Photo Illustration by Joseph Vasquez and Juan Villa / The Collegian
FOOTBALL PROGRAMS GET a lot of flack, and Bulldog football is no exception.
Critics argue that most athletic departments spend a disproportionate percentage of its budget on football.
Even worse, with the possible exception of nationally-recognized merchandising powerhouses, athletic departments lose money unless their teams go to bowl games. When the team does go to a bowl game, the proceeds carry the department into the black.
A collegiate athletic department deficit — if any — is usually due to football spending.
This is true.
Some armchair critics even go a step farther, arguing that the money spent on sports in general — football particularly — would be better spent on academics.
That is not true.
Football programs exist to aid the university in exposure, to make it a household name.
Without exposure, without headlines, a school can̢۪t be a name school, a school with prestige. Without some amount of prestige, there̢۪s no impressing the best and brightest from both locally and elsewhere to flock to the university.
In case you hadn̢۪t figured that out, getting the best and brightest to come around is pretty bloody important for a university.
Bright students are the ones who grow up to be smart businessmen and entrepreneurs. They̢۪re the alumni who, late in life, decide to give the university multi-million dollar endowments and name a building after themselves.
You know, for fun. They̢۪re rich like that.
Even the best and brightest who aren’t interested in football are still interested in a school with a name — the quickest way to a name is through exposure.
The most cost-effective way to get exposure? Headlines.
As you’ve probably figured, there’s one cost-effective way to get headlines not dependent on our faculty’s hypothetical and sudden turn to brilliance — a cure for cancer, proof of the missing link — and it’s the tried and true way: a football team.
Fresno State̢۪s athletic department has many critics and arguably even more faults, but no critic says that Fresno State football hasn̢۪t had its share of headlines.
Whether the Sept. 2001 Sports Illustrated cover story or the even just the program’s landmark sharp decline last season – Fresno State makes headlines.
With football, unlike our Title IX scandals, good and bad exposure are more or less the same.
College football teams get better, and then they get worse. Then they get better again.
People understand this, and so when a bad year rolls around, fans bide their time and future students are attracted by our legacy.
San Jose State — our supposed rival of however many years — is a case in point. They’ve been a joke long enough that any success is a headline-making miracle. And now the team seems to be coming back from its obsolescence, making way for even more headlines along the way.
Each dollar spent on a football program is an investment for the good of the university. Every last cent they spend is all meant to promote Fresno State̢۪s good name.
What doesn̢۪t help is that we̢۪re not the most prestigious college. The one real claim to fame you hear broadcast all over the place is that we have the only on-campus commercial winery in the country. I guess that̢۪s cool for all you enology majors out there.
Not really a big draw for the rest of us.
What Fresno State has is a football team. Despite all Fresno State̢۪s pretension towards academic prestige and President John D. Welty̢۪s emphasis on volunteerism, whatever that is, we need the football team to get into the national spotlight.
When Fresno State scheduled a game with USC, the gall of it all made headlines. When Fresno State did well enough that it looked like they̢۪d give USC a hard time of it, the team made headlines.
Weeks before that game, whole full-page spreads were devoted to what seemed to either the game or the massacre of the season on both teams̢۪ schedules.
The game hit, and for what must have seemed like several minutes in the fourth quarter, Fresno State was winning. Fresno State made headlines.
The game was an instant classic on ESPN, though USC won the game — barely. Personally, I think we lost to Paul Pinegar and future dropout Reggie Bush.
Did we lose?
Bush made his successful Heisman bid on the Fresno State game. Every time someone mentions his career, there will be an emphasis on that game.
The Bulldogs scored more points in the Coliseum than any opposing team in recent memory. Headlines, and exposure.
Think of the possibilities with a single television contract.
With that broadcast, how many people saw the albeit low-budget Fresno commercial that touted the on-campus commercial winery? Exposure.
How many people were impressed by our how well our non-BCS team did against the former national champion, better than most PAC-10 rivals that season? Headlines.
Despite the bowl loss to a team with a giant Frosty for a mascot — more headlines — that season was a good investment.
Last season was perhaps not as much of a good investment. Then again, having the worst record in a decade still makes headlines.
The football team exists for those headlines and exposure, good or bad.
In that, Bulldog football has rarely disappointed.
