BYU fan questions institution's commitment to big time--but what about them?

I was reading an interesting discussion on another message board about some of the schools who are big time like in the SEC or Notre Dame and where the money for the program comes from. One comment often heard is "the church has money, they should dump a bunch of it into the football program so they can be successful". But these big time football schools don't do it that way. They have a big time commitment from fans and boosters.



An example provided was Auburn. This is the description of how you buy tickets:

You must first contribute the Athletic fund then for that donation which is steep you get the privilege of buying two season books[season tickets for one seat].



At Auburn your donation for the books depends on the area where you are seated. End Zones and Upper Deck from the 20's to the goal line all start with an $800 donation followed by two season books which at Auburn will run you ~ $550 per book with the mandatory $20 bucks delivery fee per ticket included in the price I just gave you. For sideline seats from the 20 to the goal line or for seats in the upper deck from the 20's to the 50 think $1200 in donations and then the $550 per book. For seats from the 20's to 50's at field level you are looking at $2000 plus the ticket. For the orange theater seats underneath the overhang of the upper deck it's a half scholarship to full scholarship and the luxury boxes are $100,000 per unit and up depending upon amenities and the number of seats in the suites.



Alabama, L.S.U., Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Texas A&M are all very similar.

If you do quick math, that means an end zone seat will run you somewhere around $1,900 for 2 season tickets--with the limit on how many seats that gets you. At BYU you can buy as many tickets as are available in your desired section, and get a pair of cheapest end zone season tickets for $240 without a Cougar Club donation (though this increases selection priority).



And fans often complain about how much their tickets cost for the results on the field--debating whether or not to give their seats up until the product on the field improves. Let's face it. Fans around here are not "big time" like SEC or ND fans just like the program is not "big time" like those schools. If it was, I imagine it would be out of many of our price range for a pair of tickets let alone bringing the 8 kids for an afternoon game.



It would be awesome to see this great home schedule do well. Michigan State in September, Utah State on Conference weekend, Missouri and Houston in October, Halloween free to spend with family, then a San Diego State revenge game in November followed by a "bring the whole family since tickets will be available cheap" event in North Alabama just before Thanksgiving.

This is a bad argument, because 1. There's no guarantee that extra money is going to go to a bigger/better coach. With all the political crap surrounding Sitake's hire and rehire and the restrictions on the coach being a temple-recommend-holder, chances seem pretty good that extra money is either going to pad the pockets of someone undeserving of more or just be wasted on dumb stuff like fireworks or practice facilities that BYU won't let the athletes use. And 2. how much money do the fans need to shell out in order to get someone who can tip the needle for our significant recruiting disadvantages? I am guessing it's a lot, and I'm guessing you're going to have a hard time finding fans willing to put that type of money in even if it did make a difference.

I'd buy the argument that BYU could get better coaches with more money in most situations, but given all the other garbage surrounding the hiring of coaches and the stuff they're actually able to do with the hand BYU deals them, I'm not sure extra money is going to be enough by itself.

And just to clarify, I realize that these same issues exist even if the money comes from the church instead. So my argument is less whether to put it on the fans' shoulders or not, and more skepticism that money is the major issue we're facing. It's mostly due to inept management and competing priorities between us and the Board of Trustees.

I've said it before and I will say it again. BYU can't even recruit the same type of guys that led us to the NC in 84 or a 14-1 record in 96. Most of those guys wouldn't qualify because of the honor code, or more importantly, academics. We have lost so many recruits to other schools because of our academic requirements that it isn't even funny. I am not a fan of Sitake's coaching but BYU is going to have a hard time competing at the level they want until they relax some of the academic standards and put them back to where they were before the 2004 scandals. More money into the program will help but not as much as changing some of the requirements we have academically.

BYU doesn’t want big money donors who want to give money with a say on where it’s spent. I thought they also close coaches circle to new donations when they don’t want any more?



BYU either doesn’t want to win, or is extremely arrogant and thinks they can win without the effort, work, and money other programs use. They keep hiring coaches looking for on the job training.



