 |
|
Is Clemson the model for Mizzou to follow
Posted on: May 4, 2019 at 18:03:14 CT
ScottsdaleTiger MU
Posts:
12769
Member For:
26.44 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
Superficially, Clemson seems like the appropriate model for Mizzou if you want more than a second tier SEC football program.
Clemson proably has a better overall football tradition than Mizzou, i.e. going back to Frank Howard; a more interested and passionate fan base; and high school and college football are probably more important in South Carolina's culture than Missouri's, but otherwise Mizzou program would seem to have a number of advantages over Clemson's.
Missouri is a larger and more populus state. Mizzou is the only in state Power Five program. Mizzou probably has a larger number of alumni and very possiblly more alums who have made it big. It's athletic budget is generating slightly more total dollars than Clemson's, although Clemson's football budget is roughly twice Mizzou's.
Mizzou's biggest administrative shortfall compared to most other SEC programs is the amount of contributions/donations to the program. I understand that Clemson instituted a "small donor" program a number of years ago and it has been highly successful. If the current level of annual giving, about 24 million, could be increased by 50 or 100%, a lot more resources could flow into Tiger football (and while resources aren't everything, more resources are certainly preffered to fewer).
I'm not suggesting that Mizzou can emulate Clemson's success on the playing field (i.e. a couple of national championships), after all it is in a tougher league, or that Barry Odom can be a Dabo Swinney, but perhaps Sterk should take a close look at how Clemson is doing things in football.
Clemson proably has a better overall football tradition than Mizzou, i.e. going back to Frank Howard; a more interested and passionate fan base; and high school and college football are probably more important in South Carolina's culture than Missouri's, but otherwise Mizzou program would seem to have a number of advantages over Clemson's.
Missouri is a larger and more populus state. Mizzou is the only in state Power Five program. Mizzou probably has a larger number of alumni and very possiblly more alums who have made it big. It's athletic budget is generating slightly more total dollars than Clemson's, although Clemson's football budget is roughly twice Mizzou's.
Mizzou's biggest administrative shortfall compared to most other SEC programs is the amount of contributions/donations to the program. I understand that Clemson instituted a "small donor" program a number of years ago and it has been highly successful. If the current level of annual giving, about 24 million, could be increased by 50 or 100%, a lot more resources could flow into Tiger football (and while resources aren't everything, more resources are certainly preffered to fewer).
I'm not suggesting that Mizzou can emulate Clemson's success on the playing field (i.e. a couple of national championships), after all it is in a tougher league, or that Barry Odom can be a Dabo Swinney, but perhaps Sterk should take a close look at how Clemson is doing things in football.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
Is Clemson the model for Mizzou to follow - ScottsdaleTiger MU - 5/4 18:03:14