Home › Sports › Sports Columnists
Woelk: Rams pay big price for a little pride
Pride became awfully expensive for the Colorado State athletic department Friday afternoon.
STORY TOOLS
More Sports Columnists
- Woelk: Here's a vote for the current BCS chaos
- Woelk: Hawkins, staff enter critical offseason
- Osieczanek: Sports stars have plenty to say
Share and Enjoy [?]
Less than two hours after Colorado announced that it would exercise its option to play the CU-CSU game at Folsom Field next year -- a move that surprised no one -- CSU athletic director Paul Kowalczyk responded by announcing that CSU would take the 2010 game to Fort Collins.
The decision could cost Colorado State literally millions of dollars over the next 10 years, as well as the annual chance at some national exposure.
Logic and common sense would have dictated that Kowalczyk and CSU president Larry Penley swallow a little pride and make a sound financial decision. Colorado would have been happy to extend the series for another 10 years (starting next year), with three in Boulder and seven in Denver.
Such a contract would have guaranteed Colorado State about $900,000 per year over that span.
Now, the series is all but dead after 2010, and CSU will have to settle for games that pay about half that much when the series ends — a loss of roughly $4 million over the ensuing eight years.
Kowalczyk even managed to defy logic with his statement announcing that the 2010 game would be played in Fort Collins.
“ ... we believe the series ultimately belongs in Denver,” the statement read. “However ... we believe we owe it to Colorado State University, our alumni, fans, students and the City of Fort Collins to bring the 2010 game back to Hughes Stadium.”
Um, which is it Paul? Does the game belong in Denver, or do you owe it to your school and fans to play the game in Fort Collins?
In Kowalczyk’s defense, word is that Penley is the man behind the decision. Evidently, CSU’s prez is having a hard time grasping reality, namely that the two schools are not on equal footing in this instance.
One is a BCS conference school with a 54,000-seat stadium and appears on national television 5-10 times per year.
The other plays in a mid-level conference in a 34,000-seat stadium and gets on national TV about once a season (usually the CU game).
But pride appears to have overruled sound financial decisions in Fort Collins. Prez Penley has cut off his nose to spite his face.
Truth is, CU will also lose money — a huge chunk — in 2010 because of the move to Hughes.
But over the long haul, CU will be able to fill the gap in its schedule and perhaps even increase its revenue stream.
CSU has no such hope.
Next year, CU will pay CSU $650,000 to play the game in Boulder, a fee that includes 3,000 tickets at face value. CSU can buy an additional 2,000 tickets.
The ensuing year, the deal is the same in Fort Collins: CU will get $650,000 (which includes 3,000 tickets) and the option to buy 2,000 more tickets.
The difference is stadium size. Even allowing for students, CU will be able to sell roughly 42,000 tickets next year for the CSU game.
CSU, in turn, will have about 24,000 for sale in 2010. That means instead of a $1 million payoff by playing the game at Invesco, the Rams will realize about $500,000 after expenses.
That number is just about the maximum CSU can pull in for a home game — and that’s the number CSU will settle for in the future instead of an estimated $900,000 per year.
That’s what CSU threw away on Friday in the name of pride.
For people who wonder why Colorado needs a minimum six home games, the answer is simple: if CU can’t provide luxury suite and club seat owners at least six homes games per year, CU could owe a healthy refund to those owners, possibly as much as $600,000.
Now, it appears the series will end after 2010. Colorado will fill the empty date on the schedule with a home game that will provide roughly the same revenue and move on.
CSU will also have to fill the empty dates on its schedule — but the Rams won’t be able to find anywhere close to the same financial benefit. Throw in the loss of a game against a BCS conference foe, the chance to play on national television and the opportunity to be a part of the state’s showcase event for one weekend, and the Rams lost a bundle on Friday.
A heck of price to pay for pride.
Posted by RalphieBuffalo on August 30, 2008 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Which of these schools is the ". . . BCS conference school with a 54,000-seat stadium (that) appears on national television 5-10 times per year"? CU? Huh? More like twice a year for football (in the BIG years) and never for basketball (mens' or womens'). If there are other intercollegiate sports at CU, no one outside Boulder can name them. As for a showcase event. The CSU game? You're joking. Last time I looked, the Rams couldn't pound farts out of a dead seagull. Dump these yokels. Replace them with the Zoomies, and let's play some football!!