Seems uncommitted and small time to me.

Auburn can charge that much because there is demand for their product. They put out a good, winning product.



BYU could do the same as Auburn if...if they put out a product like Auburn. They don't. We lose too much.



Fans complain about the cost of tickets because the cost doesn't match the "value" of the product. It isn't just a game. It's an experience and it's a season-long experience. It's being part of something amazing; a season long journey as your alma matter makes a run for a conference and national championship. The pride of your alma mater!



BYU offers a fraction of the journey and a poor in-game experience. No one wants to pay high dollars to watch their alma mater struggle to beat DII teams. If you're going to offer that as the experience, you better not be charging me top dollar.



It's the same phenomenon with movies these days. People go to the movie theaters to see huge blockbusters not dramas. The experience of seeing the movie on a big screen with theater sound adds to it and justifies the cost. Watching a drama or romantic comedy in the movie theater isn't worth the extra coin, so people wait till it's out on rental. It's why trilogies and multi-film sagas are doing better than single, stand alone films. It's a journey and people will pay top dollar to experience and be part of the journey.



BYU doesn't even know where it is going. What's the point? What are we playing for other than to play? Conference championship? Nope. National championship? Nope. There is very little on the table, and there is low demand for that type of experience. Holmoe has it all wrong. He's offering a romantic comedy but under the guise of the Avengers.



Auburn can charge what they want and get it because they offer an elite experience and deliver on it. BYU doesn't.

Baylor just raised ~$765 million last year by soliciting donations in a concerted direct mail and media campaign and by selling naming rights to various facilities and projects.



Two things BYU athletics will never do.

snoscythe wrote:

Baylor just raised ~$765 million last year by soliciting donations in a concerted direct mail and media campaign and by selling naming rights to various facilities and projects.



Two things BYU athletics will never do.

And Baylor fans happily paid three quarters of a billion dollars. Why? Because they believe in their school.

CougarCrazy wrote:



BYU either doesn’t want to win, or is extremely arrogant and thinks they can win without the effort, work, and money other programs use.

This and the academic standards are imo the main issues. This belief and refusal to change leads me to believe it really is 100% no longer about winning. If your not in it to win then shut the program down. God doesn't care about football and a losing football team isn't going to draw anyone's attention to any religion.

frdbtr wrote:

I've said it before and I will say it again. BYU can't even recruit the same type of guys that led us to the NC in 84 or a 14-1 record in 96. Most of those guys wouldn't qualify because of the honor code, or more importantly, academics. We have lost so many recruits to other schools because of our academic requirements that it isn't even funny. I am not a fan of Sitake's coaching but BYU is going to have a hard time competing at the level they want until they relax some of the academic standards and put them back to where they were before the 2004 scandals. More money into the program will help but not as much as changing some of the requirements we have academically.

I agree 100% with this.

byufan4ever wrote:

I've said it before and I will say it again. BYU can't even recruit the same type of guys that led us to the NC in 84 or a 14-1 record in 96. Most of those guys wouldn't qualify because of the honor code, or more importantly, academics. We have lost so many recruits to other schools because of our academic requirements that it isn't even funny. I am not a fan of Sitake's coaching but BYU is going to have a hard time competing at the level they want until they relax some of the academic standards and put them back to where they were before the 2004 scandals. More money into the program will help but not as much as changing some of the requirements we have academically.

I agree 100% with this.

I've seen many complaints about roadblocks on recruiting because of BYU's academic qualifications. What's the real story? What players are we missing on? Are there recruits that play for PAC 12 and other P5 schools that wouldn't qualify for BYU? Really?

YNot wrote:

frdbtr wrote:

I've said it before and I will say it again. BYU can't even recruit the same type of guys that led us to the NC in 84 or a 14-1 record in 96. Most of those guys wouldn't qualify because of the honor code, or more importantly, academics. We have lost so many recruits to other schools because of our academic requirements that it isn't even funny. I am not a fan of Sitake's coaching but BYU is going to have a hard time competing at the level they want until they relax some of the academic standards and put them back to where they were before the 2004 scandals. More money into the program will help but not as much as changing some of the requirements we have academically.

