Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest #1Stunner

OT: University of Tulsa Athletic Dept budget cuts

Recommended Posts

On 8/9/2018 at 4:34 PM, Slapdad said:

A successful athletic department can be one of the best marketing tools for a university and financial sinkholes come in many forms for a university, but those areas of a university that drain finances often offer the most cultural impact for a community. Arts and humanities are on that list. 

A myth.  Most universities never even sniff anything approaching a Flutie Effect  yet dump tens upon tens of millions of dollars into money losing athletic departments.  I always like to use the Minnesota/Purdue versus Oklahoma/Alabama analogy.  Which pair are nationally respected, AAU member universities with high entering SAT scores and multi-billion dollar endowments.  Hint: it's not the two football bluebloods.  As for the arts & humanities, I'm not sure how you call them financial sinkholes.  First of all, they're vital parts of universities' core mission.  At better schools, enrollment in humanities, social sciences and hard sciences is usually higher than is it is in the colleges of engineering or business (if the school offers those at all), so it's disingenuous to say that they don't pull their financial weight relative to more utilitarian colleges.

SteelCityBlue

November 24th, 2018 at 9:10 PM ^

I'm looking forward to a new head coach who isn't a cud-chewing autistic retard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Victor Maitlin said:

A myth.  Most universities never even sniff anything approaching a Flutie Effect  yet dump tens upon tens of millions of dollars into money losing athletic departments.  I always like to use the Minnesota/Purdue versus Oklahoma/Alabama analogy.  Which pair are nationally respected, AAU member universities with high entering SAT scores and multi-billion dollar endowments.  Hint: it's not the two football bluebloods.  As for the arts & humanities, I'm not sure how you call them financial sinkholes.  First of all, they're vital parts of universities' core mission.  At better schools, enrollment in humanities, social sciences and hard sciences is usually higher than is it is in the colleges of engineering or business (if the school offers those at all), so it's disingenuous to say that they don't pull their financial weight relative to more utilitarian colleges.

A myth, huh? Look no further than Boise State where applications spiked by 40% after each of their Fiesta Bowl wins. Smaller schools are in a better position to capitalize by a sudden rise in fortunes in football or basketball. Ask Gonzaga, who in 1990 was looking at a $1M deficit and enrollment dip from 4,167 to 2,100 in eight years before the Zags took off in basketball. It happened to Butler and Northern Iowa. It can also happen at P5 schools. The school that all Texas high school students wanted to go to was UT....until A&M joined the SEC and Mariel electrified football. Now, A&M is the school of choice in Texas. So to say it’s a myth is absolutely wrong. Does it happen to every school, of course not. But a successful athletic department create some bonds within the state/community that translates to applications, admissions and eventually alumni. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Slapdad said:

A myth, huh? Look no further than Boise State where applications spiked by 40% after each of their Fiesta Bowl wins. Smaller schools are in a better position to capitalize by a sudden rise in fortunes in football or basketball. Ask Gonzaga, who in 1990 was looking at a $1M deficit and enrollment dip from 4,167 to 2,100 in eight years before the Zags took off in basketball. It happened to Butler and Northern Iowa. It can also happen at P5 schools. The school that all Texas high school students wanted to go to was UT....until A&M joined the SEC and Mariel electrified football. Now, A&M is the school of choice in Texas. So to say it’s a myth is absolutely wrong. Does it happen to every school, of course not. But a successful athletic department create some bonds within the state/community that translates to applications, admissions and eventually alumni. 

And how many schools like Boise or Gonzaga receive that temporary, transitory "flutie effect" bump versus how many hundreds of millions of dollars every year are subsidizing money losing athletic departments?  And even the studies that do show a Flutie Effect agree that, while it causes a temporary bump in the quantity of applications, it does nothing to drive improvements in the quality of applicants.  As for giving, it drives increased athletic donations but not overall university donations, and one study I saw even showed that it might lessen academic donations as donors jump on the athletic bandwagon, and this would particularly be the danger at a school like Nevada that doesn't have a strong history of academic fundraising.

