _________ or continue _______."
-Given safety concerns, the number of high school football players is likely to continue to decline. Indeed, there are more and more high schools that cannot field enough players for a team.
Google what happened to University of Evansville when they eliminated football. I was on a board there in 2002-2006 and it was a constant issue with some of the alums that affected donations for quite some time.
A Decade Without Football (http://archive.courierpress.com/news/a-decade-without-football-still-the-sport-might-return-to-ue-ep-448960348-327564921.html/)
We will and probably have taken a big hit with the closing of the Law School. The perception of a declining school is not an easy thing to overcome as UE found out, it affected all areas of athletics including the basketball program. Eliminating football would just exacerbate the negative perceptions already started by the Law School situation.
I would have to guess via donations and 100 tuitions, pay me games , ticket sales, football actually profits.
I realize there is a large group of people who want to put that money into basketball but let's not be naive.
We've competed last 3 years as a program. (I know we went 2-9 usc4valpo but we were in many games) We're not cheating and overfunding our program like few of our competitors have been caught doing . Much of the attrition rate has been due to VU student Life off the field.
University is behind the 8 ball in several, I mean several areas
Quote from: VULB#62 on September 04, 2019, 01:29:20 PMwith a President's club level for entertaining alums and the like.
Seeing that the north side of the ARC is the chairback side and that it is the side where expected expansion and club level expansion might be planned, why not build a club level that would extend over the area between the ARC and Brown Field and make it into a Club level that could serve for both Basketball and Football! How cool would that be??
Works for me :thumbsup: ;D
Fb16 - not sure what mean by attrition. could you please elaborate?
Football team from personal experience. Although it appears overall numbers for University are down.
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 04, 2019, 05:00:39 PMIt floats (actually sinks) my boat because seeing us dead last in the nation, even as a nonscholarship football program, is embarrassing to the university. Where is the progress? Where is the pride from the university? Why accept this over such a prolonged period and think this is acceptable? How the heck did Valpo drop down after being 6-5?
Ratings? Who cares? The PFL teams, with a couple of exceptions, are going to contain the bottom 10. Progress? Ask Dave Cecchini. You'll find him in PA. Pride from the University? What would you like the University to do? How about hire a new coach? Oh. That's been done. Acceptable? Who thinks it's acceptable? How did they drop down? Pennsylvania...again.
Quote from: valpofb16 on September 04, 2019, 05:54:39 PM
I would have to guess via donations and 100 tuitions, pay me games , ticket sales, football actually profits.
I doubt that this is true, but you nor I have the data to support our position (I honestly would like you to be correct).
I will bet that it at least evens out and is not cash hole.
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 05, 2019, 11:56:46 AM
I will bet that it at least evens out and is not cash hole.
Home attendance for last year was about 11,000. If 25% were free, then not counting hot dog sales, that leaves 7500 paying a $10 ticket price = $75,000. Add to that about 100 guys paying roughly half of the $54,000 sticker price and you add another $2,700,000, for a grand total of about $2,800,000 or so, plus the buy game revenue. I have no idea what flying the team to California and North Carolina will cost,nor the equipment cost, coaches salaries, tape and trainers etc, but I'm just guessing that, as usc4valpo suggests, it may even out, and is not a cash hole.
Quote from: vu72 on September 05, 2019, 03:52:04 PM
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 05, 2019, 11:56:46 AM
I will bet that it at least evens out and is not cash hole.
Home attendance for last year was about 11,000. If 25% were free, then not counting hot dog sales, that leaves 7500 paying a $10 ticket price = $75,000. Add to that about 100 guys paying roughly half of the $54,000 sticker price and you add another $2,700,000, for a grand total of about $2,800,000 or so, plus the buy game revenue. I have no idea what flying the team to California and North Carolina will cost,nor the equipment cost, coaches salaries, tape and trainers etc, but I'm just guessing that, as usc4valpo suggests, it may even out, and is not a cash hole.
I'd have to agree. The track and field coach (years ago) was given directives to fill out the "roster" for just such reasons. Athletics adds values and dollars, especially on large roster sports teams.
Quote from: FieldGoodie05 on September 05, 2019, 07:14:45 PM
Quote from: vu72 on September 05, 2019, 03:52:04 PM
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 05, 2019, 11:56:46 AM
I will bet that it at least evens out and is not cash hole.