I agree 100% with this.

I've seen many complaints about roadblocks on recruiting because of BYU's academic qualifications. What's the real story? What players are we missing on? Are there recruits that play for PAC 12 and other P5 schools that wouldn't qualify for BYU? Really?

Yes. Our acedmic standards for athletes is higher than the NCAA minimum but not as high as Stanford (I edited this sentance as I originally said BYU was as tough as Stanford but that is not true). Most big time college football programs get away with getting student athletes in with waaay lower test scores than the average student needs to get in. Stanford is known for not lowering their bar nearly as much for athletes and BYU us much the same way and then you add in our HC.

The only requirement for special admission at OU is that the athlete meets what Gurney called “ridiculously low” NCAA initial academic eligibility standards: a 2.3 grade-point average in core courses and a corresponding SAT or ACT score on a sliding scale. For example, an athlete with a low entrance exam test score would need a higher core-course GPA to qualify.

https://apnews.com/a842ec11faa645b7adf5e75034e8bbf4

And BYU requires a 3.3 GPA (so entire 1.0 higher than the NCAA minimum) and a 19 ACT. So yes, they are being tougher. It can be something to take pride in like Stanford who supposedly doesn't lower their standards at all for student athletes. However, it definitely puts you at a disadvantage in sports recruiting.

Stanford is one of the hardest universities to attend even for football players. With a 4.7 percent acceptance rate, only the best students in the world attend the university. To get into Stanford, students need to excel in AP classes, the SAT, the ACT, their overall GPA, and their five required essays. For Stanford athletes and football players, student-athletes have the same academic expectations to be accepted. Every year, Stanford fans are disappointed by someone decommiting when there’s nothing Coach Shaw and his staff could have done to convince the recruit to stay because ultimately, the admissions team decides who plays football for Stanford. Ryan Bartow, a 247Sports national recruiting insider, tells recruits that with a 26 on the ACT they might have a chance at Stanford. Scoring a 26 is difficult enough for regular students, but imagine those trying to manage playing top high school football while studying for the ACT. A 26 lands athletes in the 83rd percentile range, much higher than the typical student. To go to Stanford, athletes can’t be just a typical student. They need to excel. If a recruit scores a 26, at least they have a chance to be accepted into Stanford.

https://www.vanquishthefoe.com/2014/3/24/5541954/byu-football-recruiting-a-3-0-gpa-rule-is-dumb



https://www.ruleoftree.com/2016/7/31/12329878/stanford-football-faces-extraordinary-recruiting-challenges

The absence of academic roadblocks and Honor Code at Oregon State didn't seem to help Kalani succeed there very much during his short tenure as an ineffective defensive coordinator.

Bronco had better recruiting classes and was under the same academic standards.

Why do people care if the academic standards are lowered? If there is any chance to potentially better the football program why not. What does it effect any of us? Again if it could help then why not? As for the Bronco his recruiting was on the downhill slide once BYU went independent.

2011 #69

2012 #71

2013 #66

2014 #64

2015 #65

Independence along with academics and the honor code are the perfect trifecta.

Recruiting fell off, yes, but it wasn't on a "slide". It dropped from 2010 to 2011 after independence and if anything was inching back up since his best two classes in independence were (by the numbers) the last two (but I think those are all close enough to be within a standard deviation of each other).



Kalani had an "initial enthusiam" bump in his first class, and since then has been worse than anything Bronco ever brought in. Kalani isn't recruiting under different academic standards or a different type of independence. If anything, changes to the Honor Code enforcement are taking some of it's teeth out, but really, all that changed between Bronco and Kalani has been the coaching staff and the product on the field.

