Former Ksu President Talks About How To Build A Program

[gangrene]

Charley Walters: Former Kansas State President Jon Wefald says if K-State can do it, so should U

Please click on the link to read the full story. Below, I've quoted portions that I found interesting and/or relevant to North Texas.

Wefald doesn't brag. But he's plenty proud of Kansas State's accomplishments under his guidance. From the end of World War II until Wefald's arrival, Kansas State football was horrible.

"It does take unified teamwork of the coaches, the athletic director and his staff, and the administration working hand in glove, and at a large school like Minnesota, that's very possible," he said. "To me, there's no substitute for winning. You have to win. That doesn't mean you always will, but you want competitive teams that on any given night or any given field, you have a chance to win the game.

"Probably in Division I football, from 1945 to 1989, it's hard to find a team that lost more games, and not by close scores," Wefald said. "It was just ridiculous, miserable. People could come five minutes before a game and get a seat on the 50-yard line. We might have had 15,000, 16,000 people at a game. "I know this sounds hilarious, but there are fans who have told me that in the 1960s, '70s and for most of the '80s, they would cheer for a first down."

Wefald chuckled.

"We were bad," he said.

Kansas State had plenty of other challenges then, too, Wefald said.

"Our enrollment had dropped in the 1980s, we were only raising $5 million a year, we weren't yet a major research university, we needed a new library and a new art museum ... I mean, our needs were multiple and varied," he said.

During Wefald's first year as president in 1986, Kansas State won just two of 11 football games. In 1987 and 1988, Kansas State's combined football won-lost record was 0-21-1.

In Wefald's first three years at Kansas State, the school won a total of two football games.

"By 1988, we thought, 'Well, this isn't working,' so we let the football coach and athletic director go," Wefald said. "I hired a new athletic director by the name of Steve Miller, who was just what the doctor ordered. He was irrepressible, he was an optimist, he was confident, he was a risk taker.

"And then, the two of us hired Bill Snyder."

Snyder, who was offensive coordinator at Iowa under Hayden Fry, wanted competitive salaries for his assistant coaches.

"We can't be so much further below Nebraska and Oklahoma or Missouri or Colorado," Wefald said. "So we had to at least ratchet them up.

"I think by raising salaries for assistant coaches, Bill was able to go out and hire just a crackerjack group of assistants. We had Bob Stoops, who's now (head coach) at Oklahoma, for six years; we had Mike Stoops, who's (head coach) at Arizona, for five or six years; we had Mark Mangino, who went with Stoops to Oklahoma but then ended up as head coach at Kansas, and we had Jim Leavitt, who went to South Florida to start the football program there.

"By the way, (Leavitt) would be a good (Gophers) prospect."

Then, for Wefald, came improving the K-State stadium that was virtually rebuilt between 1990 and 1992.

"It seats about the same number of fans as the University of Minnesota, which is maybe the nicest 50,000-seat stadium in America," Wefald said. "I remember we used the 'Field of Dreams' as the metaphor: 'Build it and they will come.' And, of course, they will only come if you win."

Wefald said Snyder knew when he hired him that he would have the president's undivided support.

"I would say that during Bill Snyder's tenure, I probably hosted lunches for 550 football prospects; I enjoyed that," Wefald said. "When you're at a place like Kansas State, you've got to show that the whole university is committed.

"Now, I probably spent only 5 or 6 percent of my time on athletics, but I did a lot of it on my own. Like on a Saturday, I would host a lunch in December and January right up to the (recruiting) signing period. And there were times when a really good football player would say, 'Geez, if the president is that involved, and there's that kind of a sense of community, maybe I should come to Kansas State.'

"So we started getting better and better players. And we had great recruiters in Bob and Mike Stoops, Mark Mangino and Jim Leavitt. It was my thought that the president, the athletic director and all our coaches should all be on the same page and all have trust that we're trying to accomplish something together.

"And by 1994-95, we were winning nine and 10 games a year. From 1996 to 2003, we won 11 games in six of seven years. Very few teams win 11 games."

