Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board
BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Basketball
Topic:  Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead

Topic:  Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
Author
Message
JSF
General User



Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,554

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 11:49:49 AM 
Quote:
But it's clear the rest of the nation is already starting to see Morehead differently. Tyndall said a school administrator told him that the day before the U of L game, there were 200 applications for admission.“After the game, there were 3,000 in one day (applying) for admission to our university,” Tyndall said. “I think that speaks for itself in regard to the publicity and notoriety not just our basketball program has received, but obviously our university has received.”


http://www.courier-journal.com/article/2011303180107

"Loyalty to a hometown or city is fleeting and interchangeable, but college is a stamp of identity."- Kyle Whelliston, One Beautiful Season.

My blog about depression and mental illness: https://bit.ly/3buGXH8

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 1,193

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 11:52:19 AM 
Dragon, you A-hole...you beat me to it. My headline was going to be "Suck it Hays and Vedder"....

I got it from Rovell's tweet:

darren rovell
 
Day before Louisville game, Morehead St. had 200 applications. Day after? 3,000! (via @)

He only has 70,000 followers.

Keep letting the academics flap their gums.

Back to Top
  
Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 12:35:47 PM 
Few would deny that highly visible athletic success can drive applications upward.  But that fact alone doesn't justify increased athletics spending.  First, you have to determine whether that increase in applications is primarily coming from students better or worse than your traditional applicant pool.  Personally, I suspect that the couple thousand students deciding to apply to Morehead State simply due to its win over Louisville generally won't be the strongest candidates for admission.  In that case, aside from lowering your acceptance rate, the increase really doesn't do much to improve the profile of your incoming class.

Second, even if you assume that the increase in applicants will strengthen the credentials of your incoming class, you have to realistically appraise the chances that increased athletics spending will continue to result in such increases in the future.  For example, while the win over Georgetown undeniably resulted in significant visibility for Ohio, based on our recent history that is a once in every 30 year event.  And while we all hope that such high-profile wins will become more frequent, there are approximately 250 other D-I colleges at the low and mid-major level that are dreaming of similar success.  Therefore, unless we are willing to make the type of significant (i.e., 10+ million dollar) investment in athletics that would set us apart from the mid-major pack, I'm not sure that Morehead generating a few thousand more applications by virtue of beating Louisville really proves much of anything.
Back to Top
  
Jeff McKinney
Moderator

Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,155

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 1:25:15 PM 
My heart says that Dragon and Love are right, but my head says that Flomo is right.  
Back to Top
  
UpSan Bobcat
General User



Member Since: 8/30/2005
Location: Upper Sandusky, OH
Post Count: 3,812

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 1:39:28 PM 
I would say among those extra applicants, you'd have a pretty average selection. There might be a few excellent students and maybe more than a few poor students. Probably a lot of in between. But even then, maybe you can accept a few more "above average students" this way and a few less average or lower students. Sure, you're not adding a lot at the top, but it slowly rises the minimum standards.

Of course, Flomo is right about continuing the sucess costing even more. A one-year increase in applications isn't going to have a grand effect. It's got to be sustained to make a real difference in the long run, and it's not easy (or cheap) to sustain that kind of success. But I think it can be done.

And I think visibility is just one benefit of athletics.
Back to Top
  
shabamon
General User



Member Since: 11/17/2006
Location: Cincinnati
Post Count: 6,863

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 2:06:04 PM 
I work in undergraduate admissions and find it extremely unbelievable that this late in the game, a school of nearly 8,000 undergraduates had only 200 applications (unless they're talking about underclassmen).

I ready somewhere that late into last year's tournament, Butler's admissions website crashed due to the heavier traffic.
Back to Top
  
anorris
General User



Member Since: 7/6/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 3:20:59 PM 
shabamon wrote:
I work in undergraduate admissions and find it extremely unbelievable that this late in the game, a school of nearly 8,000 undergraduates had only 200 applications (unless they're talking about underclassmen).

I ready somewhere that late into last year's tournament, Butler's admissions website crashed due to the heavier traffic.
I read it as 200 in the 24 hours prior to the game.

Butler's site did crash last year -- I remember reading that and trying to get on just for my amusement (didn't work).
Back to Top
  
