Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

http://www.sent-trib.com/index.php?opti ... Itemid=104

Some interesting comments from Dr. Cartwright.

Options if external money isn't found:

¥ Dropping all sports to Division II;
¥ Eliminating football;
¥ Going to a tier system for selected sports;
¥ Dropping selected sports.

Makes one wonder if there aren't other MAC schools talking about football.

Could there be changes afoot at the NCAA level to allow for fewer sports a D1? Could the MAC be Considering changes to how many sports are "core" to the league?

Nathan,

Who else in the MAC besides the Hurons would possibly drop football?
And I can't believe any MAC school would consider going to Div II.

Over the years I've heard talk that "schools" in the MAC, especially Ohio, have pondered life without football.

Akron considered it, but stuck it out, and years later they are in good shape. Kent seems an obvious candidate.

The way the comments are being made, it sets up cutting sports as the only palatable choice, which brings the focus back too raising money for the hockey program.

Notable though, is that the $750,000 budget gap is now described as that of the department, not of hockey.

What would going to a tier system mean?

It sounds like they have decided to either cut hockey or make it a viable long term program. We really need to sell a bunch of season tickets.

Christopher discussed four different options:
¥ Dropping all sports to Division II;
¥ Eliminating football;
¥ Going to a tier system for selected sports;
¥ Dropping selected sports.
Christopher said BG's operating budget is very close to Saginaw Valley State's, one of the top teams in Division II. Ashland and Central State are the only two Division II schools in Ohio.

1.) doesn't dropping "all sports" to DII mean no ice hockey, since there is no DII NCAA ice hockey!?
2.) I doubt the university will eliminate football.
3.) What's a tier system?
4.) Dropping selected sports- I don't want to see any cut but if so how bout baseball or softball...
5.) there's more DII schools than just two in Ohio, our neighbor to the South, Findlay, is one. (I believe there's like 5-8 DII schools.)

I wouldn't object to going DII as long as we kept hockey, IF we did go DII I suspect we'd join the Great Lakes Intercollegiate Athletic Conference with other CCHA schools like NMU, Ferris State, Lake Superior, and WCHA Michigan Tech. and with nearby schools/rivals Findlay, Tiffin, Ashland, and Hillsdale.

As I read it, a tier system would mean football, hockey, men's basketball and women's basketball would get the biggest pieces of the pie because they are traditional revenue sports. The other sports would remain without any scholarships but the coaches would continue to be paid. So if it were the 4 sports I mentioned above selected the other 12 would be nothing but walk-ons and would field as much of a competitive team as possible. They would exist only as maintaining the minimum of 16 sports to remain NCAA Division I. I would also see them moving baseball and softball into the revenue list as well as men's soccer and women's soccer; possibly volleyball as well.

But let's say they don't and the majority of money goes to the first 4 sports I mentioned. You can kiss our competitiveness goodbye in baseball. All the MAC championships would become a thing of the past. Volleyball would be destroyed and we would probably see coach V leave BG. I could go on but I think everyone gets the idea. A tier system would KILL athletics at BGSU. Sure we would have football and hockey and basketball but is that really enough? Is it worth putting a team on the field knowing its financial legs have been cut out from under it? That is why this whole mess is, has been, and will continue to be an ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT ISSUE until it is fixed. What we are doing right now is more important than saving one single sport. We are trying to save the entire athletic program at BGSU! We must continue to look at the big picture or we will lose everything.

FORWARD FALCONS!

Did Bob Bell really come back as our AD?

Ask an "oldtimer".

The only real choice that is viable, IMO, is to hope that some of the hockey alumni that have had successful careers will step up, as well as some others who will donate to set up an endowment fund, making hockey a self funded sport. That is, really, the only way that it will return to any semblance of itself in the glory years. It's obvious that the athletic department is unwilling to support it much longer and, in fact, can't supply it with the funds needed to make it successful. It's worked for Miami, it can work for BG.

What I find encouraging is that they're now willing to consider that as an option because it has been my understanding that certain someones didn't want anything to do with that type of set up. They considered it an unfair advantage for hockey.

