The other day I was approached by a guy who said that he was on some committee that dealt with student fees and asked me what I thought of certain proposals to increase student fees, and one of those was to increase student fees to help the marching band. I told him all about how underfunded the band is and that more money = better band. The band could be bigger and do a lot more and represent the school much better with more money to offer scholarships and upgrade the equipment. Next, he told me that he wanted to get the athletics department to provide some, if not all, of this extra funding for the band rather than increasing student fees.

I guess I'm just curious as to what other people less biased than me, a musician, think about this. Considering how far behind Utah State is as far as $$$ goes, is it worth it for the athletic department to invest in the marching band? Should they even have any obligation to do so? The band members put in a heck of a lot of time and effort to support the football team for a very small scholarship and little to no recognition. So should athletics give the band a cut of their revenue to return the favor for all the support? What do you guys think?

I think it needs to happen. I don't know whether we are in a position to make it happen right now. About how much funding would the band need, do you think?

BigBlueDart wrote:I think it needs to happen. I don't know whether we are in a position to make it happen right now. About how much funding would the band need, do you think?

I don't know an exact number, but probably enough money to drastically increase the amount of scholarship money to entice more people to join, plus some new instruments and new uniforms, none of which are cheap...

Dissolve the band. Invite a high school band to play in every home game. I am a student and I don't want any of my student fees going to support the band.. I'd much rather have my student fees used for new football helmets.. Haha..

I would definitely support increased funding to the band if it meant more band members, better instruments, better uniforms, etc. I think a big time band is a huge part of the game day experience. I don't think the AD is at the point where they can offer much more though. I think the better route would be to seek donations from alumni, especially alumni of the band itself.

I love the band. I was in the band for a year. They do need more money. What we really need is a new band identity. One day I want to see 16 sousaphones out there marching around. I also want to get rid of any woodwind instruments, except for maybe the piccolo, if they can stay in tune. We should have trumpets, trombones (I know you're in favor of that one), mellophones, and trumpets. We need to go DCI. I would like to see both student fees and athletics help support the band. That's my dream for the band.

For the band a little money would go a long way. when I was in the band years ago, they tried to get as many as they could the "participation" scholarship for being in marching band and also playing after the season in another ensemble through both semesters. When I was there that scholarship was all of $250 split between both semesters. After a couple years marching in a small band without much support the money wasn't worth the time commitment with engineering classes and work and all. $50k would be less than the football team pays for one charter flight but for the band would allow for doubling that minimal scholarship for all with a significant increase in size. 100K annually and the participation scholarship alone would keep the band over the 150 person mark I would think. I know if about $500 a year towards tuition would have kept me playing in the band all five years.

As for donations from alumni the music department has a bit of a disadvantage. My degree was engineering and I could get a really good paying job with a major aerospace company with that degree that pays enough to let me donate to the school on occasion. Priority then goes to the engineering department and athletics. Our band program pretty much creates middle school and high school band teachers, my wife is still in contact with several of them being a music major for half her college career. You don't get rich teaching band and don't make significant donations that would improve the quality of the program with some rich alumni. The department did a fund raiser about 10 years ago and they hit up all the alumni band teachers to donate a music stand. That level of donation is not going to make a difference.

I think having a kick-(I can't express myself without swearing) marching band is a huge part of the game-day experience. Big drums and fat brass lines have been the soundtrack of college football for over 100 years. 150 loud and proud band members in the stand is an undeniable asset to the home field.

That said, if I were a student, I don't know if I'd support another fee. I had a hard enough time swallowing the athletics fees we paid, even though I knew it was a great deal and I loved going to games.

In the past, the Athletics Department has offered to help contribute to certain marching band and pep band expenses. I was told several years ago that the band director turned that money down. Maybe the new director has a different take on that. Maybe it wasn't true to begin with.

I agree that the "scholarship" band members receive barely covers the cost of the tuition for the one credit hour you're required to sign up for to receive the money. Add in the facts that rehearsals are usually in the afternoon when swing-shift jobs pick up and when non-music majors have upper-level courses that conflict, and you have a hard time recruiting kids to stay in the organization more than a year or two. And when you lose your experienced players and leaders and have to rely on younger kids, an increasing number of whom never played in marching band in high school, the quality suffers and general public support declines. It's like playing football with only the JV team.

I'm positively impressed with the direction the band has taken the last year or two. A little something to sweeten the pot and make it easier for them to recruit and retain experienced, skilled musicians is well worth the investment. But it should come from the University and alumni, not the other students.

I really think the size of the fee could make a huge difference on how palate-able concept is. I think very few would think that supporting the band is a bad idea but dollars trump everything. With 20K+ students a fall only student fee of say $5 or $2-$3 each semester has a likelihood of passing without riling up major dissent or even being noticed by most of the student population. There are some who will fight for every dollar but most won't quibble over a couple dollars on $2000 tuition and fees bill.