Raking the Leaves • Sep 29, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Yeah, why not America’s game? Why such a brutal sport? I played baseball. Its serenity and graces always enriched my life and lives of the fans.
Go Bulldogs!
Raking the Leaves • Sep 29, 2007 at 11:56 pm
Yeah, why not America’s game? Why such a brutal sport? I played baseball. Its serenity and graces always enriched my life and lives of the fans.
Go Bulldogs!
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 18, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Employers in technical fields are never impressed by just a degree. Employers are more impressed by practical experience, which Fresno State students have in spades.
We’ll never beat CalTech at desirability, though — but less because it has old-school prestige and more because it also forces its students into internships and the like.
Way I hear it, our engineering types are preferred by a whole lot of employers over people from schools ranked higher than us in funding. Why? Our students have to work through school, and end up working in their fields of interest.
If you need the prestige, you’re probably looking into graduate education. By all means go to an Ivy League school for graduate study.
That’s not really what we do here.
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 19, 2007 at 3:10 am
Employers in technical fields are never impressed by just a degree. Employers are more impressed by practical experience, which Fresno State students have in spades.
We’ll never beat CalTech at desirability, though — but less because it has old-school prestige and more because it also forces its students into internships and the like.
Way I hear it, our engineering types are preferred by a whole lot of employers over people from schools ranked higher than us in funding. Why? Our students have to work through school, and end up working in their fields of interest.
If you need the prestige, you’re probably looking into graduate education. By all means go to an Ivy League school for graduate study.
That’s not really what we do here.
Well • Sep 18, 2007 at 1:51 pm
Well I agree that the professors might not spend much time or teach the students at those IV League schools, but I doubt any of us could deny the amount of doors that would never open without the prestige of attending a school like Harvard.
I mean come on, as far as the working future is concerned for students, there are plenty of reasons to want to go to a prestigious academic school regardless of what anyone actually learns there.
And because it’s so hard to actually get into these schools, the students are at a much different level and require a different teaching approach.
I’m not putting down fresno state. It’s never going to be in the league of other prestigious universities, but we could at least try to focus on academics and being a school where employers are impressed by the degree.
Well • Sep 18, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Well I agree that the professors might not spend much time or teach the students at those IV League schools, but I doubt any of us could deny the amount of doors that would never open without the prestige of attending a school like Harvard.
I mean come on, as far as the working future is concerned for students, there are plenty of reasons to want to go to a prestigious academic school regardless of what anyone actually learns there.
And because it’s so hard to actually get into these schools, the students are at a much different level and require a different teaching approach.
I’m not putting down fresno state. It’s never going to be in the league of other prestigious universities, but we could at least try to focus on academics and being a school where employers are impressed by the degree.
Davis Carr • Sep 18, 2007 at 5:43 pm
I’ll have to back Ben on that point. The “elite” institutions are overrated for that very fact. For my (and the majority of fellow CSU students’) money, the value of our system must be underscored.
Cornell: $21,000 annual tuition, TA taught classes, inaccessible profs
CSU: $1800 annual tuition, full and associate profs teaching pre-req courses, fully accessible profs who have mandated office hours to speak with students.
Why would anyone leave Cali?
Davis Carr • Sep 18, 2007 at 10:43 am
I’ll have to back Ben on that point. The “elite” institutions are overrated for that very fact. For my (and the majority of fellow CSU students’) money, the value of our system must be underscored.
Cornell: $21,000 annual tuition, TA taught classes, inaccessible profs
CSU: $1800 annual tuition, full and associate profs teaching pre-req courses, fully accessible profs who have mandated office hours to speak with students.
Why would anyone leave Cali?
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 18, 2007 at 9:08 am
In response to Dylan:
MIT, Harvard, Princeton and Stanford have been around for how long? That’s prestige right there for professors and students both.
Yet how much time do professors there spend with undergraduates? And how many of those schools are public?
They don’t even compare to Fresno State academically until you count their graduate programs, if only because graduate students and T.A.s teach most undergraduate classes.
Anyway, those schools are much more likely to hire someone for the quality and renown of their published work than the quality and renown of their teaching.
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 18, 2007 at 4:08 pm
In response to Dylan:
MIT, Harvard, Princeton and Stanford have been around for how long? That’s prestige right there for professors and students both.
