That’s right– the Emus have won two games in a row against real opponents, beating Western Michigan 14-10. According to emueagles.com, this means they are now the Michigan Mac Champs, for which there is apparently a trophy and everything. Read all about it here; here’s a quote:
The win not only helped the Eagles get closer to being bowl eligible at 5-3 overall and 3-1 in MAC action, but it also gave EMU possession of the Michigan MAC Trophy, which is given to the Michigan MAC university that defeats the other two schools in the same sport in the same regular season. This season in the rivalry games, EMU was 2-0, WMU 1-1 and CMU was 0-2.
Bowl eligible? Let’s not get ahead of ourselves here, folks.
Anyway, annarbor.com also has an interesting article, “Yes, Eastern Michigan is actually a good football team; and people care.” Here are a couple of quotes I found kind of interesting:
“I’m a dreamer, so I dreamed about this,” said third-year Eagles coach Ron English. “You know, I just think it’s going to get better and better here and so I’m just glad for all the people that can get involved.”
Sure, English was pleased that people turned out for the game. Is the reported attendance of 6,772 something to get that fired up about? Not really. But for Eastern, it is progress.
and, later in the piece:
Just outside of Rynearson before kickoff, a man in a multi-colored hooded sweatshirt stood with an arm raised, two fingers extended. Eastern Michigan alumnus Ronnie Martin couldn’t believe what he was seeing: A scalper … at an Eastern Michigan football game.
“You can usually get four tickets and T-shirt for 25 bucks,” Martin said.
And “Tailgate Town,” which is usually more like a ghost town on fall Saturdays, smelled of spilled beer and grilling brats. It was a college football atmosphere, off the field and on it.
Again, let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves here, folks.
Yesterday was a picture-perfect day to watch a football game, it was homecoming, and they promoted the hell out of that game, probably more than any game since I’ve been here at EMU. It was still easy to get tickets, so I have a feeling that “scalper” was a little confused, and while I am as big of a fan of tailgating as anyone, I’m not sure spilled beer, brats, and around 7,000 fans is a complete turnaround.
But sure, it’s an improvement, and relatively speaking for the MAC, it’s an improvement worth noting. For whatever reason, ABC had on the Northern Illinois-Buffalo game on while the EMU game was going on, and I noticed that that game was being played to a largely empty stadium. So compared to other MAC schools, Saturday’s game was a good showing.
Still, I’m conflicted. I don’t want to be a hater, I really really don’t, but I have to wonder if all of this is “worth it” for EMU. Sure, it’s great that the Emus are a lot better this year (though don’t buy your bowl tickets quite yet), but I am pretty sure the folks who were laid off this summer weren’t exactly overjoyed.
Well I’m happy for the guys on the team. They deserve a little good fortune for a change.
The Eagles played a good game, and made the homecoming day memorable. Good job!
But Rynearson is huge. Even if 6000 real people were there, watching the game, the stadium looked pretty empty. But if anyone feels certain that the numbers reported to be in the stadium are honest and accurate, then that person probably still believes in Santa Claus and the Easter bunny too.
This year, Santa is going to bring EMU a championship and a football program that meets its own expenses.
I disagree that the stadium felt “empty” — I know its all relative but this was the first game in years that the student section was full — and there were lines to get seats and my season ticket area usually allows for leg space – not this time!
it often seems empty because the west side of the stadium stares at the east side (visitors) side and that is often empty so its perception.
But if you walked to the visitors side (as i did) you saw a healthy crowd opposite your view
Carl,
Clearly, for Homecoming this weekend, with the beautiful, perfect weather we had, and no other college football game in the county, the stadium was more crowded, by far, than usual. Students today even brought the game up in conversation, and many of my first years went….which is unprecedented. And they had a good time!! So bravo to the marketing folks and especially to the team for a very good game. And praise be to the weather.
But still: Rynearson holds over 4 times as many people as were there Saturday, by the official, unverified, count. So it was, objectively, mostly empty — and that emptiness shows in many photos.
