TV revenue for baseball wouldn't even come close to breaking even on the sport. Look at women's basketball, we (or anybody else) don't even come close to breaking even and that includes UConn which is on every week on ESPN.
Keeler: Baseball's revival at Iowa State 'not realistic'
- Thread starter jr4cy
- Start date
TV revenue for baseball wouldn't even come close to breaking even on the sport. Look at women's basketball, we (or anybody else) don't even come close to breaking even and that includes UConn which is on every week on ESPN.
Not since the 70s, when the NFL jumped ahead of MLB in popularity thanks to television.
Through May 31 of this year, 20 of the 30 MLB teams are averaging less than 75% of stadium capacity. 14 are under 60%. 8 are under 50%. 14 teams have had 10+ games with under 50% attendance.
There are even 8 MLS teams that are outdrawing the Florida Marlins.
In 1982 (earliest the NCAA has data), nine years after ISU's last title, there were 59 teams in D-1. When ISU dropped the program after 1994, there were only 33 teams left in D-1. In that offseason, the number went down to 29. Now, there are 16.
Men's gymnastics Coach Gagnier stuck around as an Athletic Department spokesman. Not certain when he retired.
I remember Cap Timm and the baseball team. I can't recall where the baseball diamond was located. That's how irrelevant baseball was at ISU. It was a tough slog through the mud in the Big8. It's even tougher to play in the Big 12 with the Southern teams. Same is true for softball, track and soccer, any outdoor spring sport.
We have to field a bunch of teams. Pollard has ISU concentrating on basketball, football, wrestling, volleyball, gymnastics, cc track and possibly a couple more. That's all he can do when going up against the rich schools like UT and A&M and the sports rich schools at OU and OSU.
Right next to the old Delta Chi house, at the intersection of Sheldon and Knapp.
Well, ISU's average attendance is around 4,000. So someone cares even if its not you. I highly doubt baseball could match that over time.
Exactly. No college sports program outside of football or mens basketball turns a profit at any school. Even if there was some sort of Big 12 TV deal that we could use with baseball, it would still be a money pit.
Also, for those of you suggesting we could fix up our current field or even play at Ames High, I hope you have noticed the other posts here about schools spending 20-30 Mil on new baseball facilities. We can't even come up with money like that to fix up Jack Trice. I hear all the time on here that to really be competitive in football, we need major facilities upgrades to help with recruiting and increased fan support. You tell me how we are going to recruit against anybody when they have new $30M stadiums and we are sharing a field with a high school.
Take a look at a lot of college games on TV and a lot of them are playing in stadiums that look almost as nice as Principal Park. We couldn't even hope to be anywhere near that.
what I meant by the Ames High remark was, it has a reasonable amount of seating for our team. Also, as long as the dugouts are respectableand the field nice, I don't think people will care too much about it. The cold could also be a home-field advantage.
Best answer yet. If it swims on it's own. I'm fine with it and will root for it and follow (from afar). If not, we don't need it. Baseball WAS america's pastime. Has already been replaced by football, in terms of viewership/game attendance numbers, and I fear that soccer will have a strong future.
An athletic department is a business. Bringing back baseball is not a good business decision. Who the flip cares about it being a past time.... I want a successfully ran athletic department.
Not even close....
The last few seasons, the baseball team was average 300-400 attendance per game... over 15-20 home games.... That is pathetic. Anyone thinking it's a good investment minus a hypothetical big 12 network tv situation is stupid.
"....You could count the midweek crowds at old Cap Timm Field on two hands."
Excellent point MustangCy!
Plain and simple - in the 2009-2010 academic year, the athletic department made $215,540. This profit included $2 million in direct institutional support, so you take that money out and we lost money. We are in no shape financially to be adding another sport.
USA TODAY database: What NCAA schools spend on athletics - USATODAY.com
USA TODAY database: What NCAA schools spend on athletics - USATODAY.com
A "bigger picture" analysis is what is needed here.
According to page 36 of the linked report, FBS baseball expenses average about $1,147,000/yr (does not include up-front costs).
http://www.ncaapublications.com/DownloadPublication.aspx?download=REV_EXP_2010.pdf
How much additional revenue would ISU make per year as part of a conference sports network (Big 9, Big 5, whatever it may be)? UT is making $15,000,000/yr by themselves with the Longhorn network. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that the other Big 12 schools could pull in $2,000,000/yr/school (or more) if some or all of them joined together to form a network.
Baseball is the primary spring TV draw. How much would baseball enhance ISU attractiveness to be part of a Big ___ sports network? Or asked another way, how much does not having baseball hurt ISU's chances of being considered to particiapte in such a network? How much would having baseball add to the contract value?
All these questioned answered together should determine if baseball is brought back at ISU.
Zero.
