Another Top 25 Football Facilities List

[Madsol]

Impossible. If you read this board we can't possibly have any of these things. We can't raise any money, never improve anything, and it doesn't really matter that Joe didn't give an F about anything regarding the program including recruiting or facilities improvements for 10+ years as long as he could stand on the sideline. We don't have to tear s*** down. We just needed someone to kick the program in the a** and get it into the 21st Century with the rest of college football.

Wow, then even at 84 years old, Paterno was an amazing recruiter. To hear you tell it, by the time he left in 2011, the facilities were a decrepit, embarrassing mess. Yet, he managed to attract a top 10 recruiting class before the Sandusky scandal hit, even with those decrepit, embarrassing facilities. Man must have been doing something right.

 

[ram2020]

I love these discussions. So what does the university get for it’s investment in upgraded facilities? Are they leveraging a higher academic ranking? Is the value of a PSU degree increased? What is the non-sports / academic return on such investment? Or is this endless arms race “...a hole in which we pour money” and more money and more money etc etc etc wash rinse and repeat.

This board has had lively discussions about the endless rise in the cost of higher ed.

Look, i've mentioned this and many others, do you want to have a championship football team or not? What cost are you willing to spend, what cost is the University willing to spend? Are 10 or 11 win seasons "good enough" for the group that doesn't want to overspend on coaches and facilities? They better be. Now, for the group that says, it's about winning at all cost, 10 or 11 win seasons are not going to appease this group. Nothing wrong with either viewpoint, I think we know what category Franklin is in. Does or will a top 10, top 5, coach stick around if the school is willing to pay to merely be a top 30 in salaries and facilities? Will the top 50 recruits want to play at a place that does or doesnt break the bank for their comfort? Remember, dear old state means far more to us than a 5 star high school QB looking to maximize his 3 years at a chosen school. He might see things like a lack of 1st round NFL drafted QB's or breathtaking facilities. Is he right, is that what he should be concerned with? Who can say? I think the football program is at a tipping point. We are either going to be elite and throw every possible resource at that aim or we are okay being a really good academic school that plays hard nosed football and wins 9-11 games a year. I think either direction is justifiable, but a direction has to be made by the university and all that support it. And for those that say you can have your cake and eat it too, show me. I'll eat crow when Stanford wins a national championship. I'll eat crow when some program that graduates its players, players that go to class, recruits fairly without incentive, and a school totally committed to the intended notion of "student-athletes" wins a national championship. You are going to have to go back quite a few years to find a school that fits the bill.

 

[Art]

Wow, then even at 84 years old, Paterno was an amazing recruiter. To hear you tell it, by the time he left in 2011, the facilities were a decrepit, embarrassing mess. Yet, he managed to attract a top 10 recruiting class before the Sandusky scandal hit, even with those decrepit, embarrassing facilities. Man must have been doing something right.

Along the same lines, Saban and Swinney were making the playoffs and/or winning titles before their schools gave them the toys. But the easy thing is to blame the dead guy.

 

[Art]

Look, i've mentioned this and many others, do you want to have a championship football team or not? How many money-losing sports and attendant support staff are you willing to cut? Are 10 or 11 win seasons "good enough" for the group that doesn't want to overspend on coaches and facilities? They better be. Now, for the group that says, it's about winning at all cost, 10 or 11 win seasons are not going to appease this group. Nothing wrong with either viewpoint, I think we know what category Franklin is in. Does or will a top 10, top 5, coach stick around if the school is willing to pay to merely be a top 30 in salaries and facilities? Will the top 50 recruits want to play at a place that does or doesnt break the bank for their comfort? Remember, dear old state means far more to us than a 5 star high school QB looking to maximize his 3 years at a chosen school. He might see things like a lack of 1st round NFL drafted QB's or breathtaking facilities. Is he right, is that what he should be concerned with? Who can say? I think the football program is at a tipping point. We are either going to be elite and throw every possible resource at that aim or we are okay being a really good academic school that plays hard nosed football and wins 9-11 games a year. I think either direction is justifiable, but a direction has to be made by the university and all that support it. And for those that say you can have your cake and eat it too, show me. I'll eat crow when Stanford wins a national championship. I'll eat crow when some program that graduates its players, players that go to class, recruits fairly without incentive, and school totally committed to the intended notion of "student-athletes" wins a national championship. You are going to have to go back quite a few years to find a school that fits the bill.