Teams with market value don’t often play games to a home stadium that is 3/4 empty seats. EMU rarely plays a game in a stadium that is even that full. Do the math. Teams with no market value are not compelling teams, by definition, in the economics of sports in our culture today. We sustain the EMU team only by draining vast sums from student derived revenue and pumping it into athletic subsidies: This is not sustainable long term, and every budget shortage that is handled without deep cuts to athletics will only accelerate EMU’s declining ability to compete on educational value and price.
Rynearson holds 30,200. Saturday’s announced attendance was 6,772, or 22% of capacity and less than half what is required by the NCAA to maintain I-A status. I suppose 6,000+ is a good draw, but considering this was homecoming and UM was idle, I don’t know whether there’s anything to get excited about as far as turnout. I for one will hold off expressing satisfaction with attendance until Pepsi no longer has to buy empty seats and the Pepsi contract can instead be turned toward other pressing campus needs. I don’t know the specifics of EMU’s contract with Pepsi, but it stands to reason that if they’re buying up $20-30,000 of empty seats for each home game, those resources could be directed toward other areas (even in this means facility costs) when we eventually get average attendance closer to where it belongs.
Again, even if 7,000 or so is a healthy crowd at an EMU game (and I would agree that it is), that’s way less than the 15,000 that the NCAA says is supposed to be the average attendance at these games. And as I was trying to imply with my mentioning the Northern Illinois versus Buffalo game, I have a feeling that most of the MAC schools have an average attendance much less than 15,000.
The Pepsi money for the tickets comes back into the General Fund, not athletics.
Turtle,
I have never before heard the suggestion that football ticket revenue, from Pepsi or anywhere, somehow goes into the Gen Fund and not athletics. Indeed, I have heard budget officials state that it MUST go to athletics. But I haven’t got the budget lines in front of me and could be ill informed. Could you please provide a source or link to back up your statement that the Pepsi money goes into the Gen Fund? Thank you.
I simply refuted that the stadium felt “empty” — because it did not. It looked empty to photos, yes, but if you attend games week in and week out this had the feel of a real game and a real crowd. I stated it was a perception, not objective. Based on numbers, yes it was empty.
But once again people need to rain on a parade — I simply understand how or why people need to always bring things down … sitedad is the only one it seems who does not feel the need to do that. Some commenters want to give credit to the weather — hello – weather always plays a role. I have been to U-M games in slushy rain and they dont get capacity (despite ticket sales.)
EMU (might) be building something here and it takes time to get people involved – this is not the Detroit Tigers with a built in fan base that was suddenly awoken in 2006 after lying dormant for 15 years. These are the first steps …
Does anyone watch Northwestern when they play a lower Big Ten team, say Indiana? The stadium looks empty too … and they are a Big Ten school playing in Chicago and the closest competion is hundreds of miles away!!
Carl,
Your points are all good ones. Mine are too, I think. I most certainly did not mean to “rain on a parade” and I’m no rainmaker. But I grew up in football country, and among fiscal conservatives, and this much I know: The EMU stadium is almost always mostly empty, EMU students are hard pressed financially and under-served educationally, and football at EMU will always be a huge fiscal drain with a small fan base. Even if we have a string of winning seasons before a notable coach heads out for bigger opportunities. Irrefutable fact: football is largely irrelevant to the real life of this university, and has little potential of acquiring relevancy, in this day and age. To the extent that EMU invests in football is the extent to which EMU ignores “the market” demand of our economy, and instead pursues fantasies. The finances of higher ed are radically different than they were when EMU joined Div 1 forty years ago. And so too are the prospects of EMU and our students, and adjustments by the institution would be prudent.
i honestly don’t see how someone so smart can make a statement such as “Irrefutable fact: football is largely irrelevant to the real life of this university, and has little potential of acquiring relevancy.”
Is it a fact or is there little potential (to be relvant.)? Which is it?
Also – one needs to look no further than CMU (until the new coach took over) so see how relevant football can be on campus. I visited CMU during their peak years and watched the campus get energized beyond insanity by the success of their program. Fans packed Ford Field for the MAC title game that year and I witnessed (on TV) a healthy crowd that traveled to bowl game that year.)
Could this happen here? Of course it could .. will it? Who knows?
To claim knowledge of the future as a certaintly is weak science.
I do not disagree or agree outright with either of you on the overall picture. But I do want to say that I can fully support Mark’s statement on relevance.