Home attendance for last year was about 11,000. If 25% were free, then not counting hot dog sales, that leaves 7500 paying a $10 ticket price = $75,000. Add to that about 100 guys paying roughly half of the $54,000 sticker price and you add another $2,700,000, for a grand total of about $2,800,000 or so, plus the buy game revenue. I have no idea what flying the team to California and North Carolina will cost,nor the equipment cost, coaches salaries, tape and trainers etc, but I'm just guessing that, as usc4valpo suggests, it may even out, and is not a cash hole.
I'd have to agree. The track and field coach (years ago) was given directives to fill out the "roster" for just such reasons. Athletics adds values and dollars, especially on large roster sports teams.
This supports adding men's and women's lacrosse ::). Sorry, didn't mean to skew this thread any more than it has been skewed already. ;D
I still propose hockey but it will never happen - Valpo throws nickels like manhole covers when it comes to athletics.
Quote from: vu72 on September 04, 2019, 06:05:26 PMSeeing that the north side of the ARC is the chairback side and that it is the side where expected expansion and club level expansion might be planned, why not build a club level that would extend over the area between the ARC and Brown Field and make it into a Club level that could serve for both Basketball and Football! How cool would that be??
Love this idea!
Quote from: FWalum on September 06, 2019, 08:53:11 AM
Quote from: vu72 on September 04, 2019, 06:05:26 PMSeeing that the north side of the ARC is the chairback side and that it is the side where expected expansion and club level expansion might be planned, why not build a club level that would extend over the area between the ARC and Brown Field and make it into a Club level that could serve for both Basketball and Football! How cool would that be??
Love this idea!
I love the idea of a shared club level, but I believe the physical distance between any ARC northerly expansion and an expanded home grandstand for Brown Field, along with a need to preserve vehicle access to the rear areas of the ARC, would preclude a single club overlooking both venues. HOWEVER, why not build the club (along with some premium suites overlooking the arena) in the new ARC addition and connect the club area to an indoor seating level in the new Brown Field press box via a sky bridge? The club area, located between the arena suites and Brown Field press box, would serve as a very attractive connecting space.
Quote from: vu72 on September 05, 2019, 03:52:04 PM
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 05, 2019, 11:56:46 AM
I will bet that it at least evens out and is not cash hole.
Home attendance for last year was about 11,000. If 25% were free, then not counting hot dog sales, that leaves 7500 paying a $10 ticket price = $75,000. Add to that about 100 guys paying roughly half of the $54,000 sticker price and you add another $2,700,000, for a grand total of about $2,800,000 or so, plus the buy game revenue. I have no idea what flying the team to California and North Carolina will cost,nor the equipment cost, coaches salaries, tape and trainers etc, but I'm just guessing that, as usc4valpo suggests, it may even out, and is not a cash hole.
Nicely done analysis, but you would need to add infrastructure maintenance costs that are unique to football and any expected capital spends going forward to sustain the program. One might also argue that you could gain that substantial student revenue via other means that are less costly. Still, you offer some very effective arguments.
Side note: I am always very impressed with the discussions and arguments related to the university on this site. We are all far better when we debate with respect and intelligence. And that is why this is the only site in which I post and engage in discussions.
For most schools, sports is a loser in terms of cost and that is for a variety of reasons. In general, in this country, collegiate athletics is considered to be a part of college life. Sure most sports can be eliminated and schools can just attempt to attract students based on academics. Is that what we want?
Didn't Howard Cosell philosophize that "sports is the toy department of life". I love sports. It adds spice to life, but it is not life. JLo's latest movie is of much high significance.
Anyone overly giddy about Valpo's two upcoming games vs. Div II teams may wish to consider this:
First and maybe foremost, Valpo lost to Truman St. last year although we'll get a read on Truman St because they play Drake next week (I think).
Today, Kentucky State which was ranking 3rd from the bottom of Div II and which was winless last year beat NEC's Robert Morris which isn't very good but you'd think they could handle pretty easily one of the worst teams at Div II.
Kentucky State was rated 165 of 168, Truman St. is 58 of 168 and Charleston is 112 of 168.