Fixed it for ya'.

 

[Art]

A) If they were being SUPPORTED, they wouldn't be "biggest money losing sports".

B) Dumping a couple of the "minor" sports (at least those generally regarded as minor) doesn't amount to a whole hell of a lot in terms of $$$$ saved.

Aside from Ladies' basketball, none of them spend a hell of a lot.
Women's Hoops carries a net loss of somewhere around $5,000,000 per year..... the others (everything except Men's Hoops and Football) average about $500,000 per year in losses.

As of the last year PSU ICA reported:

Football:
+$41,440,610 "profit"
Men's Hoops:
+$5,314,858 "profit"

Women's Hoops:
-$3,812,028 "loss"

All other Sports... I think there are 28 of them (combined):
-$15,211,664 "loss"


Women's Hoops expenditures are 2-3 times as high as expenditures for the other Ladies sports programs..... and the program generates zero revenue, for all intents and purposes.
Any talk of controlling costs through eliminating sports - that doesn't start with Women's Hoops - is just silly... FWIW.

You could eliminate EVERY Men's sport aside from Football and Hoops..... and in TOTAL you wouldn't save as much money as you would by simply dumping the Ladies' Hoops program.


And if you were REALLY serious about running a fiscally sound ICA at PSU.... you wouldn't start with the "sports" at all - - - - you'd start with the "overhead".

Cutting women's basketball is a non-starter. Too much visibility and the magnitude of its loss is a major contributor to Title IX compliance. I'd start with sports in which the Big Ten doesn't sponsor competition (e.g.men's volleyball) or in which not all schools field teams (baseball).

And if PSU "were REALLY serious about running a fiscally sound ICA" Barbour would not be the AD. There is a reason that she is and it has nothing to do with her gender.

 

[Kiber]

Who is going to have that "hard talk?" Barbour going to talk to herself in the mirror? You see where the problem lies.

Which sports make money for Penn State? Football is obvious. I'm guessing wrestling makes money now. Men's BB would probably make money simply because I believe the B1G does revenue sharing for Men's BB. Outside of football, wrestling and men's BB do any of the other sports actually produce profits?

 

[Kiber]

Cutting women's basketball is a non-starter. Too much visibility and the magnitude of its loss is a major contributor to Title IX compliance. I'd start with sports in which the Big Ten doesn't sponsor competition (e.g.men's volleyball) or in which not all schools field teams (baseball).

And if PSU "were REALLY serious about running a fiscally sound ICA" Barbour would not be the AD. There is a reason that she is and it has nothing to do with her gender.

Agree. Do not see how Penn State (or any school) could drop a sport if the B1G sponsored competition in that sport. Problem is that women's BB as a whole is a money loser.

 

[Art]

Agree. Do not see how Penn State (or any school) could drop a sport if the B1G sponsored competition in that sport. Problem is that women's BB as a whole is a money loser.

Why not? Not all schools participate in every sport. Have a feeling, though, that the conference would object more strenuously to a school (not necessarily PSU) dropping some sports as opposed to others.

 

[PennState_one]

Franklin killing it without even having top notch facilities. Just imagine what he'd do with them.

 

[Kiber]

Why not? Not all schools participate in every sport. Have a feeling, though, that the conference would object more strenuously to a school (not necessarily PSU) dropping some sports as opposed to others.

Maybe a better way I could have put it was "visibility". Women's BB is probably the most "visible" of all women's sports. I do not see any school eliminating the most visible sport available to women.

 

[Kiber]

Why would you think he "doesn't have top-notch facilities"?