Wefald's Kansas State didn't only turn around athletically. From 1986 through 2009, Kansas State students won 130 Rhodes, Marshall, Truman, Goldwater and Udall academic scholarships. Those are the five most prestigious scholarships an undergrad student can get.

"Whether you're at Harvard, Minnesota, UCLA or K-State," Wefald said. "Those are for students who are going to on to med school, dental school, vet school. They're very difficult to get. Those 130 scholarships are more than any public university in the Big Ten, Pac 10, Big 12, ACC, SEC or Big East. As of 2009, Penn State was in second place with about 90."

Wefald said K-State has gone from nearly $30 million annually in research funding to $220 million. And the $5 million in annual giving has increased to about $100 million, with a foundation worth $700 million.

[NorthTexan95]

Impressive.

[untjim1995]

Great article. There are many pieces to that article that need to done at UNT now. Raise the salaries of the coaches--all of them. Get the administration involved in athletic events like Wefald would do in Manhattan. Support the coach fully.

Now, the major difference here, though, is one that UNT really cannot copy to help themselves with right now and that is the built-in advantage that KSU had in conference affiliation. Just like USF, these two teams basically got built from the ground up, but they had the ability to sell to recruits, fans, and and coaches that you can come here and play in a conference that not only matters, but it will get you great attention when we win. K-State had home games, no matter how pitiful they were, against Nebraska, OU, and CU every other year. Those teams were always involved in the Top Ten--or higher. At USF, the same thing basically happened there, too, with Louisville, West Virginia, and Rutgers all moving up in the rankings as USF got going in the Big East. If you start scheduling appropriately during the OOC, as K-State did for their program, it got people's interest to see how that would translate once conference season began and you knew the Huskers were coming to town as the #1 ranked team. Even if UNT scheduled OOC like K-State did to get some wins for the program, the fans and media here in the area aren't going to get too excited about Sun Belt play, especially since no one has ever been ranked from this league.

[NT80]

Even if UNT scheduled OOC like K-State did to get some wins for the program, the fans and media here in the area aren't going to get too excited about Sun Belt play, especially since no one has ever been ranked from this league.

This is the next major need for athletics....a better conference with better known and regional schools!

[GrandGreen]

This is the next major need for athletics....a better conference with better known and regional schools!

A better conference would be nice, but the next major need is to win in the Belt.

In a way, I see the Belt as an advantage for a program in as much disarray as NT football. Nothing against the Belt but if NT can't win here, they can't win anywhere.

Edited November 2, 2010 by GrandGreen

[untjim1995]

A better conference would be nice, but the next major need is to win in the Belt.

In a way, I see the Belt as an advantage for a program in as much disarray as NT football. Nothing against the Belt but if NT can't win here, they can't win anywhere.

This is dead-on. No conference is taking us if we still only win 2-3 games in football, even with a new stadium. The harder part about this is that Troy and MUTS have really moved forward with their programs, and FAU and Arky State have had success, too, while our program jumped off the cliff. FIU and ULL are in situations where the right coach can make a move up the ladder in the Belt, as well. But for us to move upward, it will only start with moving up the SBC standings. Unless we win another 2 games, this will be the 6th straight year of 3 wins or less. This has been accomplished while being a part of the worst conference in FBS football.

[Side Show Joe]

A better conference would be nice, but the next major need is to win in the Belt.

In a way, I see the Belt as an advantage for a program in as much disarray as NT football. Nothing against the Belt but if NT can't win here, they can't win anywhere.

I don't think winning the Sun Belt is enough. North Texas would need to destroy the Sun Belt on an annual basis, as well as win most of their ooc games, especially most of the ones against ranked opponents. That, combined with a major increase in attendance, is the key to positioning UNT for moving up in conference realignment. Even then we probably would still need outside help, like a conference break up.

[TodgeRodge]

I don't think winning the Sun Belt is enough. North Texas would need to destroy the Sun Belt on an annual basis, as well as win most of their ooc games, especially most of the ones against ranked opponents. That, combined with a major increase in attendance, is the key to positioning UNT for moving up in conference realignment. Even then we probably would still need outside help, like a conference break up.