If someone decides to combine lots of little improvement ideas or seeks a big one time investment they want funded and put together a $50 or higher fee a lot more scrutiny will come to bear. I remember when athletics fees went up about $60 per semester to about where they are now it was a huge issue. since then they have been changing a dollar or two every year and no one seems to notice.

This will never happen, but I think this board should do a fundraiser for the band. We complain about them enough. (And any money will go a long way)

smileyface wrote:This will never happen, but I think this board should do a fundraiser for the band. We complain about them enough. (And any money will go a long way)

I'd contribute.

I think if they did add a student fee, they could always just make it somewhat of an optional fee/donation. If it's only $5-$10 and you get a couple thousand students to contribute, it could make a difference.

Will just say that SpaceCase makes an important point: Rich alumni almost never come from the music program. My first donation dollars would go there if I ever have money to donate, but most of my former classmates probably have even tighter budgets than I do. Hard to create a cash cow when the most lucrative career out of college is joining a military band.

That said, something could probably be done and I think the amount of cash that would make a big difference is minimal compared to investments in buildings, coach salaries, etc.

If we are bringing in more cash from TV, tickets, royalties, bowl games, etc. certainly we can funnel some money to the band. That to me is a major upgrade that needs to happen after bathrooms and the press box. It would add so much more to have a better band. This last year I saw major improvement this last year.

SeattleAg wrote:Will just say that SpaceCase makes an important point: Rich alumni almost never come from the music program. My first donation dollars would go there if I ever have money to donate, but most of my former classmates probably have even tighter budgets than I do. Hard to create a cash cow when the most lucrative career out of college is joining a military band.

That said, something could probably be done and I think the amount of cash that would make a big difference is minimal compared to investments in buildings, coach salaries, etc.

I can't imagine that every member of the band goes on to become a middle school band teacher though. There have to be many more who end up in other fields (such as engineering) that could manage to contribute $5 a year or whatever. Like you said, I think a minimal contribution would go a long ways. If the scholarship they get is only $250, a small increase would be a relatively big jump.

donlarson8 wrote:

SeattleAg wrote:Will just say that SpaceCase makes an important point: Rich alumni almost never come from the music program. My first donation dollars would go there if I ever have money to donate, but most of my former classmates probably have even tighter budgets than I do. Hard to create a cash cow when the most lucrative career out of college is joining a military band.

That said, something could probably be done and I think the amount of cash that would make a big difference is minimal compared to investments in buildings, coach salaries, etc.

I can't imagine that every member of the band goes on to become a middle school band teacher though. There have to be many more who end up in other fields (such as engineering) that could manage to contribute $5 a year or whatever. Like you said, I think a minimal contribution would go a long ways. If the scholarship they get is only $250, a small increase would be a relatively big jump.

You are right the majority of marching band members are not future band directors and would donate to the band, assume they have a quality experience which I can't say I had about 10 years ago with no bowl games to go to and somewhat lower standard than expected. In my day the non music majors didn't last more than a year or two with the band. With the new marching band director, repeated bowl trips, and with more funding for more money and size. I could see the band making that impact that brings support and money.

Also, soliciting donations from alumni obviously wouldn't have to be limited to alumni of the band. I have no connection to the band, and I'm poor, but I would still donate something.

I would be happy to help organize something, though I'm not sure what use I would be. Lots of band connections from the early 2000s and late 1990s, but I think they're all poor. :p

No offense to trombone ninja, but the only thing an increase in numbers and equipment are going to do is allow us to put more people out on the field dancing and prancing around the field, like a bunch of dimwits, to fall out boy at halftime. I've been meaning to post on that performance at the NM Bowl, which was beyond terrible. UTEP completely owned our guys in every facet. Not just 'numbers', but they were playing in between each and every play, they would mix it up with a variety of tunes, and I think I heard their fight song about 30 times. Their halftime segment was well-rehearsed and they looked and moved sharp, like a REAL band. They were fun to watch. Whereas our guys, like they always do, just sat on their hands and MAYBE eked out 3-5 songs per quarter. For halftime, we were treated with our band running onto the field like 5th graders and listened to fall out boy. One song in particular, we had about 1/3 of the band playing, while the other band members danced around. No joke. I'm still trying to figure out who thought that was actually a good idea. I was frequently embarrassed for our band, but that usually happens 10-15 times per game, anyway, so par for the course, I guess.

I just don't see an increase in band members and equipment as the 'answer'. You want 'recognition'?? You want respect??? Then things need to change from the top down. Like flying scotsman said, our band needs to think real hard about what they want to be. Right now, the band is nothing more than an eyesore, or 'ear-sore', at athletic events. I say either fix the whole operation or get rid of it.

