This is an interesting piece by Tobi Writes at bleacher report: “Fix your danged stadium already No. 1: Eastern Michigan University.” This is the first in what is promised to be a series of articles about “problem stadiums that haunt programs at the FBS level,” and EMU’s stadium apparently is problem stop #1.
I think Writes raises some serious credibility problems from the start by just assuming that football is a generally revenue generating enterprise; there is ample evidence in a variety of places to suggest that is way WAY off. His ideas for improving Rynearson stadium mostly boils down to getting rid of the track and getting rid of some of the unused seats to make it look a little more “full.” Maybe.
But I think Writes is most on when he says this:
EMU is only seven miles away from the University of Michigan, which draws 110K per game. Even though the Wolverines are not a pro team, they might as well be. EMU is playing in what I have named a “Killzone.” They are competing against a football business that dominates the public’s football entertainment dollars in their area, just like NFL teams do in NFL Killzones.
EMU is also a bit of a commuter school. That hurts attendance as well.
These factors strongly suggest EMU will not draw a consistent 25,000 to Rynearson at any point in the next 20 years, no matter how competitive they are on the field.
By the way, someone was telling me the other day that way back when, the EMU football stadium used to be more or less at the corner of Oakwood and Washtenaw in the space that is now a large parking lot. I’m assuming that was a long LONG time ago, but if that was the case, what a shame that the move was made.
I raised the issue of whether it is worth to have a football program with EMU’s president as I do with each president at her speech at the Ypsilanti Rotary Club last Monday. Typical response: I am committed to the program’s success, we need to give time to the current head coach, I want to win BAD, etc etc. It’s the same old tune that happens like clockwork every 4 years while the embarassments just continue relentlessly. Even CMU made us look like a JV high school team last week! They should just sell Rynearson and get some big money and put it where it belongs: Education First remember?
This writer is right on about the killzone!
It is no wonder that the team does not succeed when alumni like Eagle G cannot and will not support the teams. Interesting how you choose to use the name “EagleG” using the athletic mascot of the university. If there were not so many people out there spreading negative attitudes about the program it may be able to succeed. Without any bias, come out to a game with your family. I bet you will not be able to find a better entertainment value for your money OR continue to stay at home and attend dinners with your bah humbug outlook. Success begins one fan at a time winning them over one attitude at a time. Do not work against the university that you obviously have pride in. There would be a no better catalyst for school spirit, pride and community than coming together 20K plus strong to celebrate our school!
Dear Carterman, I cannot agree with you more! Thank you and Go Eastern!
BTW – Despite the record, as a season ticket holder, I will be in my usual seat Saturday afternoon cheering on EMU!
Anyone here on Facebook? If so, then please become a “Fan” of the EMU Football Facebook page! http://www.facebook.com/EMUFootball
>>>>>>It is no wonder that the team does not succeed when alumni like Eagle G cannot and will not support the teams.
So the problem that the team has been a loser since birth is because I will not support the team??? I can, by the way, but I would rather donate my money to an academic department or go watch a basketball game…they do win once in a while and do have a winning history!
>>>>>>>>>>Interesting how you choose to use the name “EagleG” using the athletic mascot of the university.
Frankly, I could not think of anything else at the moment:-)
>>>>>>>If there were not so many people out there spreading negative attitudes about the program it may be able to succeed.
We are not the problem Sir. The problem here is systemic…It is the killzone next door, it is the commuter student body, it is the inept coaching over the years (and the inept insistence by admins of hiring assistant coaches to run the show and replacing them after 4-5 yrs), it is the continued embarassments that just won’t stop, it is the inept marketing, it is the cold ugly Rynearson, it is the Huron grave cemetery that it was build on….joking on the last one. I do not enjoy going to the games, I was never really into football anyway. I used to bring the family with me but it’s hard to be able to take so many losses after all these years!
>>>>>>>>I bet you will not be able to find a better entertainment value for your money OR continue to stay at home and attend dinners with your bah humbug outlook.
I agree on the value but, Sir, you get what you pay for I guess. I would actually rather stay at home and have some friends over than to freeze my ass off to watch another team run us to the ground and, in the few times we score, have the stupid cannon go off! (why do they do this to scare the little ones is beyond me, please tell me they stopped it).
>>>>>>Success begins one fan at a time winning them over one attitude at a time.