Why would it be a surprise that. div 2 team could beat Valpo? there are many, many Div 3 teams that could beat Valpo. Good call JD24.
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 07, 2019, 04:53:37 PMWhy would it be a surprise that. div 2 team could beat Valpo? there are many, many Div 3 teams that could beat Valpo. Good call JD24.
There are some DIII teams which could beat Valpo. I don't think it's many many or whatever.
I can name at least 3 div 3 or NAIA teams in Iowa that would.
Need to point out that NAIA schools can offer FB scholarships. So I would lump them closer to D-II than D-III.
Quote from: VULB#62 on September 07, 2019, 07:09:15 PMNeed to point out that NAIA schools can offer FB scholarships. So I would lump them closer to D-II than D-III.
Don't ruin a good wallow. ;D
You mentioned in the other thread that Drake went down to Truman St 10-7 with Truman putting up almost no offense. Drake must be down this year offensively. Butler also had to go to overtime to beat their NAIA opponent Indiana Wesleyan.
How much athletic scholarship money do Div 2 and NAIA athletes get, and at least the end does it pretty much even out with Div. 1 non scholarship schools?
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 08, 2019, 09:31:41 AM
How much athletic scholarship money do Div 2 and NAIA athletes get, and at least the end does it pretty much even out with Div. 1 non scholarship schools?
To say it is complicated would be an understatement. Here's an article that may help.
https://www.scholarships.com/financial-aid/college-scholarships/sports-scholarships/naia-scholarships/
Quote from: JD24 on September 07, 2019, 11:42:06 PM
Quote from: VULB#62 on September 07, 2019, 07:09:15 PMNeed to point out that NAIA schools can offer FB scholarships. So I would lump them closer to D-II than D-III.
Don't ruin a good wallow. ;D
You mentioned in the other thread that Drake went down to Truman St 10-7 with Truman putting up almost no offense. Drake must be down this year offensively. Butler also had to go to overtime to beat their NAIA opponent Indiana Wesleyan.
The TSU TD was an 87 yd KO return to begin the second half putting TSU up 10-0. Drake had the entire 2nd half to comeback and couldn't put two scoring drives together — only scored 1 TD. Yet, they were able to score against a legit FCS UND the week before ??? ??? ???
Time to place a W on the win column for the beloved Crusaders over Des Moines finest. This game will have more interest than College Game Day in Ames next week!
Quote from: VULB#62 on September 08, 2019, 11:10:51 AMQuote from: JD24 on September 07, 2019, 11:42:06 PMQuote from: VULB#62 on September 07, 2019, 07:09:15 PMNeed to point out that NAIA schools can offer FB scholarships. So I would lump them closer to D-II than D-III.
Don't ruin a good wallow. ;D You mentioned in the other thread that Drake went down to Truman St 10-7 with Truman putting up almost no offense. Drake must be down this year offensively. Butler also had to go to overtime to beat their NAIA opponent Indiana Wesleyan.
The TSU TD was an 87 yd KO return to begin the second half putting TSU up 10-0. Drake had the entire 2nd half to comeback and couldn't put two scoring drives together — only scored 1 TD. Yet, they were able to score against a legit FCS UND the week before ??? ??? ???
Against North Dakota, Drake managed to put all of their offensive output into the one scoring drive. They haven't been able to run the ball at all. Averaging about a yard per carry. Vs. NDU that may be understandable. Not sure that should be the case against Truman.
Drake has lost to non Div 1 teams in the past - in fact, I think they are afraid to compete against Grandview or Central.
So if Valpo beats Truman State, are they out of the Sagarin Cellar?
Quote from: usc4valpo on September 19, 2019, 08:49:45 PM
So if Valpo beats Truman State, are they out of the Sagarin Cellar?
Unfortunately Big, Big
IFMy prediction>>>>>>>>> TSU 53, Valpo 11
I think TSU will win, but that score is overly pessimistic. Last week I predicted 43-20 and member thought that was a high, more pessimistic spread. I was actually optimistic as the score was 42-13.
Valpo needs more talent and skill players to get out of the Sagarin cellar. I think this coach can get it done, but enough about asking for patience and hearing any philosophical bogus quotes.
as of now, November 9 can be a significant Sagarin Toilet bowl event. The point spread would be a pick em.