The simple fact is football, and any of the other sports for that matter, are completely irrelevant to real life. And I did not leave off the end of that statement on accident, the sports programs are not just irrelevant to the real life of this institution, but the real lives of the students most importantly, as well as everyone else in this area; with the exception of the employees of the programs. The success or failure of our sports teams have no bearing whatsoever on the futures of the students.
What matters is the quality of the education we receive. And there is no way that you can say that the quality of the product that EMU sells is not adversely affected by the subsidies for the athletic program.
I’ve heard the arguments for athletics increasing the value of the institution by providing notoriety to the school and supposedly increasing enrollment. Also that it increases the value of the experience for students on campus. But in the end it is only an amusement, an opportunity to unwind for some, and distraction for others, no matter how pleasant. And that is a service that is fulfilled in this area by many others, and often fulfilled better. If a student wants to see football there are many other options locally to sate that hunger.
Why does the University feel the need to waste the tuition money paid by myself and my fellow students as well as the taxes paid by the residents of Michigan as a whole on empty dreams of glory that are both unlikely as well as completely empty. Even if EMU had the best football team in all of collegiate sports and they could hold their own even against a professional team, that would in no way increase the value of the education I received or increase my chances for future success in my career unless that career was attending a school that feels bad sports are more important that good education.
Site Dad mentioned “don;t buy your bowl tickets just yet” and I agree – then I read a story about because there are sooo many bowls and so few teams will get 6 wins this year that EMU, should it get the needed 7 wins (they need 7 this year because they played two small schools) or better might be an option … and they could be a “feel good” story this year. Other MAC schools might get bids too …
The issue — sans the Pizza Bowl (Detroit) the other bowls with MAC tie-in are in Idaha (eek) and Las Vegas (I think) so lets hope for somplace closer and warmer!
Here is the link with a pic of Coach E — http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1283694
Well just for the here and now, it would be awsome if EMU actually made it to a bowl game.
Boy, that just seems so unlikely to me. How many MAC teams went to bowl games last year?
Yeah its unlikely but its crazy to think they could possibly be in the conversation if they win a few more games. Other MAC teams have made frequent bowl appearances. EMU never goes bowling, and never has a chance.
I believe there were three-conference tie-ins last year so there could have been three in Bowls (assuming all had the required wins) — finding MAC Bowl records is not as easy as you might think.
MAC went 2-2 last bowl season
playing were: Miami,NIU,Ohio,Toledo (harder to find who won)
I attended the game and was happy to see the Eagles play tough and hold on for the win. Much better than some of the recent homecoming efforts.
That said, in the immortal words of Lee Corso, “not so fast my friend.”
Before we all get drunk on the Rynearson Koolaid, I believe EMU would have to go 8-4 to be eligible for a bowl game. They need six wins against Division 1 teams to be eligible, if I’m not mistaken. Thus, the Howard and Alabama State wins don’t count toward bowl eligibility.
I think we can put to rest the notion of a few knucklehead regents that a winning football team draws big crowds and boosts enrollment. Zip, zero, nada on both counts. On a perfect day for football and Michigan with a bye week, EMU could only draw 6,672 fans. Not a real great showing.
I’m anxious to hear the next excuse from that goofy marketing director. Weather, come on. Michigan draws 110,000 in the rain and cold.
Lack of coverage in the papers. Really?
As positive as the AnnArbor.com’s Sunday write-up was, elements of it smacked of a ref’s makeup call for throwing a penalty flag because someone got their knickers in a knot about the “true” EMU football attendance article earlier in the week.
Very interesting.
It’s much too early for this football program to see a difference in attendance. With how bad this team has been for so many years, its gonna take sustained success over a few years to see attendance go up exponentially. Also Michigan’s attendance is so high because they are so steeped in tradition and winning over so many decades that any comparison is unfair to emu. They don’t belong in the same discussion. Let’s wait and see how enrollment and attendance at games are affected after emu has strung a few winning seasons together first.
How many years, mark, should we wait for EMU football to string a “few winning seasons together” and maybe get a big rise in attendance? How many tens of millions is this gamble worth, in your estimation? If the goal is to increase enrollment, perhaps directly investing in what students come to EMU for will yield better pay offs.