"I would say that during Bill Snyder's tenure, I probably hosted lunches for 550 football prospects; I enjoyed that," Wefald said. "When you're at a place like Kansas State, you've got to show that the whole university is committed.

"Now, I probably spent only 5 or 6 percent of my time on athletics, but I did a lot of it on my own. Like on a Saturday, I would host a lunch in December and January right up to the (recruiting) signing period. And there were times when a really good football player would say, 'Geez, if the president is that involved, and there's that kind of a sense of community, maybe I should come to Kansas State.'

read that over....and over....and over again......and again......and again.......notice he is not talking about lip service.....or wearing a green scarf to a game or two......or making a road trip.....and even TODAY......1/20th of his time is spent on athletics......at a university that has probably 10-12 colleges in the university.......that would probably each love 1/20th of his time every week week in and week out

you can "dominate the belt" all you wish......but when the wheels pop off for a second and the fans go crazy and call for the coaches head......unless you have an ADMINISTRATION that understands what is going on......that has a PLAN OF THEIR OWN LONG TERM FOR THE UNIVERSITY'S ATHLETICS PROGRAMS.......you will find yourself right back spinning your wheels wondering why dominating the belt was not enough to get you into CUSA over UTEP......or what ever conference and school is next to take "your" spot in that better conference

when the reality and the answer is so simple......there was never a university wide plan in place to do anything other than win some games in the belt.....and then try and win some more....and if that does not work.....regroup and try and win some big games in the belt.....and repeat

and when you are busy churning through administrations every few years, and all the ugly that came with it, and getting the new one in.....so they can start to in fight with the chancellor....it hampers that long term university and athletics plan and it hangs your AD out to dry when he attempts to communicate any type of plan to the fans and supporters.....because the next guy that rolls through has a new plan.....or worse yet cares not to make a plan for athletics.....other than win some games in the belt.....and repeat

[NT80]

This is dead-on. No conference is taking us if we still only win 2-3 games in football, even with a new stadium.

CUSA took Smut with a lousy record, new stadium and no baseball. We now qualify.

[PlummMeanGreen]

CUSA took Smut with a lousy record, new stadium and no baseball. We now qualify.

GMG!

[TodgeRodge]

CUSA took Smut with a lousy record, new stadium and no baseball. We now qualify.

I think you actually believe this.....or that you see the UNT situation anything similar to the SMU situation.....or you see the way SMU was able to make a conference change as similar to how UNT might do it

much less that you ignore that SMU had a much more coherent university wide athletics policy in place and an administration that was able to make moves in an instant when things happened for them

the fact that many might well believe your comment or even find it humorous is just one of a multitude of reasons that UNT is left at the alter so often...because the administration and the supporters are not willing to put in the work or even give credit to places that have put in the effort and made it work out for them

[untjim1995]

CUSA took Smut with a lousy record, new stadium and no baseball. We now qualify.

SMU had name value, though, from its glory (cheating) years and they have always been able to convince other conferences that they can get you some part of the Dallas market. When you look at their coverage in the DMN or on The Ticket, you can see where the media attention is at least there. Realizing it is behind Big XII, other AQ teams, and even with TCU, SMU still has something for a confernece, not to mention lots and lots of money. Look, I hate them, too. They are arrogant, powerful, and live in the distant past, but I also know what they bring to the table. We will never be in a conference with them.

Edited November 3, 2010 by untjim1995

[NT80]

We will never be in a conference with them.

Some said Smut would never play us again in football. Some said NT would never have a new football stadium. Image can be more reality than reality is. Our image is changing with a new facility alone. The conference landscape is still changing, never say never.

[untjim1995]

Some said Smut would never play us again in football. Some said NT would never have a new football stadium. Image can be more reality than reality is. Our image is changing with a new facility alone. The conference landscape is still changing, never say never.