Agree. We have "excellent" facilities. Maybe not as new, as shiny, or with as many "bells & whistles" as some other programs. But when you boil it down to producing a good football team, Franklin has everything he needs from the football perspective. Two grass field outdoor fields, a synthetic grass outdoor field, a full indoor field (many indoor fields are 50 yards)....... No, they do not have a wiffle ball field, a putt-putt course, a laser arcade, a sliding board.... but I do not think those things are really essential for winning football games ..... or else every NFL team would be installing them at their facilities. But the last time I looked, NFL teams also do not have wiffle ball fields, slides and putt-putt courses. I really do not see Tom Brady or Drew Brees taking extra time to try and putt a fluorescent golf ball thru a windmill and out a clowns mouth.

 

[danvillenit]

Agree. We have "excellent" facilities. Maybe not as new, as shiny, or with as many "bells & whistles" as some other programs. But when you boil it down to producing a good football team, Franklin has everything he needs from the football perspective. Two grass field outdoor fields, a synthetic grass outdoor field, a full indoor field (many indoor fields are 50 yards)....... No, they do not have a wiffle ball field, a putt-putt course, a laser arcade, a sliding board.... but I do not think those things are really essential for winning football games ..... or else every NFL team would be installing them at their facilities. But the last time I looked, NFL teams also do not have wiffle ball fields, slides and putt-putt courses. I really do not see Tom Brady or Drew Brees taking extra time to try and putt a fluorescent golf ball thru a windmill and out a clowns mouth.

NFL teams aren’t recruiting unpaid 18 year olds. True , grown men making multimillions don’t care about games but apparently some hs players do

 

[MJG-90]

3) Ice Hockey (but only because PSU counts distributions from the Pegula Endowment as revenue)

How does PSU handle that accounting? The scholarship is funded by the endowment which "pays" the school tuition, room and board for the scholarship player? So it's equal revenue and expense to the athletic department?

 

[rigi11]

So is there ever going to be a time when PSU has the "hard talk" with the non-revenue producing sports and tells them they are cutting the programs? If Penn State is supporting on average 7-15 money losing sports, and this is causing them to have a hard time meeting budget, then it makes simple sense to cut them out. I'm sure Title 9 prohibits cutting of a women's sport if the same (or similar??) men's sport is not also cut. For example, there is no Men's Field Hockey, so if they cut Women's Field Hockey, I'm sure an equivalent men's sport would also face the ax........... But anyhow, not getting into specific sports/teams. An obvious position to take IMO, would be to get down to 17-18 ICA sports like some of these other schools.

Cut two at a time. Title9 Problem solved.

 

[rigi11]

Clemson is generally regarded as having one of the best football facilities in the country. If not *the* best (it has a f*cking slide yo! and a whiffle ball field!). So, I did a quick Google search to find out how they pay for it. The best I could find is from 2017-18, but this has basically been their business model since 2006 (with varying degrees of success - for example, in 2009 Clemson generated $31.9mm in revenue; in 2017, they generated $53.9mm). And they're on a roll....

Article from Greenville Online: https://www.greenvilleonline.com/st...-clemson-football-revenue-million/1736799001/

Clemson Football Revenue 2017-18

Ticket Sales: $24,856,086

Bowl Revenues: $2,891,254

Contributions: $5,220,176

In-Kind Car Leases: $42,828

Institutional Support: $1,551,104

Program Sales, concessions, novelty sales, parking: $1,268,336

Royalties, advertisements and sponsorships: $750,000

Endowment and Investment: $20,103

Sport camps: $919,005

ACC Distribution: $16,346,384

TOTAL: $53,865,276

Some highlights from the article I found:

Clemson athletic director Dan Radakovich is often asked where all that money comes from. He frequently prefaces his response by explaining where it does not come from.

The Clemson athletic department is an official division of the university. However, financially, it operates without assistance from the university. The funds used for scholarships, coaches’ salaries and stadium upgrades come from a different collection plate than the funds used for professor salaries, research and dorm upgrades.

The program alone generates more money than three quarters of all 230 NCAA Division I public schools included in a database of college athletic revenues compiled by USA TODAY Sports.