I have to say that I want to Thank President Cartwright for her comments in the article. SHE acknowledges the importance the team and the ice arena to the community as a whole. SHE seems to be willing to work with the alumni and community to find a viable option for ALL involved. SHE will be getting a letter of thanks from me ASAP and I would encourage others to do the same. I'm encouraged by HER part of the article!

"A one-year extension for hockey doesn't make a lot of sense, a year, then a year, then a year," Cartwright said

Cartwright recently talked to five former players at a Cleveland alumni event and said they were willing to do fund-raising work to save the program. She said the players thought they could be more successful generating the money, adding the university would be willing to provide staff to assist them.


"We've had an outpouring of commitment, people wrote saying this is very important. If there's a community-public-private partnership that wants to build a new arena for things we want to do, we'll look at it," Cartwright said. "We're open to anything."

These three quotes are the ones that stick out to me...especially the last one. SHE honestly listened to the community and hockey supporters. She's willing...and we're willing...let's get this done!

GO FALCONS!!
Erika

So how does Miami and Western fund their hockey programs?

Does it boil down to their fans donating more money than we do?

Title IX could not possibly allow football, men's basketball, hockey and women's basketball be the only scholarship sports. You most certainly need gender equity in scholarships.

Division II provides scholarships as well but just not as many. We would be competing against Findlay, Tiffin University, Ashland, Urbana and Central State, that come to mind in Ohio football. We would have difficulty competing with these schools if we did not offer and they did in any sport even if we are DI and they are DII.

The whole MAC could possibly drop to DI-AA (or whatever it's called) but DII seems unrealistic. Unless the whole conference drops take a look at the Championship Division and you will quickly note that no current conference among them is a travel friendly as the MAC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NCAA_conferences) for BG and that would shift expenses from scholarships to travel. There is no logical way for BG to go out on their own or remain in the current MAC format without football.

The funding sources simply must be found for hockey. My impression is that they want it self-supporting and that means $16-20 Million before next year. Unless a large portion of this total is endowed I see the program going away at least temporarily as noted with other programs. Let's hope the braintrust appointed by the University has better vision and can solve this problem.

I posted this in the football forum as well, but thought it fit here in the hockey forum too:

-----
I wanted to pass along a note to the Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba community concerning the notion of Bowling Green dropping its athletic programs to NCAA Division II or dropping the football program. It was reported tonight on Toledo news, attributing the Sentinel-Tribune article, that BG is considering these options in an attempt to balance the budget. I want to comment on this in no uncertain terms -- it is just not true.

Athletic Director Greg Christopher mentioned both of those options almost two months ago in his Ask the AD segment so this is not a recent happening. As with any difficult issue, many options are usually put on the table as to how it can be solved. In this case, both of those options were put on the table months ago and quickly dismissed as options that Bowling Green State University does not want to consider. We are completely committed to the MAC and the MAC requires that we field teams for football, volleyball, men's and women's basketball, baseball and softball. Eliminating football or moving to Division II was never given serious consideration by the University's leadership. This was quickly eliminated as an option.

-----

On a side note, I just want to say that I have thoroughly enjoyed my first five months here at BGSU. I have found that BGSU fans are intelligent and passionate sports fans and I wouldn't want it any other way. It's been great to observe and take in BGSU athletics over the past five months as I've gotten accustomed to the department and gotten to know many people. If you ever have any ideas on how we, in athletic communications/sports information, can do our job better or keep you better informed, please feel free to drop me an e-mail at [email protected].

Thank you!
Jason Knavel

Dropping football is not an option because, as I understand it, the MAC requires its member teams to field DI football, basketball (men's and women's), volleyball, baseball and softball teams. We would have to drop out of the MAC completely to drop football

That seems a bit high to me. If hockey only has 18 (I read that somewhere) then how does football need 85? There are 6 positions in hockey, so hockey has 3 times the starting positions. Apply that to football where they have 22 starting positions, and you would need 66 plus 2 for kickers, for a total of 68. That's darn near the entire hockey team that could be dropped from the football team and probably not missed a whole lot.