I agree but after so many years it is simply not worth it. If an EMU President had some guts and was willing and/or able to think out of the box they could sit down and put all pluses on one side and all minuses on the other side of the value of a football program and, I am certain, that it is suicidal to keep such an expensive program in Ypsilanti! But, no one has the guts to do it, and all people reporting to the top EMU people do not have the guts to even bring it up! Even if English magically succeeds ( I hope he does but I certainly am not taking this bet!) he is gone to a bigger school in a flash and then, here we go again, the old cycle begins again!
>>>>>>>>Do not work against the university that you obviously have pride in.
I am raising this issue again because I love the school!!
>>>>>>>>There would be a no better catalyst for school spirit, pride and community than coming together 20K plus strong to celebrate our school!
20k strong????????????We would not have 20k in the stands even if we had Diles back here doing the counting, lol. And if we did, we would probably bribe all the local school students and EMU students with giveaways and we may get past 10k…We are in a killzone, this program is too expensive (it would be a lot more expensive if we did not get paid to go get beat up by at least two big schools every year…does wonders for school pride!), has no winning history and we keep trying the same stuff over and over and over…it’s just crazy.
A sincere apology to the coaching staff and the student athletes…I would LOVE it if you can prove me wrong!!!!
Thanks for reading if you made it this far.
Now children….let’s play nice.
I’m going to take the opposite view of the author. I believe that a problem with EMU is that “we” worry too much about UM’s schedule. Why not schedule games at the same time? It’s a different audience. Think about how people might be more willing to come out to a game if the games were at 12 or 1. A nice lunch tailgate, it’s not overly cold yet, and the commuter students could then enjoy Saturday night either in Ypsi or closer to their homes. Having night games does not make sense. We need to get rid of the mindset of a “kill zone” and realize that the fans of each team are different.
I think the killzone argument is really hard to dispute; besides the bad attendance at games, it’s really hard to just get people generally interested, period. I know someone has made this observation here before: you’re just as likely to see people on campus wearing U of Michigan “Maize and Blue” wear as you are to see EMU t-shirts or sweatshirts. For whatever reason, the reach/killzone of basketball doesn’t seem as profound, though I don’t know if I’ve ever seen more than about 3,000 people at a basketball game.
I don’t know how they schedule games, but it seems like the “third-tier” football conferences like the MAC schedule games different in the hopes of getting on TV or something. I’m not sure, but that might explain the football schedule. Besides, you could make the opposite argument about the times, too: scheduling games in the evening means you’ve got the whole day to do whatever and then you can come out for some lovely football entertainment. Assuming you like to see the emus get beaten up….
EagleG is right on the money. Win or lose, football is a huge money pit here at EMU. I think most of the things pointed out in this thread play a part, obviously some more than others. But the bottom line is win or lose the program loses big money every year. Why do we keep investing our tax and tuition dollars into a money losing endeavor? Why can’t our BOR and administrators see the writing on the wall from Lansing? (Actually I’ll give the administrators a break, as the BOR has the ultimate power) In two years when the stimulus money is gone, things are going to get ugly. And I mean uglier than we’ve ever seen before. Maybe then the BOR will have their hand forced. The decisions they make at that time will be really interesting.
I’m not certain that doing what every other university does is any justification, but all who read here should keep in mind the following facts.
I read, just this week, that only 6 universities do not need any funds from the general fund to support football. That does not include any of the other sports.
When Myles Brand, Exec. Dir. of NCAA was here a couple of years ago, he noted that of the 120 Division 1 schools, only 6 did not require any general funds for athletics.
What this says is that almost all other universities are in the same position as EMU. Now, one might argue differences in amounts, but that does not seem to be what is happening here.
I should remind all that the VP for Enrollment Management said the year we went to the Calif. Bowl we had more applications and enrollment that we ever had. This means that “winning football” is a factor impacting enrollment.
I am not trying to justify what we do, but merely note what some have said.
Also, keep in mind that were we to drop football, we would need to get out of the MAC because football is a required sport for inclusion.
At the last BOR meeting, our earnings from game guarantees (playing the big boys) for this year will be 1.9 million. After our expenses, we retain a little more t$600,000.00. This does not mean we make money, but perhaps the bite is not as great as some might think.
>>>>>The year we went to the Calif. Bowl we had more applications and enrollment that we ever had. This means that “winning football” is a factor impacting enrollment.
I am not sure it can impact enrollment per se to a meaningful degree but it can certainly impact alumni donations and, let’s face it, alumni pride. I was there in 1987, it was a fluke year and everything bounced our way and we have been trying to imitate that ever since….and who can forget the longest losing streak in the nation before that??? Is it really worth it to keep reaching for something so elusive so we can get to the top (of the MAC) once a generation???