TWT
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,189

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 3:25:59 PM 
There are some extreme examples where a highly visible athletics program has made a difference. I can think of Duke, VT, UConn all of which while quality institutions really were not on the radar of students nationally prior to success. I have been to all 3 campuses and they nothing to get excited about like the way you can get with the Ohio campus. Playing in BCS football and basketball conferences adds to the perception that those schools within those conferences are a step up from the run of the mill university. My grandfather has been a fan of UConn basketball since the early 90's and one of the things he told me is that president of UConn realized that to keep the best students in-state that they had to be good at athletics. First they built up the basketball, next the goal was to do it with the football program. UConn has moved way up the college rankings in the last 15 years as they've ascended to the top. Ohio doesn't have the ability to make such a transformational rise in athletics but the sky is the limit for men's basketball. I guess maybe not the entire sky but the potential is there to be a regular NCAA team like a Temple or Xavier with only a rare off season (CIT, NIT 20 wins). The problem has been over the last 20+ years at Ohio, LHunt and TOS were not the real deal and were only good at having enough sporadic success to keep their jobs. That has really been the modern era of men's basketball and us fans were stuck with mediocre coaches all this time. Groce looks to be something different, at least better than TOS and LHunt he's coached in more post season games than either of them in only 3 seasons. He's getting this program loaded in talent and if he is successful enough to take off to the Big Ten or Big East someday the program will be better for it.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Back to Top
  
Tim Burke
General User



Member Since: 11/23/2004
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Post Count: 607

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 3:46:19 PM 
Florida is your best example. In the early 90's they were a mediocre flagship university that was the agricultural extension home for the state. After the 1996 national championship, they invested heavily in athletics (something made possible through later BCS funding) and now after football and basketball national championships the student profile is entirely different than it was back then. Students who used to go to UF are now going to USF or UCF or UNF or Florida Atlantic because they can't get into UF anymore.

That despite UF maintaining a ridiculously high enrollment.

Ohio '99 EMU '00 USF '08(?)

Back to Top
  
Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 3,061

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 9:37:30 PM 

This one win by Morehead won't change that school.  But, several wins like that can.  You gotta hold on to your coach though.  That's the toughest part.




Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

Back to Top
  
perimeterpost
General User



Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 3,165

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/19/2011 10:47:22 PM 
We're lucky to have a prime school name, (no city, direction, or founder's last name) but a decent athletic program is still the best marketing tool for my diploma amongst people who read my resume and make hiring decisions outside of the midwest.

I interviewed with a company in early Janurary and the hiring manager was a Kansas grad. I don't know if he hired me out of pity after that 57 pt ass kicking, but either way, talking about bball and our win over Gtown was a great ice breaker for the interview. It was much better than having to explain that Ohio and Ohio State are two seperate schools, for the 1000th time.

MY STATE. MY TEAM.
Back to Top
  
Tim Burke
General User



Member Since: 11/23/2004
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Post Count: 607

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/20/2011 6:30:44 AM 
Ohio69 wrote:

This one win by Morehead won't change that school.  But, several wins like that can.  You gotta hold on to your coach though.  That's the toughest part.






I'm gonna go ahead and say Donnie Tyndall isn't leaving Morehead anytime soon. 

Ohio '99 EMU '00 USF '08(?)

Back to Top
  
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,948

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/20/2011 10:47:44 AM 
perimeterpost wrote:
We're lucky to have a prime school name, (no city, direction, or founder's last name) but a decent athletic program is still the best marketing tool for my diploma amongst people who read my resume and make hiring decisions outside of the midwest.

I interviewed with a company in early Janurary and the hiring manager was a Kansas grad. I don't know if he hired me out of pity after that 57 pt ass kicking, but either way, talking about bball and our win over Gtown was a great ice breaker for the interview. It was much better than having to explain that Ohio and Ohio State are two seperate schools, for the 1000th time.


I think this point is lost in the admissions discussion.  I went to Ohio from out of state and have lived out of state since graduation.  Our athletics do provide a point on a map and a point of reference.  The only other consistent reference is Halloween. 
Back to Top
  
Shawn Sellers
General User

Member Since: 1/4/2005
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 221

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/20/2011 12:22:25 PM 
Flomo-genized wrote:
Few would deny that highly visible athletic success can drive applications upward.  But that fact alone doesn't justify increased athletics spending.  First, you have to determine whether that increase in applications is primarily coming from students better or worse than your traditional applicant pool.  Personally, I suspect that the couple thousand students deciding to apply to Morehead State simply due to its win over Louisville generally won't be the strongest candidates for admission.  In that case, aside from lowering your acceptance rate, the increase really doesn't do much to improve the profile of your incoming class.

Second, even if you assume that the increase in applicants will strengthen the credentials of your incoming class, you have to realistically appraise the chances that increased athletics spending will continue to result in such increases in the future.  For example, while the win over Georgetown undeniably resulted in significant visibility for Ohio, based on our recent history that is a once in every 30 year event.  And while we all hope that such high-profile wins will become more frequent, there are approximately 250 other D-I colleges at the low and mid-major level that are dreaming of similar success.  Therefore, unless we are willing to make the type of significant (i.e., 10+ million dollar) investment in athletics that would set us apart from the mid-major pack, I'm not sure that Morehead generating a few thousand more applications by virtue of beating Louisville really proves much of anything.


There is no doubt in my mind that this is good for the school academically. Every single one of those applications would have to be below average, for it not to be good for the university. There is no way that is the case. Having more students apply to choose from allows the university to be more selective.