^^^^

srsly though. EVERYTHING SUCKS AND NOTHING WILL EVAR FIX SO BURN EVERYTHING!!!!! isn't a solution. Did you notice that the Air Force marching band 'danced like idiots' through most of their songs. I acutally prefer the band to be 'dancing like idiots' rather than sitting there and looking bored. Double also, this new guy has had 2 years to try to implement his system. Respect the Process (after the other guy was there for 15 years)

There's potential for awesome. We will move to more DCI style as time goes, but DCI is COMPLETELY different from what we were doing before. The band spent last year relearning how to march in the new guys style. Think of that. Something sooooo fundamental changed. After old guys spend up to 5 years doing it one way. and it changed.

So chill.

AGGZILLA wrote:No offense to trombone ninja, but the only thing an increase in numbers and equipment are going to do is allow us to put more people out on the field dancing and prancing around the field, like a bunch of dimwits, to fall out boy at halftime. I've been meaning to post on that performance at the NM Bowl, which was beyond terrible. UTEP completely owned our guys in every facet. Not just 'numbers', but they were playing in between each and every play, they would mix it up with a variety of tunes, and I think I heard their fight song about 30 times. Their halftime segment was well-rehearsed and they looked and moved sharp, like a REAL band. They were fun to watch. Whereas our guys, like they always do, just sat on their hands and MAYBE eked out 3-5 songs per quarter. For halftime, we were treated with our band running onto the field like 5th graders and listened to fall out boy. One song in particular, we had about 1/3 of the band playing, while the other band members danced around. No joke. I'm still trying to figure out who thought that was actually a good idea. I was frequently embarrassed for our band, but that usually happens 10-15 times per game, anyway, so par for the course, I guess.

I just don't see an increase in band members and equipment as the 'answer'. You want 'recognition'?? You want respect??? Then things need to change from the top down. Like flying scotsman said, our band needs to think real hard about what they want to be. Right now, the band is nothing more than an eyesore, or 'ear-sore', at athletic events. I say either fix the whole operation or get rid of it.

No offense taken. To be honest, I agree with most of this. I think most of the music we played this year was stupid (call me maybe?! Seriously?!?) and I really hated running into the field for each show. I don't like the way the new director has done things at all. The one good thing he's done is improve the way the band sounds, to a degree. Most of that is having the band face forward the entire show. Back in the day everyone would pretty much face whatever direction they were marching, meaning the west side would hear saxophones and trumpets while the south side heard the trombones and mellophone, etc. now the whole band faces the same direction, so they sound better, and that's an improvement. But I get the vibe that this new director is more concerned with the band looking like a drum corps than entertaining a crowd that came to watch a football game, and that's what frustrates me more than anything, even to the point where I don't even want to be in the band next year. So I definitely agree that more needs to be done than just getting more money, although the OP was just about whether or not anyone else thought that it would be a good investment.

I will say, however, that what you said about UTEP owning us with the stand tunes is completely untrue. We also played in between every play, and had a much larger variety of tunes. I heard maybe three different stand tunes from their band. Just sayin'

This is actually a quite interesting conversation maybe because was in marching band in high school. After reading the OP I thought to myself, 'What does Ohio State University, perhaps the gold standard in college marching bands, do for funding?' and so I went and looked.

Here's what I found: https://osumarchingband.com/support/

When I read through this my interpretation is that OSU has made a commitment to the band by providing dollars for a few years and then issuing the challenge for them to have a $20 million dollar endowment (1/2 through the fundraiser and 1/2 through more OSU commitment). See additional information at: http://dotthei.osu.edu/

This leads me to believe that the top levels of the university, including the AD who is a VP, perhaps need to become more involved. I don't know the level of involvement that they do have so perhaps it's not needed. However, when I watch the band I get the feeling that it's like, 'Yep, we have a band', level of commitment. Maybe the thought process is that people don't go to the football games to watch the band so it's hard to direct money that way. However, with the right songs the band can actually be enjoyable to listen to. The people at the top need decide that the band is an important enough fixture at the football games to become more involved to determine what the direction of the band and how best to support USU athletics.

I think it's kind of a 'one thing at a time' type of commitment from the AD. For example, first get the football team the resources needed to put together a winning team. Now let's upgrade the facilities (weight rooms, locker rooms, press box/west side), etc. Next it may be how to improve the gameday experience.

I know it's easy to poke at the USU marching band but I personally won't do that because I can appreciate what they're trying to do. If we don't like the prancing/running/whatever than perhaps a well crafted email sent to the director explaining what it looks like to you as a fan may help provide direction. Perhaps even providing him suggested music choices in terms of music. However, keep in mind that what is cool today and bought with limited funds for preparation for 2015 will likely not be cool then.