>>>>>>>keep in mind that were we to drop football, we would need to get out of the MAC because football is a required sport for inclusion.
Is this true? Are you 100% sure? If we dropped football (or dropped to Div II), what happens to all our other great teams? Especially basketball, I am a fan since the Grant Long days!I somehow have never received a straight answer on this. Can someone confirm this????
Somewhere on this blog, there’s a link to a study that was done by Moody’s (I think) that said that when it comes to increasing enrollment, sports is a bad investment. In other words, while a good football team might bring in some students, there are better ways to spend money to increase enrollments.
But if that’s the argument, then that’s all the more reason to invest in basketball instead. When Oakland University’s basketball team recently did halfway decent in the NCAA tourney (I think they got in and won a game or something like that), what I heard was that they got a boost in enrollment the next year. And hey, basketball is A LOT cheaper.
Wow, I can’t believe that none of the comments have addressed the primary reason sports are offered and that is for the student athlete. I believe football is an important part of a well rounded intermural sports program. However there is no reason EMU cannot continue to offer football to the student athlete yet not totally demoralize them nor pour huge amounts of money into a losing proposition at the expense of other equally valuable sport experiences for the student athletes (swimming and diving, wrestling, etc.). Many academically excellent universities are committed to providing their student athletes with a football program but have wisely chosen not to be in division one. I think it is unconscionable that EMU football student athletes have to have their sense of self worth crushed because the egos of several members of EMU’s Board of Regents refuse to give up the cache of being in division one despite being its doormat.
When EMU starts to offer as many full ride academic scholarships (I’ve heard its around 20) as it does full ride athletic scholarships (I‘ve heard its around 90) then and only then will we begin to see EMU live up to the slogan Education First.
EagleG, I did check and football is a required sport to be a full member of the MAC. We are also required to compete in 5 other sports. There are 6 core sports required.
I think you guys should re-examine the money pit comment. How much did they get for playing U of M? How much will they get for playing Arkansas? It’s around $2 million. The solution to the football issue is to put the facilities on equal footing with Western and Central. They out recruit us because of facilities. Without football there is no MAC conference membership. Perhaps you’d like to play Findlay or Tiffen. I’m sure our Olympic Sports would vote no on that. I’ve seen success at EMU 22 years ago. It can happen again. I’ve never seen such spit and bile comments over football. Another thing that none of you have considered is that moving down to Division I-AA or II does not mean there will be any savings. Depending on the conference, travel expenses could increase. In addition, there are several schools at those levels that have better facilities. Best to stay where we are, playing Michigan schools and schools in Ohio and Indiana. Once we leave Division 1-A there will be no going back. EMUlifer: I agree with you that things will get ugly. I can see the elimination of sports at several schools and even the loss of a conference or two.
Facilities, facilities, facilities. We’ve got to have much better football facilities in order to compete in any fashion in the MAC. It’s truly a shame that EMU has not had the type of facilities it needs to compete at this level of college football for so long. What is a football recruit to think when he’s shown around and sees that we lack so many amenities that other universities in the MAC offer. I think what they are trying to do now with the in door practice facility will help somewhat, but hopefully down the road, I hope they could look at renovating rynearson stadium. I think that would be a huge boost to the program.
I agree Jackie – but would you also agree that it’s a greater shame that EMU has lacked adequate academic facilities?
And here’s a cut and paste from the Knight Commission’s summary of its new study of how presidents of universities with big football programs see the situation. The full 51 page report is well worth reading for anyone who claims to care about athletics and education….
“Key findings from the presidential survey…. include:
“Dilemma of reform – While presidents recognize the need for reform, there is a lack of clear consensus about the best way to effect change. Nearly three-quarters believe that athletics present unique challenges as compared to other areas of the university when trying to control costs on their own campus. A majority believe institutions must act collectively to address these escalating costs.
“Sustainability – Less than a quarter of presidents believe intercollegiate athletics are sustainable in their current form at FBS institutions nationally. Two-thirds view their own programs as sustainable; but nearly half (48%) express concern that the current economic outlook will affect the number of varsity sports their institution can support in the future.
“Salaries – When asked about salaries across FBS institutions nationally, an overwhelming majority (85%) of FBS presidents indicate they feel compensation is excessive for football and basketball coaches. Viewed as the greatest impediment to sustainability, coaches’ salaries are costs that are difficult to control.
“Growing Divide between Haves and Have-Nots – A major concern is the growing imbalance between financially strong and weak programs. Presidents of less competitive institutions feel that their programs are unfairly exploited.