Now, this gave the university a look from students that otherwise might not have applied. But ultimately it's up to the academic programs to draw these potential students interest.
Back to Top
  
PutnamField
General User

Member Since: 9/20/2007
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 303

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/21/2011 3:45:50 AM 
Uncle Wes wrote:
The problem has been over the last 20+ years at Ohio, LHunt and TOS were not the real deal and were only good at having enough sporadic success to keep their jobs. That has really been the modern era of men's basketball and us fans were stuck with mediocre coaches all this time. Groce looks to be something different, at least better than TOS and LHunt he's coached in more post season games than either of them in only 3 seasons. He's getting this program loaded in talent and if he is successful enough to take off to the Big Ten or Big East someday the program will be better for it.


This isn't quite accurate if you're looking for metrics for comparison's sake. Groce will coach his fourth postseason Division I game tonight at ETSU. Hunter has already coached four (three for Ohio, one for Western Carolina). O'Shea has coached three (all for Ohio).

Notably, Hunter cranked out seasons of 16-12, 18-10, 17-10, 18-10, 20-13 and 19-11 that did not lead to postseason appearances. Back then, you either made the NCAA or the NIT or you stayed home. There was no such thing as the More Is Better Mini-Me Basketball Tournament. If this year's team got into one with an 18-15 record, then several of those Hunter teams would have been shoo-ins. It's kind of like printing more money and saying you're rich.

Likewise, TOS had teams that went 19-11 and 19-13 and stayed home.

In terms of some signature wins, don't forget that Hunter in his final season beat West Virginia and Arizona State. Earlier he'd beaten Syracuse, UConn and Virginia. TOS beat Cincinnati, Virginia and North Carolina and damn near beat Kentucky and Louisville. Groce has beaten Georgetown but otherwise has fared poorly against top-level competition.

None of which is to say that the future doesn't look bright with Groce, that last year's run wasn't magical and well done or that this year's team didn't show grit and determination to turn what looked like a lost season into a fairly solid one. I also believe that Groce is likely to rack up more signature wins before he's done. My point is that there's really no objective reason thus far to exalt our current coach far and above the last two. Hopefully, that time will come.
Back to Top
  
athena
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 710

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/21/2011 9:02:04 AM 
perimeterpost wrote:

I interviewed with a company in early Janurary and the hiring manager was a Kansas grad. I don't know if he hired me out of pity after that 57 pt ass kicking, but either way, talking about bball and our win over Gtown was a great ice breaker for the interview. It was much better than having to explain that Ohio and Ohio State are two seperate schools, for the 1000th time.



You mean he didn't ask about our Classics Dept.?
Back to Top
  
crackerbaby00
General User

Member Since: 3/8/2007
Post Count: 442

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/21/2011 9:18:04 AM 
PutnamField wrote:
Uncle Wes wrote:
The problem has been over the last 20+ years at Ohio, LHunt and TOS were not the real deal and were only good at having enough sporadic success to keep their jobs. That has really been the modern era of men's basketball and us fans were stuck with mediocre coaches all this time. Groce looks to be something different, at least better than TOS and LHunt he's coached in more post season games than either of them in only 3 seasons. He's getting this program loaded in talent and if he is successful enough to take off to the Big Ten or Big East someday the program will be better for it.


This isn't quite accurate if you're looking for metrics for comparison's sake. Groce will coach his fourth postseason Division I game tonight at ETSU. Hunter has already coached four (three for Ohio, one for Western Carolina). O'Shea has coached three (all for Ohio).

Notably, Hunter cranked out seasons of 16-12, 18-10, 17-10, 18-10, 20-13 and 19-11 that did not lead to postseason appearances. Back then, you either made the NCAA or the NIT or you stayed home. There was no such thing as the More Is Better Mini-Me Basketball Tournament. If this year's team got into one with an 18-15 record, then several of those Hunter teams would have been shoo-ins. It's kind of like printing more money and saying you're rich.

Likewise, TOS had teams that went 19-11 and 19-13 and stayed home.

In terms of some signature wins, don't forget that Hunter in his final season beat West Virginia and Arizona State. Earlier he'd beaten Syracuse, UConn and Virginia. TOS beat Cincinnati, Virginia and North Carolina and damn near beat Kentucky and Louisville. Groce has beaten Georgetown but otherwise has fared poorly against top-level competition.

None of which is to say that the future doesn't look bright with Groce, that last year's run wasn't magical and well done or that this year's team didn't show grit and determination to turn what looked like a lost season into a fairly solid one. I also believe that Groce is likely to rack up more signature wins before he's done. My point is that there's really no objective reason thus far to exalt our current coach far and above the last two. Hopefully, that time will come.