If you're going to shut schools out because they don't offer sports, then you can eliminate:
Baylor - gymnastics, swimming, wrestling
Kansas - gymnastics, men's swimming, wrestling, men's tennis
Kansas State - soccer, softball, swimming, wrestling, gymnastics, men's tennis
Missouri - men's tennis
Oklahoma - swimming
Oklahoma State - volleyball, swimming, gymnastics
Texas A&M - wrestling, gymnastics
Texas Tech - swimming, wrestling, gymnastics
And just like that, there are no schools left.
Why do so many posters here bring up Title IX when it had nothing to do with killing baseball at ISU. BVD, the AD who killed baseball at ISU, said the one and only reason was finances. Had there been a lot more booster support, maybe things would have been different. Besides, if baseball were to revived, there would not be any Title IX issues as there are that many more athletic schollies offered in women's sports than men's.I can't see JP spending the money necessary to revive baseball, as, number one, a new indoor stadium (not the Bergstrom facility) needs to be built. Back when baseball was played, home games from season's start to mid-April were played on a field rented from a small college in southern Missouri. Is it any wonder why there was so little following for baseball at ISU when slightly over half the "home games" were played about 600 miles south of here. I just don't see JP allowing that to happen again if baseball was revived. Thus the ISU Athletic Dept. would have find a way to justify to the BOR and finance a new indoor stadium for baseball. The weather during late winter and early spring in central Iowa is just too volatile and cold for an outdoor stadium. ISU simply could not attract the kind of talent needed to field a competitive team in, arguably, the best baseball conference in the nation with an outdoor stadium. Face it, the teams ISU fielded at the end of baseball years were just plain bad. The end really came when the NCAA switched baseball from a summer sport to a late winter and spring sport; a season that heavily favors the southern teams. The few successful northern teams notwithstanding, all the traditional baseball powers in DI baseball mostly lie south of the Mason-Dixon line. To revive baseball at ISU would require an expenditure of money from the people involved who probably would not be willing to pay, assuming the BOR approves any plans to build a new baseball stadium in the first place. Those are some big obstacles to overcome for a sport that had so little following.
No, because if Title IX was never put in place, We wouldn't have had to spend loads of money on some women's sport that would suck more money than baseball,(or hockey, for that matter) so our athletic department would have had a surplus of money to spend on other men's sports that may not do as well as football or basketball, but at least draw more people than a women's swim meet.
A couple of problems with your argument. One is that the sports in your list do not all have equal TV appeal and value for the TV contract. Do you think that come spring time, men's tennis would have the same TV interest and audience as baseball?
A second problem is that wrestling, gymnastics, and swimming are winter sports, and MBB/WBB are the primary TV draws during the winter. Also, since there is limited participation amongst the schools in wrestling (4), women's gymnastics (3), and swimming (3 men's and 5 women's), would there be significant viewer interest across the network viewing area in these sports? I don't see not having these three sports as a significant detriment from a TV standpoint. Given the Oklahoma schools wrestle, there might be some broader interest for wrestling.
As an example, we might look at what is broadcast on the Big Ten Network. I am assuming they have a decent idea of what appeals to their network viewers. The Big Ten has 7 women's gymnastics teams, and the BTN network this past year broadcast 5 gymnastics meets plus the Big Ten championships. In contrast, The Big Ten network broadcast 30 baseball games, and streamed another 50 on their website. From what I could find, the only men's tennis broadcast on BTN was the championship matches. The BTN did broadcast 15 wrestling matches, but nearly all of the Big Ten schools wrestle, so there would be widespread interest for that sport across the BTN viewing area.
The bottom line is that some sports just aren't that big of a deal as far as the TV network is concerned. If the sports you have aren't on TV or being streamed, then the network doesn't profit from them, and they add no value to the network.
The BTN olympic sports schedule can be found here
Big Ten Events On TV - Big Ten Network
Big Ten Network 2011 College Baseball Schedule | College Baseball 360
From the TV network standpoint, I see three problems for the Big 9:
ISU not having baseball - missing the primary men's spring TV draw
KSU not having softball and soccer - missing the primary women's spring draw and a women's fall draw (I'm not sure whether soccer or VB is the bigger women's fall draw. Going by what was broadcast on BTN last season, it would appear to be VB, as 19 VB matches were broadcast compared to 9 soccer matches).
OSU not having volleyball - missing a women's fall draw.
Last edited:
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
jbh--I think that your argument is sound about the biggest spring draw, and I think it's possible that TV money could even cover the annual operating costs.
The big concern that I would have is this: Where does the startup money come from? How do we get a stadium built for baseball on our budget?
The big concern that I would have is this: Where does the startup money come from? How do we get a stadium built for baseball on our budget?
I think it's ironic you post this - I think women's swim meets outdrew baseball in attendance...