That equips Clemson to reinvest into the football program with competitive salaries, comprehensive student wellness programs and immaculate facilities. It also equips Clemson to provide those same resources to nonrevenue sports on campus. Football revenue also helps Clemson operate in the black without any money from the school or the state.

So, it begs the question - what is Penn State doing wrong? OR, what is Clemson not telling us?

EDIT: Here is where Penn State is at in 2018:

Penn State's football program generated more than $100 million in revenue in fiscal 2018, the last year for which figures are available.

That's about a 32 percent revenue increase from 2014, when James Franklin was hired to coach the Nittany Lions. Revenues exceeded costs, in ’18, by more than $50 million.

That $50 million essentially funds Penn State’s athletic department, which prides itself on being financially self-sustaining.

Sounds like PSU alumni are the problem. PSU alumni falling behind.

 

[Nitt1300]

It’s interesting that in earlier days what used to sell a kid and a parent on a school was a visit to their living room, a firm handshake and a heartfelt commitment that their child would get a 4 yr degree. The proof was in wins and losses and an elevated grad rate.

How did we get here? Why did we get here?

too many uber rich "fans" donating too much money and making high school kids who can play the center of the universe

our values are upside down

 

[scartiger]

Clemson is generally regarded as having one of the best football facilities in the country. If not *the* best (it has a f*cking slide yo! and a whiffle ball field!). So, I did a quick Google search to find out how they pay for it. The best I could find is from 2017-18, but this has basically been their business model since 2006 (with varying degrees of success - for example, in 2009 Clemson generated $31.9mm in revenue; in 2017, they generated $53.9mm). And they're on a roll....

Article from Greenville Online: https://www.greenvilleonline.com/st...-clemson-football-revenue-million/1736799001/

Clemson Football Revenue 2017-18

Ticket Sales: $24,856,086

Bowl Revenues: $2,891,254

Contributions: $5,220,176

In-Kind Car Leases: $42,828

Institutional Support: $1,551,104

Program Sales, concessions, novelty sales, parking: $1,268,336

Royalties, advertisements and sponsorships: $750,000

Endowment and Investment: $20,103

Sport camps: $919,005

ACC Distribution: $16,346,384

TOTAL: $53,865,276

Some highlights from the article I found:

Clemson athletic director Dan Radakovich is often asked where all that money comes from. He frequently prefaces his response by explaining where it does not come from.

The Clemson athletic department is an official division of the university. However, financially, it operates without assistance from the university. The funds used for scholarships, coaches’ salaries and stadium upgrades come from a different collection plate than the funds used for professor salaries, research and dorm upgrades.

The program alone generates more money than three quarters of all 230 NCAA Division I public schools included in a database of college athletic revenues compiled by USA TODAY Sports.

That equips Clemson to reinvest into the football program with competitive salaries, comprehensive student wellness programs and immaculate facilities. It also equips Clemson to provide those same resources to nonrevenue sports on campus. Football revenue also helps Clemson operate in the black without any money from the school or the state.

So, it begs the question - what is Penn State doing wrong? OR, what is Clemson not telling us?

EDIT: Here is where Penn State is at in 2018:

Penn State's football program generated more than $100 million in revenue in fiscal 2018, the last year for which figures are available.

That's about a 32 percent revenue increase from 2014, when James Franklin was hired to coach the Nittany Lions. Revenues exceeded costs, in ’18, by more than $50 million.

That $50 million essentially funds Penn State’s athletic department, which prides itself on being financially self-sustaining.

Iptay which has been around for a long time is the Athletic department way of raising money.

https://www.greenvilleonline.com/st...y-heres-what-donors-get-in-return/1526245001/

Second largest in giving this year

http://www.iptaycuad.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=211809934&DB_OEM_ID=28510

 

[Art]

How does PSU handle that accounting? The scholarship is funded by the endowment which "pays" the school tuition, room and board for the scholarship player? So it's equal revenue and expense to the athletic department?

More or less. Believe that Pegula also underwrote all or part of coaching salaries and cost to operate and maintain the arena. Women's hockey program, IIRC, loses money.