O'Shea also beat UMD on the road his final season at Ohio
Back to Top
  
SouthernCat
General User

Member Since: 1/3/2005
Post Count: 166

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/21/2011 10:26:37 AM 
athena wrote:
perimeterpost wrote:

I interviewed with a company in early Janurary and the hiring manager was a Kansas grad. I don't know if he hired me out of pity after that 57 pt ass kicking, but either way, talking about bball and our win over Gtown was a great ice breaker for the interview. It was much better than having to explain that Ohio and Ohio State are two seperate schools, for the 1000th time.



You mean he didn't ask about our Classics Dept.?


We have a classics department?
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,762

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/22/2011 9:12:19 AM 
Jeff McKinney wrote:
My heart says that Dragon and Love are right, but my head says that Flomo is right.

After reading all the posts in this thread, I find I agree with this one the most, as well as Putnam's analysis of the relative merit of our last few coaches.

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
Bobcatbob
General User



Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Coolville, OH
Post Count: 1,347

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/22/2011 10:34:59 AM 
Tim Burke wrote:
Florida is your best example. In the early 90's they were a mediocre flagship university that was the agricultural extension home for the state. After the 1996 national championship, they invested heavily in athletics (something made possible through later BCS funding) and now after football and basketball national championships the student profile is entirely different than it was back then. Students who used to go to UF are now going to USF or UCF or UNF or Florida Atlantic because they can't get into UF anymore.

That despite UF maintaining a ridiculously high enrollment.


So the local analogy is that the more money spent and the more titles won by Ohio A&M, the more borderline applicants we can look forward to, too? 

This alone should be the academic argument for strengthening the Ohio athletic profile.  Somebody call Steve Hays.
Back to Top
  
Brian Smith (No, not that one)
General User

Member Since: 2/3/2005
Post Count: 3,016

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/22/2011 1:39:57 PM 
mhatc wrote:
athena wrote:
perimeterpost wrote:

I interviewed with a company in early Janurary and the hiring manager was a Kansas grad. I don't know if he hired me out of pity after that 57 pt ass kicking, but either way, talking about bball and our win over Gtown was a great ice breaker for the interview. It was much better than having to explain that Ohio and Ohio State are two seperate schools, for the 1000th time.



You mean he didn't ask about our Classics Dept.?


We have a classics department?


I don't think we want to start going down this road. 

Or people might start asking: "We have wrestling, women's soccer, softball, cross country, golf, field hockey, track, swimming and diving programs?"

I think both the classics department and those sports belong at Ohio.

Last Edited: 3/22/2011 1:45:23 PM by Brian Smith (No, not that one)
Back to Top
  
bornacatfan
General User



Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,716

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/22/2011 2:52:14 PM 
Interesting fromthe other side. The Prez here at ETSU is stronglyoppposed to intercollegiate athletics and has been vocal about dismantling the programs and cutting funding. We sat ina bar fullof folks last night talking aboutthe loss of Football and the rise of Appy State who got all the local recruits who normally came here to play.

It is really strange to hear the moaning and anger from folks who were pretty much hard core fans of ETSU that really hold the president in poor regard due to his outspoekn sqnce regarding athletics. On the bright side their Golf has been nationally relevant for some time now despite the effort of admin.

never argue with idiots, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Winter comes and asks how you spent your summer.....

The game loves and rewards those who love and reward the game

Back to Top
  
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,734

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/22/2011 4:32:06 PM 
Athletics are part of  a school's identity much like  pro sports are to a city. It makes the experience better if you live there. Your school /city are in the paper when you play. The standings are there for all to see. What is the publicity worth? It's hard to measure, but the best example is a city like Omaha, which has a metro area about the same size as Cincinnati. What would Cincinnati be without the Bengals and Reds? Omaha. Not that Cincinnati is like New York, but you get the idea. It's worth it for us to have strong athletics. We could be stronger if we spent more money. That's the tricky part.
Back to Top
  
Jeff McKinney
Moderator

Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,155

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/22/2011 4:46:58 PM 
Giacomo:  This doesn't affect the basic point you were making, but just wanted to mention that Omaha metro population is 900,000, while Cincinnati metro population is 2.2 million. 
Back to Top
  
colobobcat66
General User

Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,548

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Athletics = Visibility? Ask Morehead
   Posted: 3/22/2011 5:48:39 PM 
Jeff McKinney wrote:
Giacomo:  This doesn't affect the basic point you were making, but just wanted to mention that Omaha metro population is 900,000, while Cincinnati metro population is 2.2 million. 


Oh, what's 1,300,000 people among friends?
Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  1 - 25  of 32 Posts
Jump to Page:  1 | 2    Next >
View Other 'Ohio Basketball' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             



WHO'S ONLINE
There are 209 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com
207 Guests
2 Registered Users:
 Jeff Hill, Felix
There are no other users looking at this page.




Copyright ©2025 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties