Insider: Herbst in over her head

[freescooter]

I agree with this, but then you can't say she is instituting Ivy League policies when she is the most aggressive UConn President in terms of downgrading the curriculum for athletes. I mean, she did the exact opposite of what Ivy League schools do. So how is that Ivy League? There's a reason the team's APR scores were jacked up the last few years, despite the fact that so many from those classes never finished their degrees. We'll likely end up with a GSR in the high 75% range from that class, with only Beverly, Okwandu and Kemba graduating. Meanwhile, Oriakhi, Smith, Lamb, Bradley, Jamal Coombs-McDaniel, all gone. And none of them will count against UConn.

upstater, nobody is saying she is implementing Ivy policies at UConn so much as that if she could she would give athletics a similar level of priority. There is a difference. But I do think that outlook has had an impact on the way they have handled the conference realignment thing. And maybe the selection of Manuel as AD, too. If you think it is very important, you pick an AD who will fight for it and you fight for it. If you don't, you issue press releases that say in effect doesn't matter what league we're in, look at our academic progress...

 

[upstater]

upstater, nobody is saying she is implementing Ivy policies at UConn so much as that if she could she would give athletics a similar level of priority. There is a difference. But I do think that outlook has had an impact on the way they have handled the conference realignment thing. And maybe the selection of Manuel as AD, too. If you think it is very important, you pick an AD who will fight for it and you fight for it. If you don't, you issue press releases that say in effect doesn't matter what league we're in, look at our academic progress...

Every President in the country would do the same thing, including SEC presidents. Some SEC presidents have even tried, but they know what happens when you buck boosters and politicians. So to say she prefers more emphasis on academics over athletics is a "No * Sherlock" kind of statement. What should be more interesting to everyone is that she implemented the kind of academic policies that hurt academics and helped athletics. She had to do it because of the APR--but in the final analysis, she did it!!

 

[J187Money]

When you consider the money suck of athletics yearly, and the big payout in the other conferences, a differential of $20m in TV rights alone, and you add to that nightmarish scenarios of empty seats from a disintegrating product, we could be talking about $30-40 million in losses on top of the $10 million they already lose, ell, with that kind of money at stake, it better be her priority. If endowments are returning 4% in interest per year, and some of the 4% has to be reinvested in the endowment, then do the calculations. The losses are the equivalent of losing a half billion in endowment. This is a huge amount of money, which makes much of this thread preposterous. If Herbst really doesn't put this as priority #1 right now, you have to be scared for the university as a whole, because she is taking huge risks with her maneuvers on the academic side (ie. shifting resources, raising tuition).

In 2011 and 2012, each football school got $3.18M in TV revenues. (assuming this site is accurate)

http://collegesportsinfo.com/2012/05/10/2012-ncaa-television-revenue-by-conference/

I understand there is a big differential between the new deals that the other conferences are getting (and what we would get) and what we would get as a member of, say, C-USA (@1.17M/school). But that is $2M from current revenues. Forgone revenue isn't a loss to the school. Clearly it puts us at a competitive disadvantage, and clearly we would lose some other revenue from lower ticket sales, but I don't think it is anywhere near the magnitude of what you are talking about.

 

[upstater]

In 2011 and 2012, each football school got $3.18M in TV revenues. (assuming this site is accurate)

http://collegesportsinfo.com/2012/05/10/2012-ncaa-television-revenue-by-conference/

I understand there is a big differential between the new deals that the other conferences are getting (and what we would get) and what we would get as a member of, say, C-USA (@1.17M/school). But that is $2M from current revenues. Forgone revenue isn't a loss to the school. Clearly it puts us at a competitive disadvantage, and clearly we would lose some other revenue from lower ticket sales, but I don't think it is anywhere near the magnitude of what you are talking about.

And what about the athletics budget?

It's in the $60 million range. UConn already loses $15 million.

By throwing in the towel instead of holding out for an ACC invite, you're perpetuating $15 million (or more) in losses a year.

Unless you get rid of football and join the A10. But that's another story.

 

[J187Money]

And what about the athletics budget?

It's in the $60 million range. UConn already loses $15 million.

By throwing in the towel instead of holding out for an ACC invite, you're perpetuating $15 million (or more) in losses a year.

Unless you get rid of football and join the A10. But that's another story.

I'm not saying it is meaningless but 15M is 1.4% of the 1.05B budget for the entire school.

 

[upstater]

I'm not saying it is meaningless but 15M is 1.4% of the 1.05B budget for the entire school.

I already went through this before.

I wish I could find my dang post. But you're conflating fix costs with fungible costs. Endowments have strings attached. So do research grants. Not to mention benefits, building costs, debt service on bonds, tenured faculty, etc. At most, UConn probably is looking at a budget of $100 million as fungible, if not less.

You're effectively using up 15% of the money Uconn has to make the school work. consider that the big build out of faculty is only using $10 million a year, and that this money is going to come from tuition and cuts elsewhere. They will need to get rid of departments elsewhere to do this. And nationally Uconn is being touted and cheered for this $10 million outlay.