As for A&M, it was elected into the AAU long before Johnny Manziel was dropping racial slurs and empty beer cans on campus.  And A&M is NOT the school of choice in Texas.  Texas had more applications (47K vs. 33K), a lower acceptance rate (40% vs 66%) and higher SAT scores (1269 vs 1191), and those numbers aren't even close.  Texas A&M is only the school of choice for a very particular type of kid drawn to the weird fake army culture at A&M.  For everyone else in Texas, it's a backup school to UT.

Is Nevada a fundamentally better university because of 2010? I don't really see any difference in entering SAT scores, endowment, rankings etc.  Let's see how much SAT scores go up because of this year's Sweet 16.  Yet how much has Nevada pumped into athletic subsidies over the last decade?  Probably around $100M, and it's actually on the moderate end of the scale.  Do you think that $100M might have actually led to better academic improvements had it been directly spent on something like.....uhhh....academics?

Look, I can actually respect somebody saying, "I want my college to have big time sports and I don't care what it costs."  That's at least intellectually honest.  It's this bullshit argument that dumping all that money into athletics is somehow the best way to move the university forward academically that's a loser.

SteelCityBlue

November 24th, 2018 at 9:10 PM ^

I'm looking forward to a new head coach who isn't a cud-chewing autistic retard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tulsa's small student enrollment always raises the question whether it can sustain IA football status.  Tulsa has been written off many times in the past but, yet, Tulsa perseveres.  Tulsa reminds me of the service academies.  Not the most highly recruited athletes but athletes with dedication to both sports and academic achievement.  Tulsa, SMU, and Tulane, the three private schools in ACC/West, along with Navy, have a close affinity.  All four schools met in Washington, DC some time ago following the WAC-16 collapse to form a new conference.  It did not come to pass but it illustrates that these four schools find common ground.  I think the mentality is we need to hang together or else we will get hung one by one.

Tulsa is getting scorched on the AAC board.  The implication is Tulsa is not committing enough for coaching salaries to hire and retain good coaches and is therefore unable to build a strong competitive sports program.  My perspective is all G5 schools have the same problem as Tulsa.  If you pay a good football coach $200,000 or $2,000,000, a G5 school is going to lose their successful coach to the allure of the P5.  As a perspective, here is ACC's record in retaining successful football coaches:

Houston lost its FB coach to Texas.

SMU lost its FB coach to Arkansas.

UCF, the second largest university in USA and with a 50,000 football stadium, an undefeated season with a Peach Bowl victory over Auburn, lost its football coach to Nebraska.

Temple lost its FB coach to Baylor (of all places!).

UConn lost its FB coach to Maryland.

Navy lost its FB coach to Georgia Tech.

USF lost its FB coach to Oregon.

Memphis lots its FB coach to Virginia Tech. (Memphis also lost its basketball coach to Kentucky).

Tulsa lost its last two successful FB coaches to Louisville and Pittsburgh.

Again, the allure of the P5 is over powering, no matter what a G5 coach is paid.  Even a super successful program like Boise State loses its coaches, one to Colorado and most recently Washington U. 

In the meantime, there is no doubt in my mind that Tulsa will continue to be very competitive in AAC in all sports.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tulsa Guy said:

Memphis lots its FB coach to Virginia Tech. (Memphis also lost its basketball coach to Kentucky).

 

Memphis just raised it's football salary to 2.6 million to keep Norvell from taking the Arkansas gig...moreover, we kept Calipari 9 years.

I feel like we're doing just fine.

mem skyline sig.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, UofMTigers said:

Memphis just raised it's football salary to 2.6 million to keep Norvell from taking the Arkansas gig...moreover, we kept Calipari 9 years.

I feel like we're doing just fine.

Well to be fair, Calipri was there during a time where the financial gap between top conferences and the mid majors was smaller. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2018 at 1:12 PM, #1Stunner said:

Here are my ratings:

(1) Farr's (the founder was classically trained in Ice Cream manufacture at USU)

(2) Aggie Ice Cream 

(3) BYU Creamery

 

My co-worker says the ice cream from Washington St own creamery is pretty good. But she really likes their cheese.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, UofMTigers said:

Memphis just raised it's football salary to 2.6 million to keep Norvell from taking the Arkansas gig...moreover, we kept Calipari 9 years.

I feel like we're doing just fine.