 

[Art]

It’s a comment that is often made. Is it a valid reason to invest precious/limited resources to attract the 0.1% of student athletes who want to play at the pro level? I’m not being argumentative. I think it’s misguided.

A program that generates a surplus justifies its own existence.

Certain Ivy League schools conduct regular reviews of their athletic programs. Each sport comes up for an in-depth review every 2-5 years. The AD's charge is to justify their continuing existence. And, no, I can't recall the last time a school discontinued a sport as part of this process. That's because they've justified the costs and they haven't gotten out of control.

 

[Art]

I was thinking about this on the way home...maybe the problem isn’t the shortage of money but the poor allocation of existing funds? And I’m not saying get rid of title IV and or non revenue sports.

Absolutely. You can easily imagine the situation that has caused Coach Franklin to go public, albeit to not an excessive degree, with his gripes over facilities and lack of money for AC salaries.

 

[psuro]

Clearly Sandy's got this.

I can't wait for the add-on to Lasch that will include, for starters, an amusement park and shopping mall, complete with an IMAX multiplex movie theater and food court.

ARMS. RACE.

Bet they get a Sbarros

 

[BobPSU92]

Bet they get a Sbarros

 

[N&B4PSU]

Impossible. If you read this board we can't possibly have any of these things. We can't raise any money, never improve anything, and it doesn't really matter that Joe didn't give an F about anything regarding the program including recruiting or facilities improvements for 10+ years as long as he could stand on the sideline. We don't have to tear s*** down. We just needed someone to kick the program in the a** and get it into the 21st Century with the rest of college football.

Pretty sad. There are so many successful templates out there that fixing this mess should be a snap.

If it isn't, then who/m/ever is responsible has to go. Yesterday.

I don't know dick about any of this but i've seen enough in my lifetime to know that if you give me $35M I'll get you a showplace. $70M? Seriously?

WTF is going on up there?

 

[Art]

Pretty sad. There are so many successful templates out there that fixing this mess should be a snap.

If it isn't, then who/m/ever is responsible has to go. Yesterday.

I don't know dick about any of this but i've seen enough in my lifetime to know that if you give me $35M I'll get you a showplace. $70M? Seriously?

WTF is going on up there?

This is not that hard to figure out. We've heard Coach Franklin's public comments about facilities (with which I don't happen to agree, but that's another discussion) and money for assistant coaches salaries. What series of events do you think preceded these and who else was involved?

 

[ram2020]

I am perfectly happy with 10 and 11 win seasons. College football is the most corrupt sport and we all know it. It is all about the appearance of fairness but it’s not fair. Name another sport that says they are so unique that a normal playoff format is simply impossible? That they must have a “special” committee select who gets to play? It’s a rigged game for fools but we willingly pony up piles of treasure thinking we can win a rigged contest.

What is the end game? At what limit do you, we, me say this is ridiculous and counter productive to the business of educating? Isn’t this like the preverbal “wall of cereal” in a dining hall? Or organic free range meats prepared by trained chefs (referring to Gladwell’s podcast on higher ed).

Ned, totally, it is completely beyond the pale. Players taking steroids and receiving cash for performance, coaches making 6,7,8 million dollars a year. Big donors lining the pockets of the Athletic departments and Directors. The problem is that it is not changing, it is not going back in time, there is no getting the toothpaste back in the tube considering the money at stake. Truthfully, I think it's time for 2 segments of college football. One group can call it whatever they want, but pay the players and just make it a mini-NFL. Schools can run it like a for profit business if they want and do whatever the hell they want with the revenues. Pay your coach 15 million for all I care, players are adults, they don't have to go to class or fain the student athlete BS anymore. Sure, they will leave without their degrees, but it's not my problem.Basically, this model is in place at the majority of the elite schools today. The other segment of schools adheres to a strict and monitored system of graduating players, no pay for student athletes, reasonable salaries and a portion of the football revenues are mandated to go back to the institution for new buildings on campus and educational development. You fall below certain metrics, you are kicked out, you can go join the other conference if you want. The problem as I see it for Penn State right now, is that the football program is sort of straddling the line. We want to be "elite" and compete with all of those programs, but not at the detriment of graduation rates and our reputation as a good academic university. My contention is that if Penn State pulls this off, and that is nearly impossible as they are at such a disadvantage over true football factories, it will be a singular moment of greatness. You can't win the big one without the best coaching, the best recruiting, the most football committed and supported University and an athletic department willing to whatever it takes.