Yet how much time do professors there spend with undergraduates? And how many of those schools are public?
They don’t even compare to Fresno State academically until you count their graduate programs, if only because graduate students and T.A.s teach most undergraduate classes.
Anyway, those schools are much more likely to hire someone for the quality and renown of their published work than the quality and renown of their teaching.
Davis Carr • Sep 17, 2007 at 11:38 am
Read Jeff Robert’s take on all this over investment on football and basketball in the Sunday edition of the Fresno Bee’s sport section. Continuing the arms race is pointless.
Davis Carr • Sep 17, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Read Jeff Robert’s take on all this over investment on football and basketball in the Sunday edition of the Fresno Bee’s sport section. Continuing the arms race is pointless.
Jones • Sep 14, 2007 at 4:26 pm
Great article. And in response to ‘skeptical’ yes. I think it is perfectly ok for a school to be know for its athletics program. Having a great athletics program doesn’t in any way mean that out academics are failing. With the money that comes in from a good season, promotions, and the increase in students and simply applications we could have enough money to increase the level of our academics.
Remember also that spending a lot of money on new books and teaching resources won’t always make students work harder, or want to even. In some cases it can just prove to be a distraction to students AND teachers.
Jones • Sep 14, 2007 at 11:26 pm
Great article. And in response to ‘skeptical’ yes. I think it is perfectly ok for a school to be know for its athletics program. Having a great athletics program doesn’t in any way mean that out academics are failing. With the money that comes in from a good season, promotions, and the increase in students and simply applications we could have enough money to increase the level of our academics.
Remember also that spending a lot of money on new books and teaching resources won’t always make students work harder, or want to even. In some cases it can just prove to be a distraction to students AND teachers.
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 14, 2007 at 9:46 am
Check out the response here.
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 14, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Check out the response here.
Dylan • Sep 13, 2007 at 3:20 pm
You need football to make your school a household name. Try a few of these schools on and tell me if they’re household. Harvard , Princeton, Stanford, MIT…. All known for their academics and generally ripped apart in athletic competitions. Building a schools name purely on academics ensures greater amounts of consistent federal funding then revenue from bowl games. Lets try and make sure the school continues to get funding to keep faculty here and get fresh blood in and maybe discourage the multi-million dollar paychecks we award to coaches.
Dylan • Sep 13, 2007 at 10:20 pm
You need football to make your school a household name. Try a few of these schools on and tell me if they’re household. Harvard , Princeton, Stanford, MIT…. All known for their academics and generally ripped apart in athletic competitions. Building a schools name purely on academics ensures greater amounts of consistent federal funding then revenue from bowl games. Lets try and make sure the school continues to get funding to keep faculty here and get fresh blood in and maybe discourage the multi-million dollar paychecks we award to coaches.
Jim • Sep 13, 2007 at 8:37 am
Well I personally it is just getting the name Fresno State out there. Most people dont even know where Fresno is. They just know Fresno State has a football team that they have heard about. Many people I have met from back east, that is all they know that Fresno State football team.
Jim • Sep 13, 2007 at 3:37 pm
Well I personally it is just getting the name Fresno State out there. Most people dont even know where Fresno is. They just know Fresno State has a football team that they have heard about. Many people I have met from back east, that is all they know that Fresno State football team.
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 12, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Great post. Further response on Friday.
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 12, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Great post. Further response on Friday.
skeptical • Sep 12, 2007 at 1:01 pm
But there is no actual evidence that such enthusiasm in the football team really benefits the university as an academic institution. We got here with this tradition already in place and have no idea what shape we’d be in without it.
It can be assumed that good football can lead to good other things, but I think you’re naive to say the purpose of the football team is to give the school a good name.
I really don’t know the mathematics of it (here’s a good idea for a collegian story), but my guess is that most of the revenue from football games, after paying salaries (doesn’t Pat Hill make about $500,000 a year?) and scholarships, goes to paying for the stadium’s construction.
The editors should have someone dig up those documents and get back to us on where and why the money goes. Local private businesses probably make a killing off of the team, too, but what do we get out of it? Headlines? No thanks. This university’s enrollment is not a problem.
The argument about rich successful people being drawn to Fresno State because of football headlines and later donating is a stretch. Sure, millions of dollars here and there is great, but the brunt of funds comes from regular taxpayers, who should want the school to focus on education, which benefits them more than 6 or 7 home games per year.