Here is the new normal.  Mike Gundy at Oklahoma State and Lincoln Riley at Oklahoma U make $5 million per year with 5 year guaranteed contracts.

Scott Frost at Nebraska makes $5 million per year with a 7 year guaranteed contract.

Chad Morris at Arkansas starts at $3.5 million and will make an additional $500,000 per year in 2019, 2020, and 2021 if he is still with Arkansas.  In addition, his contract contains $1.2 million in bonus incentives each year.

Jumbo FIsher at TAMU makes $7.5 million per year with a 10 year guaranteed contract.

Willie Taggart at Florida State makes $5 million per year with a 6 year guaranteed contract.

All of the above contracts have additional performance bonuses, for example, academic performancel, bowls, playoffs, etc.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Well to be fair, Calipri was there during a time where the financial gap between top conferences and the mid majors was smaller. 

I believe when he left Memphis was paying Cal 2.2 million per year and that was sold back in 2009.

mem skyline sig.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UofMTigers said:

I believe when he left Memphis was paying Cal 2.2 million per year and that was sold back in 2009.

Yes, $2.2 million in 2009 is solid.  But Cal still left for the allure of P5 status.  And that's the point....no matter how much a G5 school "invests" in their athletic program, it is impossible to hold of the P5 schools.  By the way, John Calipari salary at the U of Kentucky is $7.45 million....before bonuses.  New Memphis basketball Penny is being paid $1.5 million annually with a 3 year contract.  Memphis owes former basketball coach Tubby Smith $10 million because he was fired before the end of his contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2018 at 3:30 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Viktor is a conflicted fan.  He is a sports fan but he is of the opinion that athletics generally do more harm than good for the school and investment in things like facilities are generally a bad idea.  Reno has a lot of fans like that unfortunately and it has really hampered their Athletic Department. 

WTF are you talking about. There might be 1 NV fan on this board that thinks that way, and I never saw a lot of that mentality when I lived there. 

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tulsa Guy said:

Yes, $2.2 million in 2009 is solid.  But Cal still left for the allure of P5 status.  And that's the point....no matter how much a G5 school "invests" in their athletic program, it is impossible to hold of the P5 schools.  By the way, John Calipari salary at the U of Kentucky is $7.45 million....before bonuses.  New Memphis basketball Penny is being paid $1.5 million annually with a 3 year contract.  Memphis owes former basketball coach Tubby Smith $10 million because he was fired before the end of his contract.

Penny only took that deal to make the Tubby buyout possible.

Memphis was paying Tubby 3 million per year...that's about our current max for a hoops coach.

mem skyline sig.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Image result for tulsa time eric clapton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Victor Maitlin said:

And how many schools like Boise or Gonzaga receive that temporary, transitory "flutie effect" bump versus how many hundreds of millions of dollars every year are subsidizing money losing athletic departments?  And even the studies that do show a Flutie Effect agree that, while it causes a temporary bump in the quantity of applications, it does nothing to drive improvements in the quality of applicants.  As for giving, it drives increased athletic donations but not overall university donations, and one study I saw even showed that it might lessen academic donations as donors jump on the athletic bandwagon, and this would particularly be the danger at a school like Nevada that doesn't have a strong history of academic fundraising.

As for A&M, it was elected into the AAU long before Johnny Manziel was dropping racial slurs and empty beer cans on campus.  And A&M is NOT the school of choice in Texas.  Texas had more applications (47K vs. 33K), a lower acceptance rate (40% vs 66%) and higher SAT scores (1269 vs 1191), and those numbers aren't even close.  Texas A&M is only the school of choice for a very particular type of kid drawn to the weird fake army culture at A&M.  For everyone else in Texas, it's a backup school to UT.

Is Nevada a fundamentally better university because of 2010? I don't really see any difference in entering SAT scores, endowment, rankings etc.  Let's see how much SAT scores go up because of this year's Sweet 16.  Yet how much has Nevada pumped into athletic subsidies over the last decade?  Probably around $100M, and it's actually on the moderate end of the scale.  Do you think that $100M might have actually led to better academic improvements had it been directly spent on something like.....uhhh....academics?

Look, I can actually respect somebody saying, "I want my college to have big time sports and I don't care what it costs."  That's at least intellectually honest.  It's this bullshit argument that dumping all that money into athletics is somehow the best way to move the university forward academically that's a loser.