I'd try to avoid raising student fees. They are already paying a fee for Music & Theater so it may be worth looking into where that money is going and whether more of that can be captured. Maybe even getting rid of the 'Aggie Bike' and/or 'Blue Goes Green' fees and redirecting more towards the band could help pay for that. For those that love paying those fees for those organizations, I'm sorry. Pushing recycling fees to the students seems wrong and funding the Aggie Bike doesn't make sense to me. See: http://www.usu.edu/budget/Documents/Tui ... hedule.pdf

Marching bands are a key component of every big and successful football program I have been to. A well-funded band absolutely contributes to an amazing fan experience(a current goal of our AD). I expect we'll see great improvements to our band over the next several years.

Anyone who has been to a game where the other team has an amazing band knows what I'm talking about. Anyone been to a game at BYU lately? Tell me you didn't have the thought "I wish our band was more like theirs" and I'll call you a liar. While I don't think an awesome band will sell more tickets in and of itself, it's a key component to the overall fan experience that we hope to have in order to sell more tickets.

donlarson8 wrote:

SeattleAg wrote:Will just say that SpaceCase makes an important point: Rich alumni almost never come from the music program. My first donation dollars would go there if I ever have money to donate, but most of my former classmates probably have even tighter budgets than I do. Hard to create a cash cow when the most lucrative career out of college is joining a military band.

That said, something could probably be done and I think the amount of cash that would make a big difference is minimal compared to investments in buildings, coach salaries, etc.

I can't imagine that every member of the band goes on to become a middle school band teacher though. There have to be many more who end up in other fields (such as engineering) that could manage to contribute $5 a year or whatever. Like you said, I think a minimal contribution would go a long ways. If the scholarship they get is only $250, a small increase would be a relatively big jump.

I would like to see the scholarship level bumped up to at least 25% during the period the band is active. Summer and fall semesters? and winter for the pep band. That should help get numbers up. I don't have any ideas other than a small student fee for uniforms, travel etc. Maybe get the band involved in some fundraisers?

ag4fr wrote:Some tips for "COOL"

A. Get rid of the ridiculous announcer guy. Did they do that already? What would be wrong with just having the stadium PA announcer do the band as well. Honestly, I just tune the entire performance out and mostly just because that guy was so crazy.

B. Chaos is not really cool. It's a little funny the first time or two, then it is just chaos. Sharp choreography and crisp execution is actually pretty darn cool.

C. Loud is cool. We need more big and loud instruments and generally more people in the band. Not so many piccolo and flutes. The noise level of the band needs to rock the house and not be barely audible over noise of a 20K crowd. I want my ears to ring when they are done.

Yeah, that'd be cool...

My wife is an alumna of the College of the Arts and the music program. And we currently donate to the school, although it is limited.

I think what the music program needs to understand, is that while the marching band is not the most important part of the College of the Arts, it is the most visible to most people, much like the athletic program for the entire University.

As far as should the athletic program provide funding/payment to the band, I think so. I think there should be a certain amount per game that is paid to the band for playing, with the targeted goal between the athletic department and the marching/pep band to improve the game day experience.

If we decided to put together a fundraiser for the marching band, I would donate. But I think before that happens, I would want to make sure that everyone was on the same page with where they want the band to go. Especially with the number of outstanding marching bands the state of Utah has in the high school ranks, I see no reason that the band couldn't phenomenal. But it will take someone with a vision and the leadership to help it transform. That's what happened to the football program. I don't know if the current leader has that capability, but I think that's what it will take.

ag4fr wrote:Assuming a 150 person band, a $100K commitment to the band would take the stipend from $250 per year to nearly $1000 per year if all of the $$ was used on stipends.

At $1000 per year, I don't expect we would have any trouble finding kids from all kinds of majors who played in the band in high school and would like to play in college and have the opportunity to travel to bowl games and a few road games and conference bb games, etc.

Plus, at that point, they are pretty engaged and committed and they want to make the band great and stay with it for more than a year or two. At $250 per year, everybody is take it or leave it, at best.

In the grand scheme, $100K does not seem like that much money from the school or the AD or a combination of both to come up with.

I agree (I'd go back for $1000) but there are more costs for the band than just stipends. One big one is uniforms. A couple of years ago, we had (if I remember correctly) a 120 piece band. We just didn't have that many current uniforms. The drum line had to march in the old ones, and it looked weird. So, I think if there were an initial investment to get another 50 uniforms, than I think a $100K upkeep cost would do. However, those uniforms are incredibly expensive. So I don't think it's gonna happen.