“Transparency – More than 80% of presidents believe greater financial transparency is needed.
“Benefits of Athletics – College presidents perceive athletic success provides substantial benefits to the institution, such as generating higher levels of fundraising, attracting better qualified students, enhancing school spirit and raising the profile of the institution. Although research generally does not support a significant correlation between athletic success and increased donations or better student quality, FBS university presidents are swayed by personal experience that there are cross-institutional benefits of winning sports programs.”
http://www.knightcommission.org
This survey seems to largely be focused on schools whose football programs are “winning” programs, ones that arguably make money for the schools. EMU of course is not really in that category. Note that the last point in the summary above makes reference to the fact that few scholarly studies support the widely repeated claim that winning teams yield great benefits to the schools fielding those benefits. Such claims are faith-based, not evidence-based, assertions.
None of these questions are simple. What is clear is that the current economic structure of college sports is not likely to be sustainable even at the “rich” schools, much less so at schools like EMU.
That’s true about the academic facilities. Ideally Pray-H and Mark Jefferson should have been fixed up a 10-15 years ago. But of course, i believe the EMU has really had tough luck with its presidents in the recent past. These clowns hardly did anything substantional for the advancement of the university either academically or athletically.
thanks, Jackie. We’re in agreement.
And I shamefully correct my typo near the end of my last post, where when I wrote that “few scholarly studies support the widely repeated claim that winning teams yield great benefits to the schools fielding those benefits” the last word should have been, obviously, “teams”. Virtually all the benefits of intercollegiate athletics are intangible. Everything else in American universities is measured by tangible metrics.
EMU built the Student Center instead of fixing PH a half dozen years ago, and the budgets for each project were about the same. Guess which was most overcrowded and most run down, the McKinney student union or PH?
So, dropping football all together gets out of the MAC in all sports.
Moving football to I-AA gets out of the MAC in all sports.
Moving football to Division II gets out the MAC in all sports.
EMU Supporter, thanks for checking! It sounds like we need to get out of the MAC in ALL 3 cases outlined above…please confirm.
If this is the case, I will need to reevaluate whether to start my project of getting signatures to drop the football team….just kidding, well, not actually, I thought about it…kind of sick to hold a winless team to one yard passing and still lose the game! And the only way to not have a super losing team budget is to go on the road and become punching bags to at least two big schools every year!
It all comes down to the relationship between academics and athletics….Not being born here, I always found it quite “unique” seeing athletics in colleges so…glued together. It never made any sense to me but I have come to accept it as part of the culture…like baseball I guess:-)
A couple of thoughts:
* It might be easier to attract better players and have a better team if we had better facilities, but no one wants to pay the money (especially now, with budgets what they are) to build a better facility, especially since the current team isn’t very good. Conversely, if our team was halfway decent, I suspect people would be a lot more tolerant of spending money on the team.
* I think the next couple years will be interesting to see what happens because I’m pretty sure that EMU is not the only team in the MAC who is facing budgetary strains and who is wondering about football. But I guess I would ask this: what’s sacred about the MAC? I mean, it’s not like they are awesome in everything else but football. So what if we got out of the MAC and into a different conference?
“By the way, someone was telling me the other day that way back when, the EMU football stadium used to be more or less at the corner of Oakwood and Washtenaw in the space that is now a large parking lot. I’m assuming that was a long LONG time ago, but if that was the case, what a shame that the move was made.”
Rynearson was opened in 1969. Prior to that games were played at a field near that corner (end zones were east and west), and the baseball field was directly to the north. I haven’t been able to find much information about it, but I did recently see a big aerial photo of campus (I wish it were online, because it was really spectacular) that must have been taken in spring or summer 1969, because it showed the old field, plus Rynearson under construction (almost finished). What struck me about that, and other photos I’ve seen of the old field are: 1) Rynearson was a long way away from campus when it was built, 2) that old field just had small bleachers on each side, and probably couldn’t have seated more than a few hundred people. Here’s an aerial view from the 1950s: http://media.aadl.org/documents/large/ypsigleanings/2010-spring_015.jpg
Keep in mind that when Rynearson was built, the football team was doing reasonably well. In the late 1960s and early 1970s the team had a bunch of winning seasons, including a trip to the Pioneer Bowl in 1971. One early game at Rynearson actually sold out (1971, a 0-0 tie against Eastern Kentucky). I don’t think EMU could have fit a 15,000 person stadium (Rynearson’s original capacity was 15,500) into that old location, much less the 30,200 that the NCAA required in 1992.