The principle of the matter is whether football should be the thing the school is known for. Should that be what the focus is on?
What makes headlines, on something besides the sports page, is when professors go on strike. Why should the best professors want to stay when it seems the university (and much of the student body) is more concerned with sports?
And who in their right mind is going to send their little miracle genius student to Fresno State (because they’re impressed by the football team!) when they could go to a prestigious undergraduate program somewhere else?
As a parent, why would I want my money to go to a campus seemingly focused on sports and then send my kids elsewhere?
The idea that a good football team will bring more prestige to the university is one I’d like to believe. But it seems unlikely that the current method will make a positive impact on anything other than the football program.
skeptical • Sep 12, 2007 at 8:01 pm
But there is no actual evidence that such enthusiasm in the football team really benefits the university as an academic institution. We got here with this tradition already in place and have no idea what shape we’d be in without it.
It can be assumed that good football can lead to good other things, but I think you’re naive to say the purpose of the football team is to give the school a good name.
I really don’t know the mathematics of it (here’s a good idea for a collegian story), but my guess is that most of the revenue from football games, after paying salaries (doesn’t Pat Hill make about $500,000 a year?) and scholarships, goes to paying for the stadium’s construction.
The editors should have someone dig up those documents and get back to us on where and why the money goes. Local private businesses probably make a killing off of the team, too, but what do we get out of it? Headlines? No thanks. This university’s enrollment is not a problem.
The argument about rich successful people being drawn to Fresno State because of football headlines and later donating is a stretch. Sure, millions of dollars here and there is great, but the brunt of funds comes from regular taxpayers, who should want the school to focus on education, which benefits them more than 6 or 7 home games per year.
The principle of the matter is whether football should be the thing the school is known for. Should that be what the focus is on?
What makes headlines, on something besides the sports page, is when professors go on strike. Why should the best professors want to stay when it seems the university (and much of the student body) is more concerned with sports?
And who in their right mind is going to send their little miracle genius student to Fresno State (because they’re impressed by the football team!) when they could go to a prestigious undergraduate program somewhere else?
As a parent, why would I want my money to go to a campus seemingly focused on sports and then send my kids elsewhere?
The idea that a good football team will bring more prestige to the university is one I’d like to believe. But it seems unlikely that the current method will make a positive impact on anything other than the football program.
Blumpkin Flynt • Sep 12, 2007 at 12:02 pm
If the western states ever have the opportunity to form a second regional BCS conference—-I’d fully expect Fresno State to be right along side Hawaii, BYU, Boise, and Colorado State. Then again, when was our last WAC title?
Blumpkin Flynt • Sep 12, 2007 at 7:02 pm
If the western states ever have the opportunity to form a second regional BCS conference—-I’d fully expect Fresno State to be right along side Hawaii, BYU, Boise, and Colorado State. Then again, when was our last WAC title?
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 12, 2007 at 11:01 am
Being affiliated with a conference helps us snag a bit of the spotlight, there.
A fledgling conference like the WAC is in and out of attention all the time, so whenever Boise crashes the BCS bowls, or whenever Hawaii makes a run at a PAC-10 team, we still feel the effects — there’s sure to be a side bit that mentions Fresno State, or David Carr.
I’m not sure what New Mexico State’s football program does for us, though.
Benjamin Baxter • Sep 12, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Being affiliated with a conference helps us snag a bit of the spotlight, there.
A fledgling conference like the WAC is in and out of attention all the time, so whenever Boise crashes the BCS bowls, or whenever Hawaii makes a run at a PAC-10 team, we still feel the effects — there’s sure to be a side bit that mentions Fresno State, or David Carr.
I’m not sure what New Mexico State’s football program does for us, though.
Carl Jeutestein • Sep 12, 2007 at 10:30 am
good analysis. Football builds the school name. Just think about the kind of national ‘spect we’d have if we pulled off that win over Oklahoma this past Jan. Even if we were simply just part of a big game like that.
Carl Jeutestein • Sep 12, 2007 at 5:30 pm
good analysis. Football builds the school name. Just think about the kind of national ‘spect we’d have if we pulled off that win over Oklahoma this past Jan. Even if we were simply just part of a big game like that.