Posted by RockyMountains on August 30, 2008 at 11:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, Prez Penley has cut his nose to spite his face, but he has acted this way since he arrived in Colorado. Yesterday, CU President Bruce Benson praised CSU as an educational institution at the Denver Buff Club rally. You would never hear that from Penley. In fact, Penley complained to Gov Bill Ritter when Gov Ritter approved a higher funding for CU in his first year as governor. It has been well documented that former Gov Bill Owens slashed CU more deeply than CSU (probably because his daughter went there and other political/financial reasons) and Gov Ritter must have told him that because Penley left their meeting very humbled.
Every institution of higher education in this state (and all states) has a unique purpose and niche. CU, CSU, UNC, Colorado School of Mines, etc. all do great research/educational work. Although Prez Penley should have pride and and fight for every dollar for CSU, he belligerently thinks that CSU should be King of the World (or at least the State). He just doesn't get it...
(In fact, this football series was created/pushed by several members of the state legislature to probabaly pit one school against the other (divide and conquer!), but that is a thought for another day.)
Posted by ChicagoRamFan on August 30, 2008 at 1:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ralphie, Ralphie, Ralphie,
Any time you draw 65K - 75K fans into the state's biggest city and venue for a game, it's a showcase event. Add to that the exciting games that are typically within a field goal or touchdown and it's one of the better rivalry games in the US. I'm not saying it compares to Florida / Georgia or Oklahoma / Texas, but it's still a huge event in its own right.
Now, regarding pounding farts out of a dead seagull, I know for a fact that we can do that as we have one of the best vet schools in the country and I believe that's an elective class.
On the other hand, what we are not able to do is pound some sense into Mr. Woelk regarding the Rocky Mountain Showdown. I don't know why he suddenly views this matchup purely in economic terms and while that warms the cockles of my business man's heart, there is more to these decisions than dollars.
As a CSU supporter, I think Paul Kowalczyk made the right call here. And there is no lack of logic in his opinion that the series belongs in Denver but if CU takes it back to campus, we should, too.
Good luck to CU the rest of the season -- you're going to need it, given your schedule. I do hope we school you big time on Sunday.
Posted by RAMinBoulder on August 30, 2008 at 9:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Once again, CU and Neil Woelk display an overwhelming sense of both elitism and entitlement. Yes, CSU may have sacrificed some much needed cash by bringing this game back to Ft Collins in 2010. However, should one be surprised that Kowalczyk exercised the principal of reciprocity? Tit-for-tat. You have a home game in your stadium, we'll have one in ours. It is a principle of equity, not always of finances. To say that CSU's pride is ending this series is both disingenuous and patronizing. CU exercised the option, CU knew the likely response from their in-state rival, and thus CU should bear the brunt of the blame should this series end. In many ways, this situation is not much different than the spoiled kid playground move of "I'm taking my ball and going home."
So, CU's ticket holders need another home game? Apparently Invesco stadium 30 miles away from Boulder is much too far away for either a Prius or Mercedez to travel. As far as I know, the buses still run from Boulder to Invesco on game day. Besides, many of these season ticket holders reside in the Denver metro area.
This game belongs in Denver, pure and simple. Nearly every state with a land grant university (generally "State") and the liberal arts school (generally "University of . . .") have a rivalry game. The recent CSU-CU games have gone down to the wire, and have provided intense kickoffs for both teams' seasons. Losing this rivalry would be a real travesty. Of course, it is tough for CU to advance its case of possessing an "elite" Big 12 program when it either loses or eeks past a "lowly" Mountain West school. We'd hate to negatively impact anyone's potential BCS rankings, would we? Speaking of the lowly Mountain West - did anyone else happen to see the Utah - Michigan game today? The conference does not necessarily make the team.
Here is hoping that both CU and CSU can reach an agreement to keep this superb rivalry game going past the 2010 season. If not, I hope CU takes some responsibility for killing the series. Of course, accepting personal responsibility is generally not something for which Boulder is well known. And yep, I'm going to grad school here in Boulder now, so I see this attitude first hand. While I hope both schools successful seasons, I have but one allegiance tomorrow. GO STATE!
Posted by BorregoRam on August 30, 2008 at 11:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The Rams get on national TV once a year and only because they're playing the buffs? Before the Mountain channel, the Rams were on TV more than the buffs. So biased the facts aren't straight!
Posted by MOHI on September 1, 2008 at 3:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I said is sucks to be a CSU ram...
Posted by boulderhawk on September 6, 2008 at 4:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have to agree with RAMinBoulder. Well said.
(Requires free registration.)
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Camera staff does not actively monitor comments. If you believe a comment breaks the user agreement, please flag the comment and someone will take a look at it.