Given the local market for sports, I’d wager a great deal that NOTHING will produce “exponential” increases in game attendance for EMU football that last even 3 seasons. The market is satiated with such high quality football of a storied program, there’s little interest in a and has little potential to grow, and no investor would put his own money on such an enterprise. But the investors in EMU football are NOT spending their money, just students’ money. Is that sustainable? For how long?
EMU likely won’t string winning seasons together, and you’re right, financially its not sustainable under the current financial situation. Investing in athletics is certainly not worth sacrificing on the academics of this institution. The gentleman i was commenting on was looking for too much too soon as far as attendance and enrollment is concerned when they havent really won anything yet and no one should compare EMU and U of M football programs like he did because there is no comparison.
I’m kind of torn because I would love to see EMU build a successful football program. I really dont care about their market share and the rest of that. I understand building programs in todays college football landscape takes a lot of money, but i dont want to see EMU’s academic quality suffer for. If i had to pick I’d rather see them invest in academics and grow the university off of that instead of football. But for now im just enjoying the winning and im happy for the players.
A school can count one win against I-AA competition towards bowl eligibility. So 7-5 is the record to watch for.
yes – they need seven wins to qualify
and yes, EMU is not a likely candidate for any bowl (sans an automatic bowl) even with a great record, but as the story I linked to mentions, there may be a “fill the empty slots” round-robin at the end of the season and EMU might get in ..
having said that – bowl games are not the end-all for college football (to me) because a.) there are soo many b.) most are unwatchable c.) getting six wins in a 12 game schedule is hardly and accomplishment (before they added the 12th game it was a bigger deal) and D.) EMU would likely break even if they have to travel to New Mexico
But 8-4 would be a fantastic season – bowl game or not
A MAC title is the ultimate goal.
Annarbor.com has a great article today about EMU 3-year student, Leah Shutes who is $60,000 in debt. Somehow I think Lisa would prefer that the millions the Board of Regents are spending on athletics were funneled to lowering tuition or at the least, handing out scholarships for needy students. I also doubt that Lisa knows that a percentage of her tuition is spent on athletics, and I’d bet most students at EMU don’t know that a portion of their tuition debt is because of athletics. Maybe we need to let them know.
Oh I know how much of my money is going to athletics and I am not happy about it at all. The problem is, the people that make the decision about how to spend my money really do not care whether those decisions are in my favor or not. The EMU powers really want to pretend they are running UofM or MSU or Notre Dame or pick your classic sports powerhouse. When playing “Sim University” from the top of Welch, winning athletics records look so much cooler than winning academics. You can’t have a good fight song to bio-medical research and a future anthropologist doesn’t look as good on a billboard (unless played by Emily Deschanel of course) as a losing coach or a green-and-white uniform.
Regarding bowl possibilities: Right now EMU seems very likely to end the season at 7-5 or 8-4. With 35 bowls needing 70 teams, current projections are that about 68-70 teams will reach bowl-eligibility, meaning that EVERY bowl-eligible school gets an invitation somewhere (and it’s p0ssible that a few ineligible schools will be granted waivers from the NCAA). Most of the current projections are showing 7 or 8 bowl-eligible schools from the MAC, with 6-8 getting bowl bids.
Well, we’ll see how this works out. I guess I have two thoughts on the Emus bowling:
* I am not against college sports in general or EMU football in particular, really truly. My only issue here is that at what expense is this happening at EMU in particular and at universities like EMU around the country in general? Given the current economics, spending a bunch of money on football right now is sort of like a family budget where you spend all your food money on candy and ice cream.
* Just for the heck of it, let’s just say this all works out: EMU runs the table and ends up 9-3 and they get into a bowl game of some sort. Much praise and happiness from all around about the money well-spent, Ron English, etc. Yea team!
Now, one of the reasons given as to why it makes sense to spend all this money on sports is because it will lead to an increase in enrollment. Well, suppose after our winning ways, after all that money toward football and other sports, suppose that doesn’t happen and enrollment remains more or less flat. What does that then mean about the importance of football?
Speaking of throwing away money with little-to-no return on investment, any word(s) on:
A. How much was the total cost EMU paid for dependent verification?
B. How many unauthorized/illegal/whatever-adjective-you-want dependents were found?
I do wish the EMU football players well and it looks like they can possibly pull out a winning record and minor bowl game if 7 is the magic number for wins. But the flip side of any success is Coach English may be hunting for greener pastures. A winning football season at EMU is far and few between, so it’s not a stretch to think the fax machine at the Convo Center might be on overdrive after hours once the season’s over.
Then EMU has to start all over and “embrace another process.” And probably pay $350,000 to $400,000 for a new coach and lay off more people to make the “books” work.
If EMU goes to a bowl, that’s be exciting in many ways. Especially for the hand full of EMU football fans who hang in year after year, as real fans; and also for the fair weather fans who’ll enjoy a good season and the bowl trip.
How much will a bowl trip cost EMU? More than it earns in revenue, I’d wager. I think the coach gets a bonus payment if his team goes to a bowl. Plus, a chartered plane, probably, and hotel rooms a plenty. These are real expenses. The fame to EMU that would result from going to a football bowl is….hard to calculate, as it’d be so fleeting and relevant mostly to the football audience, which doesn’t much overlap with the audiences most relevant to EMU’s future.
My prediction: if EMU goes to a bowl game, it’ll cost a lot, and the equivalent sum in actual direct recruitment/admissions would demonstrably produce more revenue and students than the bowl game’s pay off will.
Heard the rumor that EMU’s current budget shortfall is due to the rip that appeared a few weeks ago in the indoor practice field’s “bubble”? That’s going around, lots of folks seem to take it seriously, but I don’t believe it.
@Mark Higbee
That is the problem with minor bowls – teams cant say no to them because of the status but rewarding a 6-6 team with a trip is only a reward in the minds of those who make the decisions …
its more expensive than a traditional “away” game because of the extended stay, and hangers-on that travel (and sometimes the band) …
the best scenario remains the Pizza Bowl in Ford Field — less expenses all around and who knows, we might get a decent turnout at the game. Usually when there is a Mich MAC school playing metro detroit turns out … Can we all say Pizza, Pizza
There’s one important aspect of getting a bowl invitation that benefits the team going forward. NCAA rules allows bowl-bound teams an additional 15 practices between the end of the regular season (or conference championship) and the bowl game. In addition to the obvious preparation for the bowl game, coaches usually use these practices to give back-ups, particularly those that may be moving into starting roles for the next year, extra time and attention.
(Don’t take this to mean that I like bowls — I hate the current system and would love to see the bowl system scrapped.)
Cmadler,
Thanks for the info on the extra practices permitted teams going to a bowl. I didn’t realize that. Of course, it’s arguably a way to further subordinate the “student” side of the student-athlete role to the needs of the team’s managers, and therefore it is probably not an overall advantage to those players who will have no career in athletics after their college playing days are done (students need to concentrate on finals!). I think that 99% of the college players are bound for lives without careers in athletics, so that future needs some attention. The Ivy League conference rejects the 12 game schedule for just that reason, and at those schools, student-athletes do make realistic plans for their futures. And, don’t worry Cmadler: No careful reader would take your informative comments to be an endorsement of the bowl system as it stands.
It’s clear that, by and large, the NCAA and member institutions (Ivies and a few others excepted) only give lip-service to the concept of the student-athlete in Division I football and basketball. It’s a convenient excuse to maintain the fiction of amateurism, but when you consider the expansion to the 12-game season, conference championship games, the expansion of bowl games, and the growth in weeknight games (this week, for example, MAC football teams will play on Tuesday night, Wednesday night, and Thursday night, entirely in the interest of television contracts), it’s clear that they’re athletes six days a week and student-athletes on payday.
If EMU football makes it to a bowl game this year — a bowl far from home — the university will pay for the costs, upwards of a half million dollars, by firing staff and cutting student services even more. EMU officials won’t openly say that that’s their plan, but it is and they’ll do it without attributing the cuts to the costs of a bowl game in a sport EMU cannot afford any longer.
I find it interesting that this thread has continued for so long debating the importance of college football at EMU. While it is obvious that the Eagles have not had a successful football team, they have had a successful athletic department from the mid-major level in other sports. While the football team is only starting to produce a winning formula, other sports count on football to help in fundraising. It is widely known that football (whether losing or not) is the most important sport with regards to fundraising. It is the premier sport that supports everything else.