 

[Cpeplion]

They approved a design team. Hope it's not the same design team they used for the Beaver Stadium additions that do not match each other or the space pod mausoleum with horrible sight lines called the BJC. ........ If the design teams for any of those projects submits a bid, it should instantly be tossed in the toilet.

The builder that built the BJC went belly up...just fyi and hahahaha

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Ned, totally, it is completely beyond the pale. Players taking steroids and receiving cash for performance, coaches making 6,7,8 million dollars a year. Big donors lining the pockets of the Athletic departments and Directors. The problem is that it is not changing, it is not going back in time, there is no getting the toothpaste back in the tube considering the money at stake. Truthfully, I think it's time for 2 segments of college football. One group can call it whatever they want, but pay the players and just make it a mini-NFL. Schools can run it like a for profit business if they want and do whatever the hell they want with the revenues. Pay your coach 15 million for all I care, players are adults, they don't have to go to class or fain the student athlete BS anymore. Sure, they will leave without their degrees, but it's not my problem.Basically, this model is in place at the majority of the elite schools today. The other segment of schools adheres to a strict and monitored system of graduating players, no pay for student athletes, reasonable salaries and a portion of the football revenues are mandated to go back to the institution for new buildings on campus and educational development. You fall below certain metrics, you are kicked out, you can go join the other conference if you want. The problem as I see it for Penn State right now, is that the football program is sort of straddling the line. We want to be "elite" and compete with all of those programs, but not at the detriment of graduation rates and our reputation as a good academic university. My contention is that if Penn State pulls this off, and that is nearly impossible as they are at such a disadvantage over true football factories, it will be a singular moment of greatness. You can't win the big one without the best coaching, the best recruiting, the most football committed and supported University and an athletic department willing to whatever it takes.

Some good ideas and comments. I'll add the football program is not in any way a financial detriment to the university; but the university, and other athletic programs, is to it. That's not to say there isn't any value in having successful non-revenue sports - the question is, how important are they at the expense of football?

 

[Art]

The builder that built the BJC went belly up...just fyi and hahahaha

Yes, the original GC for the BJC, Lott, went bankrupt before the building was finished. But the architectural firm that designed it, Rosser International, is still in business, hahahahahaha.

 

[Art]

Where's the picture of JoePa?

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Teams that have made the College Football Playoff who are on this list (facility ranking):

Clemson (1) x 4 appearances, 2 NC
Oregon (2) x 1 appearance
Ohio State (4) x 3 appearances, 1 NC
Alabama (6) x 5 appearances, 2 NC
LSU (7) x 1 appearance, 1 NC
Oklahoma (8) x 4 appearances
Notre Dame (14) x 1 appearance
Washington (17) x 1 appearance
Georgia (18) x 1 appearance

Unranked:

Florida State x 1 appearance
Michigan State x 1 appearance

 

[ram2020]

Some good ideas and comments. I'll add the football program is not in any way a financial detriment to the university; but the university, and other athletic programs, is to it. That's not to say there isn't any value in having successful non-revenue sports - the question is, how important are they at the expense of football?