Budgets are not what they seem. The costs are mostly fixed. When people give you money for research, etc., there are strings attached. The tuition money probably covers faculty pay at best.

 

[pj]

Universities have bloated administrative staffs. The ratio of administrators to teaching/research faculty has risen dramatically over the last 20 years. Anything that reduces that ratio is a smart move, since the faculty bring in revenue but the administrators don't.

Athletics brings in revenue too.

To build up the university, we need both faculty and successful athletics. You can't persuade me that she's damaging athletics by hiring faculty. Arguably she is improving our profile to the B1G.

 

[J187Money]

I already went through this before.

I wish I could find my dang post. But you're conflating fix costs with fungible costs. Endowments have strings attached. So do research grants. Not to mention benefits, building costs, debt service on bonds, tenured faculty, etc. At most, UConn probably is looking at a budget of $100 million as fungible, if not less.

You're effectively using up 15% of the money Uconn has to make the school work. consider that the big build out of faculty is only using $10 million a year, and that this money is going to come from tuition and cuts elsewhere. They will need to get rid of departments elsewhere to do this. And nationally Uconn is being touted and cheered for this $10 million outlay.

Budgets are not what they seem. The costs are mostly fixed. When people give you money for research, etc., there are strings attached. The tuition money probably covers faculty pay at best.

Trust me. I've spent my life dealing with budgets etc. I 100% know what you are talking about, but I will also say this:

If the financial solvency of a university is dependent on the success of the athletics department, they should just shut it down. Too many variables that cannot be controlled.

 

[businesslawyer]

I don't quite buy that chief, but let's say it true. You being a woman might have something to do with that? The priests in charge of Catholic schools don't dig her? Same dudes that likely spread the word she was "begging" them to stay? Big f--in deal.

To be honest, I'd be interested to see her play the Title IX card - that all these conference moves are having an adverse effect on an elite women's basketball program, which is one of the few profitable ones in the country, which in turn affects all the other women's programs which would be threatened (like the ones at Rutgers and Maryland that were bagged b/c of poor management).

I remain shocked that not one women's issues politician has screamed about this yet. I just don't get it.

 

[upstater]

Universities have bloated administrative staffs. The ratio of administrators to teaching/research faculty has risen dramatically over the last 20 years. Anything that reduces that ratio is a smart move, since the faculty bring in revenue but the administrators don't.

Athletics brings in revenue too.

To build up the university, we need both faculty and successful athletics. You can't persuade me that she's damaging athletics by hiring faculty. Arguably she is improving our profile to the B1G.

You're right, but this doesn't account for the increased costs. Administration salary is still below 1% of the entire budget, so at most, it has accounted for say .5% of the rise.

I was actually arguing that athletics can damage academics, as it has at numerous schools. The reverse.

 

[NEforceUConn]

...............

To be honest, I'd be interested to see her play the Title IX card - that all these conference moves are having an adverse effect on an elite women's basketball program, which is one of the few profitable ones in the country, which in turn affects all the other women's programs which would be threatened (like the ones at Rutgers and Maryland that were bagged b/c of poor management).

Wow great point (and I thought that before I saw a fellow bantam comment on it). That card should be shown to the press and gov because it actually holds some credibility.

The university/college community should be ashamed of themselves turning the other way and allowing Conference Commissioners to dictate the future of storied universities. A tragedy.

 

[specialisthusky]

I remain shocked that not one women's issues politician has screamed about this yet. I just don't get it.

I am not sure the casual bystanders understand the implications and collateral damages that CR will eventually cause. Heck I'm not sure our administration even grasps it. I think these politicians will voice their opinions in about 3-5 years when the effects become more visible.

 

[businesslawyer]

So who knows Congresswoman Delauro and wants to make sure she and her staff do get this?

 

[mets1090]

In regards to the OP, at every company you can find one employee that thinks their boss is bad at their job. Call them an insider and you make it a story.

 

[J187Money]

So who knows Congresswoman Delauro and wants to make sure she and her staff do get this?

I do. Seriously. If someone wants to draft a letter I would be happy to put my name on it and give it to her.

 

[businesslawyer]

I do. Seriously. If someone wants to draft a letter I would be happy to put my name on it and give it to her.

If I have time this weekend.

 

[ctchamps]

I do. Seriously. If someone wants to draft a letter I would be happy to put my name on it and give it to her.

Before BL goes to the trouble are you liked by the Congresswoman?

 

[J187Money]

Before BL goes to the trouble are you liked by the Congresswoman?

Personal / family friend.

 

[ctchamps]

Get on the stick BL.

 

[NEforceUConn]

For women's bb to save UConn athletic future would be an SI story of the century! (Note I do not say ESPN - those bastards)

Boys please proceed, and cc Hillary, Jill Abramson and even Oprah.