Overall I believe that a fair number of athletes realize that they will not be going pro in their respective sport. So what? I am sure most of those athletes realize that they need to concentrate on their academic life also, but don’t you realize that many of these athletes play the game for their love the their sport. And with the current job market, concentrating on your academics does not guarantee you will be able to use that education in the marketplace if you can’t get a job! Let people use sports as a way to get away from the problems we have for just a minute.
Mark,
Your statement about the Ivy League schools only playing a 11 game schedule is misrepresenting the reason why they do so. Ivy League schools play at the FCS level of Division 1. The scheduling for FCS is different as FCS plays a playoff-system to award the national championship. They are only allowed an 11 game schedule as they play the regular season and then up to four games if the team wins the national championship.
“It is a premier sport that supports everythign else.” You are confusing the top 10-12 programs in the country with the rest. EMU football DOES NOT support all other sports by way of fundraising. They do not cover their own expenses, let alone all the other sports.
While it’s true that only about the top 8-22 schools (varying from year to year) have revenue-positive athletics departments in which football and men’s basketball are able to cover the entire cost not only of themselves but of all other sports, there are probably about 50-70 football programs and 40-60 men’s basketball programs that are revenue-positive, covering all their own costs plus part of the costs of other sports.
A revenue-positive athletic department at EMU is a pipe dream, but revenue-positive football and men’s basketball are possible.
Mark,
My momma always said that two plus two does not equal five. I think your “bubble rip” comment to explain the EMU shortfall that you say you’ve heard may very well be right on the button.
When local news reports first came out, CFO Lumm said there was a $1.7 million shortfall due to enrollment projections down .07 of a percent (and not raising tuition high enough like other state universities) and that the shortfall could go higher.
Then the 49ers used the bubble to practice when it visited for its game against the Lions. The high winds ripped the bubble during that time.
There was an article about the rip in AnnArbor.com.
http://ww.annarbor.com/sports/eastern-michigan-indoor-practice-facility-pops-with-san-francisco-49ers-inside/
Curiously, EMU did not report any such incident on its athletic website.
Then, another news report comes out a few days after that incident that the budget shortfall is now $4.6 million. Lumm trots out some hooey that the financial portfolio’s investment income was down.
http://annarbor.com/news/emus-budget-shortfall-expands-to-46-million/
No university counts their portfolio/endowment as part of the annual budget. That’s absurd. But, of course, this is a university that I’ve been told by doesn’t count revenues as part of its budget, either. Equally absurd.
Do the math. $4.6 million minus $1.7 million equals $2.9 million, the original cost of the bubble minus the parking lot and landscaping (which made the total cost $3.9 million).
So, it sounds like the bubble rip is not something you can sew back like a Sunday sweater. My guess is they’re going to replace the whole damn thing — and lay off more folks to accomplish it.
Concerned faculty and staff may want to drive by Rynearson and observe whether there’s any late-night activity reminiscent of the Baltimore Colts loading up the Mayflower trucks in the middle of the night.
The top brass knows if they mention the bubble as one of the shortfall reasons, they would be skinned alive and fed to the campus squirrels. And rightly so.
Elementary, my dear Watson.
Speaking of absurd, Huron Hal’s suggestion that the cost to repair the bubble is the same as “the original cost of the bubble minus the parking lot and landscaping ” is exactly that. Don’t forgot that the original cost included the foundation, the entrance building, doors, playing surface, etc. It’s like suggesting that it costs the same amount to replace your roof as to build a whole new house.
1. The 15 extra days for practice for a bowl game is a myth. There are no prescribed limits but coaches usually conduct 15 or fewer practice sessions anyway.
2. The bubble has been an unqualified success with it more than paying for itself while bringing many groups to campus. We should have built 2 of them!
3. The bubble is under warranty and the tear cost EMU nothing to repair. I didn’t see anything on the website about the leaky faucet in Pray-Harrold, so why would you expect a story on the athletic website about a tear that was repaired?
Really? More than paid for itself? The last report that was put out stated “they really didn’t know how much it has made because they are still figuring out operating expenses.” It will pay for itself, but we are far from that point.