If you were an LDS kid who had one or two football offers from Power 5 schools, and/or Boise State, why in the world would you even consider BYU? If you were a legacy, or had a long time connection to the school, maybe. But without those kids, or even 60-75% of the LDS kids who are Power 5 quality, there is simply no way we can be competitive at the highest level. While the money end of things would still be tough, had we stayed in the MWC with Boise, we would have had shots at multiple New Year's Day games, and with Boise as an ally, we could have gotten nearly the TV deal we currently have.



Independence was a reaction to Utah and TCU jumping. I thought it wise at the time, but looking back, I consider it a mistake. A fun mistake at times, but a mistake over the long haul.



Now we have the catch 22 of having a program caught in limbo. No Power 5 will touch us, independence is a slow ride into mediocrity, and going back to the MWC will be seen as BYU admitting failure (if the conference would even have us). Moreover, we hamstring ourselves with silly rules like the requirement of the Head Coach being an active member, and not investing in coaches at a Power 5 level.



Put it all together and the picture is bleak. Really, I see it as a choice: Either (1) admit that we have football simply because its fun and a part of college tradition, or (2) commit to institutional changes and spending designed to get us up a level. If its no.1, then quit trying to compare ourselves to Utah, embrace our unique position, and go back to a conference, regardless of which one it is (or even drop to FCS). It could still be fun and entertaining, without the consistent lies about national prominence. We could be the Boise State of the next decade, like they were the BYU of the last decade. If its no. 2, drop the LDS HC rule (coaches still have to commit to live the Honor Code and hold players to it), spend on coaches and facilities, and go for it.



Either way, trying to have it both ways is going to continue this decline.

Some people really really like the BYU environment. It provides a place to go to school and play football with fewer distractions. Some kids want and/or need that clean LDS environment where their rommates will be less likely to be parying all night and getting drunk. There have been some non-LDS athletes who have appreciated this atmosphere. I believe Jamaal Williams' mom pushed him real hard to come here specifically because of the environment. So while the HC can seem like a hinderance it can also be a recruiting tool (although whether the HC = good clean environment is another debate).



Yes, I think independence was definitely a reaction to Utah specifically jumping. I think it was the right move at the time. I think we came really close to getting into the Big 12. Now we are kind of in limbo.

cougarapologist wrote:

While the money end of things would still be tough, had we stayed in the MWC with Boise, we would have had shots at multiple New Year's Day games, and with Boise as an ally, we could have gotten nearly the TV deal we currently have

You're going to have to walk me though this. I cannot imagine either of these two things even being a remote possibility had BYU stayed in the MWC.



When exactly over the last 10 years would BYU have actually had the opportunity to go to "multiple" NY 6 bowl games? Seriously, which teams would have done that? The ones that lost to BSU?



Also, why in your mind is a NY6 bowl game anything special? and by "special" I mean "of lasting value" What, if anything, did Hawaii's NY6 bowl game give to that program? How about Memphis this year? They had their hats handed to them by Penn State in the Cotton Bowl, if BYU went to the Cotton Bowl this year does anybody doubt that Penn State would have handed our hats to us? Seriously? This is an honest question, what does being a little school in a big bowl game give to BYU? - A recruiting advantage? "hey come to our school, and we won't ever play Nebraska or Texas, or Michigan State in the regular season, but if we're lucky we might get to play them on New years day, and lose big"



Finally, what makes you think, that BYU could have gotten a TV deal close to what it has now by staying in the MWC? Do you realize even after BYU left the MWC the MWC was screwing things up so bad the BSU left? Do you realize that BSU had the conference telling them what color of uniform they could wear at home games? The MWC was pulling these shenanigans even after BYU left, had BYU NOT left, you actually believe that the MWC would have stopped being stupid of their own accord?



BSU has been the better school than BYU over the last 10 years and it comes down to having better coaching. Even with that, BYU's TV deal today is light years ahead of what BSU gets.



And look at Boise State this year. BSU had a dream football season with a spectacular win of Florida State on the road, and had one loss in a very close game to a bowl team, and still ended up in the Las Vegas Bowl, NOT an NY6 game. so when you say that leaving the MWC was a mistake, I cannot follow your logic path to that conclusion.