Also a good point, but goes back to my original thesis yesterday. What is the University, it's alumni/supporter/boosters, and administrators willing to sacrifice to win the big enchilada? I mean sure, let's get rid of all sports with the exception of football and dump all the money into the program. Is that in the best interest of the University and it's supporters? I really don't know and I am not advocating for either direction, just that a direction of some sort has to be made. I don't think you can get by with a combination and be in a successful spot. You either:

A. Give football every possibly resource, pay whatever it takes, all Online classes for players, give out money to get top level recruits, win National Championships or fire everyone.
B. Release yourself unconditionally from this arms race and just enjoy a decent team that has coaching turnover every few years, outdated facilities, average-good recruiting. Pay your coach about 3 Million a year, knowing full well he will leave for a bigger job, etc. Basically, be a Cincinnati or a Boston College. 9-11 win seasons should be viewed as major accomplishments.
C. I guess some combination of the two resulting in a team that is really good(but not elite), might buy you another win or two, but your 40 points worse then a clemson or LSU on any given Saturday(basically where we are now). Old outdated facilities and stadium whereas money gets stuck to help these facets out, but "Hey, we are paying our coach $6 million a year!"

 

[ram2020]

Some good ideas and comments. I'll add the football program is not in any way a financial detriment to the university; but the university, and other athletic programs, is to it. That's not to say there isn't any value in having successful non-revenue sports - the question is, how important are they at the expense of football?

Also a good point, but goes back to my original thesis yesterday. What is the University, it's alumni/supporter/boosters, and administrators willing to sacrifice to win the big enchilada? I mean sure, let's get rid of all sports with the exception of football and dump all the money into the program. Is that in the best interest of the University and it's supporters? I really don't know and I am not advocating for either direction, just that a direction of some sort has to be made. I don't think you can get by with a combination and be in a championship spot. You either:

A. Give football every possibly resource, pay whatever it takes, all Online classes for players, give out money to get top level recruits, win National Championships or fire everyone.
B. Release yourself unconditionally from this arms race and just enjoy a decent team that has coaching turnover every few years, outdated facilities, average-good recruiting. Pay your coach about 3 Million a year, knowing full well he will leave for a bigger job, etc. Basically, be a Cincinnati or a Boston College. 9-11 win seasons should be viewed as major accomplishments.
C. I guess some combination of the two resulting in a team that is really good(but not elite), might buy you another win or two, but youre 40 points worse then a clemson or LSU on any given Saturday(basically where we are now). Old outdated facilities and stadium whereas money gets stuck to help these facets out, but "Hey, we are paying our coach $6 million a year!"

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Also a good point, but goes back to my original thesis yesterday. What is the University, it's alumni/supporter/boosters, and administrators willing to sacrifice to win the big enchilada? I mean sure, let's get rid of all sports with the exception of football and dump all the money into the program. Is that in the best interest of the University and it's supporters? I really don't know and I am not advocating for either direction, just that a direction of some sort has to be made. I don't think you can get by with a combination and be in a successful spot. You either:

A. Give football every possibly resource, pay whatever it takes, all Online classes for players, give out money to get top level recruits, win National Championships or fire everyone.
B. Release yourself unconditionally from this arms race and just enjoy a decent team that has coaching turnover every few years, outdated facilities, average-good recruiting. Pay your coach about 3 Million a year, knowing full well he will leave for a bigger job, etc. Basically, be a Cincinnati or a Boston College. 9-11 win seasons should be viewed as major accomplishments.
C. I guess some combination of the two resulting in a team that is really good(but not elite), might buy you another win or two, but your 40 points worse then a clemson or LSU on any given Saturday(basically where we are now). Old outdated facilities and stadium whereas money gets stuck to help these facets out, but "Hey, we are paying our coach $6 million a year!"

The reality is unless you're willing to compete with Clemson and Alabama, who are 'all the f*ck in' on football, schools like Penn State, Michigan, etc. who use sports not only as a vehicle for revenue but also for the qualities and experiences they can provide students, will maybe get a shot once every five years or so. Look at the schools getting into the arms race - traditionally average to poor programs looking to make it big - South Carolina, Kentucky, Illinois, Northwestern, Texas Tech, Oregon State....you get the idea. Penn State is rarely mentioned on these kinds of lists and it's one of the most profitable programs in the country.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

What "resources" and analysis do you think this Rocket-Surgeon (Brad Crawford) employed when compiling his list?

https://www.linkedin.com/in/bradcrawford


Gotta' remember the old Chicken-and-Egg thing.

