Hindsight...was Montana Wrong?

In the fall of 2010, Montana spurned an invitation from the WAC.  The main reason is because it was going to be too expensive to add football scholarships and to sponsor additional women's teams to comply with Title IX.  There was one glaring missing item to the analysis that was printed in the Billings Gazette afterwards.  How much would revenue increase and how much more money would the football program have to generate to cover the costs?  In other words, how much revenue can Montana expect to make in a jump to the FBS?

Let's compare Montana to their former rival, Idaho.  As you can see below, Idaho makes money in football, enough to make up for the losses in other sports.  And in 2010, there was only 1 "money game" at Nebraska.  They traveled to both Louisiana Tech and Hawaii.  They averaged just 12,000, finished with a 6-7 record and still made money in football.

Montana has a lot of advantages in athletics that Idaho does not.  Montana has a decent football stadium.  They have National Parks nearby.  They have an airport.  They have fans that come to their games from all over the Treasure State.  Where Idaho can't get a home and home with PAC-12 teams, Montana could.

Here is the bottom line, it would cost Montana an extra 4,000,000 to move up to the FBS, but their non-football sports would probably make back at least 1,800,000 of that on their own, leaving football to come up with the extra 2,200,000.  Keep in mind that moving the football program to the FBS raises the profile of the non football/basketball sports.  There would be more opportunities for the non-revenue programs to visit colleges where non-revenue program can make money.  For example, Utah's Women's Gymnastics program makes money.  The non revenue sports may make more than 45% of their costs if Montana becomes an FBS school

They could make up the difference in football with two concessions, one is a home and home with BYU, which I'm certain the independent Cougars would jump on, needing games to fill their schedule.  This is a guaranteed TV game.  I have no doubt that BYU would indeed pay a visit to Washington-Grizzly stadium.  Then another money games, like the Tennessee game of 2011, and there is more than enough money to cover it.  Also consider than in the FBS, there is more money for TV games.  There is a higher level of competition, so there is the opportunity to charge a slightly higher price for tickets.  Bottom line is if Idaho can make a significant profit in football, so can Montana.

But was Montana wrong to spurn the WAC?  No, it was not a mistake at all.  We all saw the death spiral that the WAC is now in coming two years ago.  The WAC needed six FCS programs to agree to jump up, not just Montana and Montana state.  In order for the WAC to have survived, the Big Sky Conference would have needed to be gutted, or the expansion would have needed to touch the Missouri Valley and Southland Conferences as well.  It would have been a wide footprint.  Montana would indeed make a very fine FBS school, but the right conference needs to emerge for the Grizzlies to join.  The WAC is not the right conference any more that Jimmy Stewart was the right choice to play Gandolf in Lord of the Rings.

The school would need to make some other changes to really make a jump to the FBS work.  They would probably need to expand the stadium to over 30,000 (which would be relatively easy), and they would need a new basketball arena, which would not be so easy.  Let's face it, Wayne Tinkle's program deserves an arena that they can at least break even with.  Dahlberg is old and really little better than a high school gym.  Perhaps a deal can be worked with the City and/or County of Missoula to build a joint facility: a 10,000-seat arena that can also be a good concert venue and perhaps also host an NBADL franchise and/or a minor league hockey team.  Missoula could use something like that, whether or not Montana makes a move to join an FBS-level conference.

If the MWC still wants to go to 12, and Boise State, et al still insist on remaining in the Big East, then why not ask Montana and Montana State to join?  What not accept?  They would be a good fit for each-other.  Wouldn't Montana be a better choice than New Mexico State?

The football expense and Revenue for the University of Montana in 2010

Football Expense...5,087,854

Football Revenue...6,909,838

Average Football Attendance...25,448 (Capacity 25,203)

Men's Basketball Expense...1,499,077

Men's Basketball Revenue...1,212,593

Average Basketball Attendance...3,996 (Capacity 7,300)

Non football/basketball expense...3,393,981

Non football/basketball revenue...1,544,886

Percentage that non football/basketball sports cover costs...45%

"Money games" in 2010...None

Idaho...

Football Expense...5,490,410

Football Revenue...7,668,822

Average Attendance...12,730 (Capacity 16,000)

Men's Basketball Expense...1,521,464
Men's Basketball Revenue...1,117,265
Average Basketball Attendance...1,359 (Capacity 7,000)
Non football/basketball expense...4,205,645
Non football/basketball revenue...3,986,714
Percentage that non football/basketball sports cover costs...92%

"Money games" in 2010...@ Nebraska

Note: 2011 numbers will not be available until July.

I have corrected the capacity of Dahlberg according to the University's own web site.  Still, the point is that a College Basketball program that has had the recent success of Montana should at least break even in men's basketball.