I'll go ahead and say never on this one and I will feel pretty confident about it. Two blackballings over the course of 30+ years that have kept us out of their conference tells me that this is true. And that series in football will get bought out quickly if it starts to benefit us more than them. Money will always talk.

[Arkstfan]

I don't think winning the Sun Belt is enough. North Texas would need to destroy the Sun Belt on an annual basis, as well as win most of their ooc games, especially most of the ones against ranked opponents. That, combined with a major increase in attendance, is the key to positioning UNT for moving up in conference realignment. Even then we probably would still need outside help, like a conference break up.

6-5

10-3

10-2

Boise State's records before going WAC. Two Big West titles in there.

10-3, 12-1, 14-0. Three seasons before MWC invite.

9-4, 13-0, 10-3. Three years of Utah before Pac-12 invite.

[GrayEagle]

I don't think winning the Sun Belt is enough. North Texas would need to destroy the Sun Belt on an annual basis, as well as win most of their ooc games, especially most of the ones against ranked opponents. That, combined with a major increase in attendance, is the key to positioning UNT for moving up in conference realignment. Even then we probably would still need outside help, like a conference break up.

It will take some winning but since we've been there before and with the new stadium, budget, etc. I don't see that we need to destroy all of the opposition in the conference. For example, did Nevada destroy others in the WAC before being selected by the MWC? Ditto for Fresno State, UCF, SMU, Rice, UTEP, etc.

One attention-getter is attendance. I believe that if we can have a winning year in 2011 with attendance in the mid-20s, with our size, location and other factors going for us then I believe that we are very attractive to CUSA (and maybe MWC) in the next wave of expansion. A lot depends on who leaves what conference.

[untjim1995]

6-5

10-3

10-2

Boise State's records before going WAC. Two Big West titles in there.

10-3, 12-1, 14-0. Three seasons before MWC invite.

9-4, 13-0, 10-3. Three years of Utah before Pac-12 invite.

Boise also had a stadium and a city that could host a bowl game, which was attractive to the WAC, especially since their bowl ties-in were evaporating quickly. The winning part was great, as well, which made it an easy sell to the other teams in the conference. The same can be said of Utah. They don't host a bowl game--yet--but their stadium is very nice, especially since the Winter Olympics were there back in 2002, as are their other facilities. In both cases, too, those conferences got another state's major team and their fanbases to get eyeballs watching those games. Idaho may not be a populous state, but if most of its citizens are watching the Broncos play, the whole conference gets extra attention. heck, even if Fresno State is playing Nevada, people in Idaho will watch closely, thus helping ratings and increasing media coverage. It certainly works that way in Utah and Colorado, too, and the Pac-12 will get two growing states in their market now that will help boost ratings and coverage. Without dealing with the headache that would have been UT, even with all of its TV sets and T-shirt alumni, the Pac-12 did just fine in my opinion, especially on the football field, where their teams will still have a very strong chance of playing for a national championship every year.

All of this is to say, that even if we ever do start to win in the SBC again, we know that we still have to beat other name teams, as well, and even that still won't guarantee us getting into another conference. I just think that the other Texas schools in non-AQ leagues have very little interest in ever being in a conference with us, just like La Tech feels about the other LA schools. It for this very reason that I want TCU to move up to the Big East and for SMU to take their place in the MWC (small chance). This scenario may very well be our easiest--and only--path to joining CUSA at some point down the line.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

There is no similarity between North Texas and Boise State other than we both used to be I-AA schools.

Boise has only had tow or three losing seasons since 1969. They've always had community and school support no matter what division they were playing in. They've upgraded their facilities along the way.

That's nothing like the situation we are in. They've been climbing; we've been sitting around with out heads up of collective backsides.

[SilverEagle]

There is no similarity between North Texas and Boise State other than we both used to be I-AA schools.

Boise has only had tow or three losing seasons since 1969. They've always had community and school support no matter what division they were playing in. They've upgraded their facilities along the way.

That's nothing like the situation we are in. They've been climbing; we've been sitting around with out heads up of collective backsides.

You mean our administration has been sitting around with THEIR heads up their collective backsides.