If PSU just won the "Championship" last year, what are the odds that PSU (despite their obviously decrepit facilities ) would have appeared on his extensively researched list?
100%?

I mean, have to make the playoff to win a championship. Your point is well taken, noting South Carolina has won nothing at all ever and they are #5 on this list. My guess is he looked at what schools are spending, what recruit reaction to the facilities are, and made a subjective list. I don't see anything too wrong with that.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

If I had to guess, he - (or some other lackey) - more or less "GOOGLED" the most recent "College Athletics Complex Construction" hits.... and slapped together his lazy "gotta' beat a deadline" clickbait list.
Nothing (much) more. Nothing (much) less.



Amazingly:

I find it kinda' difficult to believe he toured all the athletic facilities of the D1 teams.....
Conducted a rational and informed analysis of such facilities....
And applied various metrics to try to quantify an inherently subjective issue.....
And then put his list together.

I imagine you would feel similar?

Maybe I'm wrong

Meh, it’s a subjective concept for the most part - I don't expect there to be any real way to determine 'best' football facilities. He could have said 'most hype with recruits' and that would have probably have been more accurate, noting a lot of these lists from various writers inevitably have the same schools on them.

 

[Art]

Teams that have made the College Football Playoff who are on this list (facility ranking):

Clemson (1) x 4 appearances, 2 NC
Oregon (2) x 1 appearance
Ohio State (4) x 3 appearances, 1 NC
Alabama (6) x 5 appearances, 2 NC
LSU (7) x 1 appearance, 1 NC
Oklahoma (8) x 4 appearances
Notre Dame (14) x 1 appearance
Washington (17) x 1 appearance
Georgia (18) x 1 appearance

Unranked:

Florida State x 1 appearance
Michigan State x 1 appearance

Ya think there might be other factors going on at those schools that contribute to them making the playoffs besides lavish facilities? I mean there are sixteen on the facilities list that haven't made the playoff. And BTW, Saban and Swinney got there before their schools gave them the newest toys.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Ya think there might be other factors going on at those schools that contribute to them making the playoffs besides lavish facilities? I mean there are sixteen on the facilities list that haven't made the playoff. And BTW, Saban and Swinney got there before their schools gave them the newest toys.

True, and a lot of those are with 'new' or 'soon to be new' facilities. Some of these teams are never going to compete for a playoff for sure. But, facilities as a 'recruiting concept' has changed in the past few years or so. Used to be nice couches and lots of video game consoles meant everything; whole different ballgame now.

 

[Art]

True, and a lot of those are with 'new' or 'soon to be new' facilities. Some of these teams are never going to compete for a playoff for sure. But, facilities as a 'recruiting concept' has changed in the past few years or so. Used to be nice couches and lots of video game consoles meant everything; whole different ballgame now.

Not so sure about that. Yeah, we hear recruits wax lyrical about the electronic ping-pong tables at this school or sleeping pods with adjustable sleeping angles and automatic climate control. But I think we hear about those things because they're easy to talk about. I think there are a lot of other factors that rank ahead of facilities when a prospect contemplates a decision, with winning championships and track record for NFL development at the top of the list. Given where I think facilities rank, I don't think that schools are at a disadvantage unless theirs flat out stink.

Again, maybe a recruit tells a coach that he's chosen another school because their facilities are better. Probably a lot easier than saying that the other coach is a hell of a lot better than you are.

 

[Kiber]

The builder that built the BJC went belly up...just fyi and hahahaha

The GC typically just builds what the blue-prints call for them to build. Some of the larger constructions companies also have architectural & design services. But the majority of times the architectural firm designing the building and the GC actually doing the construction, are separate. ..... The A&E should have gone bankrupt and if they are not bankrupt they should never be allowed in State College ever again.

 

[PennState_one]

Why would you think he "doesn't have top-notch facilities"?

Lol because he's not on "the list"....

Not saying they don't have nice facilities. I'm just impressed he is doing what he is doing.