I absolutely agree with every point that you make, but I think the one thing you left out is simply name recognition (particularly for western schools). While perhaps not a big deal or worth the cost, it is certainly a factor. 

If it weren't for UNLV basketball or Boise State football, no one outside of Vegas or Boise would even know that these universities exist. I think the athletic program at Nevada has bought a lot of recognition, for what is honestly not a very well known university. When I tell people that I went to Nevada, there are certainly people who don't know anything about it or even that it exists, but sometimes people will bring up the basketball team or Colin Kaepernick. While not necessarily for the best reasons, it does put the name out there and that is worth something. Particularly for a land grant, flagship university like Nevada in a quickly growing state. If it wants to align academically with schools like Oregon, Utah, Arizona, ASU, etc then just getting the name recognition is a big part. Athletics can significantly contribute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2018 at 8:36 AM, #1Stunner said:

https://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/tusportsextra/bill-haisten-derrick-gragg-philip-montgomery-and-frank-haith-accept/article_833b8a0b-9b60-5982-be6d-ecda78465987.html

Looks like the University of Tulsa is experience major budget problems.  To address it, the Athletic Director, Basketball Coach, and Football Coach are all taking pay cuts.  And Tulsa is going to start doing more 1 and done "money games" with P5 opponents.

Problem is that they have limited revenue sources.

 

TU also is hopeful that the next American Athletic Conference television deal is more lucrative. At the end of the 2016-17 college sports calendar, the Orlando Sentinel reported, South Florida received the most significant share at $8.9 million. TU’s share was $4.9 million.

The AAC’s current television deal expires in two years. Conference officials are preparing for the next negotiation of a contract that would take effect with the start of the 2020 football season.

“We’re just not getting anywhere near what we deserve in TV,” AAC Commissioner Mike Aresco told the Sentinel in June. “It’s a throwback to that five-year-ago period when we were very unstable and the whole situation was unstable, and that’s just not remotely true now.

“I think at the time, I don’t think anyone realized how powerful our schools could become. We’ve established ourselves as a nationally relevant and respected conference, and now it’s a question of (making) sure that results in a TV deal that we need to keep this going.”

Lol! What a putz!

PEA6!!!

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2018 at 8:42 AM, #1Stunner said:

Here is a look at the Athletic Department finances for every public university.

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

If:

1. A chain is truly only as strong as its weakest link; and

2. The Pac aspires to be as strong as the other four power conferences; then

3. Oregon State and Washington state should be cut out of the chain.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2018 at 1:54 PM, Victor Maitlin said:

A fair assessment.  I love college football (and basketball & hockey to a lesser degree), but I also consider them to be corrupting influences on their universities that can cause huge negative pr problems and have become significant financial sinkholes at many, if not most, schools. Does that make me a hypocrite come football season?  Perhaps, but who said life was all neat and cut and dried. 

Relevant to the calculus is one's perspective.

I recently heard that nationally, only about 20% of public K-12 schools still have organized physical education. The speaker's assertion in so stating was that narrowmindedness by policy makers was among the reasons for the increasing obesity of school-age kids and I wouldn't dispute that premise. Our son attended the same public elementary school I went to. "In my day" at the lower grades teachers would educate us as to the rules of such sports as kickball and dodge ball and observe the play. However, in that same school 12+ years ago, they would pretty much just open up the "ball room" to allow kids to borrow balls during "PE" if they so chose. Thankfully our son had already begun playing T-ball and AYSO before he entered kindergarten so unlike about half of his classmates, he wouldn't just sit around doing nothing. I don't necessarily disagree with you about college football or basketball or whatever but insofar as their existence gets kids to participate in physical activity at the HS and middle school levels who would otherwise be sitting on their butt all day, I think it's a positive.

As to the corrupting influence, it seems to me the main blame for that lies on the shoulders of the NCAA which has spineless leaders like Mark Emerett and which is so institutionally impotent it can't even issue subpoenas to compel people to speak with its investigators.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SGF, going off that chart San Jose State and New Mexico State would have the 4th largest budget if either returned to the BW.  I didn't expect Cal Poly to be ahead of those two.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...