My Warde Take

[huskypantz]

So uconnphil and
freescooter have liked his post
that's all you need to know

I think he's channeling stevie wonder-vision and I still liked it - it was funny.

 

[Alum86]

Is it April yet?
Can't wait to see your tantrums
over NY Mets.

Meh.

Stairmaster loves Warde
Embarrasing on this board
Please stop it, Dear Lord.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

We are not talking a couple million - depending on what accounting methodology - we are talking 10's of millions in the hole. Running huge deficits is generally not the business plan you want to highlight toward acceptance to anything.

Specifically, what should've been cut? How many sports shut down?

 

[J187Money]

We are not talking a couple million - depending on what accounting methodology - we are talking 10's of millions in the hole. Running huge deficits is generally not the business plan you want to highlight toward acceptance to anything.

So with a $1.18B budget, and the fact that tuition isn't free, it is clear that the school as a whole is unprofitable. The entire model is built on deficits. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, but what's to say they don't cut a flagging academic program instead? You and I don't have the data on the entire financial situation of the school and how decisions are made.

They could just decide that they are willing to spend $20 million a year on what amounts to marketing on sports. The ROI on UCONN sports cannot be solely measured on its cash return.

 

[Adios]

So much for this thread.

 

[uconnphil2016]

So with a $1.18B budget, and the fact that tuition isn't free, it is clear that the school as a whole is unprofitable. The entire model is built on deficits. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, but what's to say they don't cut a flagging academic program instead? You and I don't have the data on the entire financial situation of the school and how decisions are made.

They could just decide that they are willing to spend $20 million a year on what amounts to marketing on sports. The ROI on UCONN sports cannot be solely measured on its cash return.

Also, if Warde were to cut our athletic budget at a time where we're trying desperately to make it into P5 we'd basically be accepting defeat and would be relegated to mid-level D1 athletics. Warde and Dr. Herbst aren't morons--they obviously know that the current financial model for our athletic department is unsustainable. But, we've got to keep spending while we can in hopes of making it into the sandbox with the big boys...spending money is both the solution and the problem. Budget is going to be a much bigger issue for the next AD as Big East money disappears and we have to figure out how to fit square pegs into a round hole

 

[Chief00]

The state budget environment is dramatically changing due to a day of reckoning - anyone that is in denial of this fact misreads the landscape. The latest casualty are XL renovations and reports of 600 state employee layoffs.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The state budget environment is dramatically changing due to a day of reckoning - anyone that is in denial of this fact misreads the landscape. The latest casualty are XL renovations and reports of 600 state employee layoffs.

Yes, a day of reckoning is on the horizon and it is a shame that most politicians ignored this for as long as they have.

That said, how can you be sure that attempting to improve our situation (and as a result, income) in athletics isn't the best course of action to deal with the arrival of said day of reckoning?

 

[Husky25]

Are you saying that the position of Athletic Director at the University of Connecticut also includes Gubernatorial responsibilities?

Warde Manuel may resemble Huell in stature (though I think Huell is bigger), but his bed is not made up of $88 Million in cash. His budget must be approved. UConn does not own, nor operate, the XL Center. So to think any dollars saved (should he tighten his belt with the UConn athletic budget )would go toward renovations or save the jobs of 600 state employees is foolhardy at best.

 

[whaler11]

I don't see how the state budget is the issue. I don't see how the students dont revolt over the subsidy. It's not like the state's general fund buys the Munchkins (required donut joke).

 

[Chief00]

I am willing to consider the argument that we should ignore the budget landscape - be the outlier - roll the dice - and spend at P5 levels to achieve P5 status.
The companion to that argument is leadership getting us into the P5 - so far they have failed at that while schools that arguable have less attributes make it. Warde walks away not having succeeded at that formula - granted in a support role to the President. However, if they had succeeded that would have been highlighted in the write-ups about what he accomplished at UConn.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

I am willing to consider the argument that we should ignore the budget landscape - be the outlier - roll the dice - and spend at P5 levels to achieve P5 status.
The companion to that argument is leadership getting us into the P5 - so far they have failed at that while schools that arguable have less attributes make it. Warde walks away not having succeeded at that formula - granted in a support role to the President. However, if they had succeeded that would have been highlighted in the write-ups about what he accomplished at UConn.

Just go to bed.

 

[Chief00]

Just go to bed.

Kind of early for bed - did not grow up on a farm

 

[J187Money]

I am willing to consider the argument that we should ignore the budget landscape - be the outlier - roll the dice - and spend at P5 levels to achieve P5 status.
The companion to that argument is leadership getting us into the P5 - so far they have failed at that while schools that arguable have less attributes make it. Warde walks away not having succeeded at that formula - granted in a support role to the President. However, if they had succeeded that would have been highlighted in the write-ups about what he accomplished at UConn.

That isn't really my point. My point is that virtually every program in America loses money on an unsubsidized basis, including most P5 schools. Every D2 and D3 school has sports, and none of them make money either. High school sports don't make money (ok maybe football does in Texas). And yet, all of this stuff exists on every level. Each organization makes a determination as to how much pain they are willing to bear, and what the "value" of every athletic and academic program brings to the school.

http://chronicle.com/interactives/n...dec289e45aaa8f12757d89e52c2#id=details_129020

There are also a lot of ways to look at the math. In 2014 UCONN athletics had $71M of revenue, $17M of it was subsidies from the school. $10M from student fees. The student fees don't cost the school anything, and UCONN has record enrollment, so I'm going to pretend for a second that money doesn't matter.

http://www.foundation.uconn.edu/2015/12/08/the-fy15-uconn-foundation-annual-report/

BUT - the school also raised $16.9M through the foundation for athletics, and it doesn't look like any of that money is counted in the "revenues" in the above. So did the school really lose any money on a cash basis?

If you took athletics away, how much money would you have to spend on marketing in order to make the school attractive to students across the country? $5M? $10M? $20M? I have no idea.

What I'm trying to say is that athletics is part of a complex ecosystem and people LOVE to break out sports as a separate entity because it makes for a good read. But that isn't how you would look at it if you "ran" the business of UCONN as a whole. So it is silly to look at it that way if you are standing on the sidelines. Even "for profit" businesses do all sorts of things that aren't profitable in and of themselves for a variety of reasons. People that write these articles have an agenda.

I'm not saying that the finances don't matter - but you can't look at them in a vacuum.

 

[upstater]

BUT - the school also raised $16.9M through the foundation for athletics, and it doesn't look like any of that money is counted in the "revenues" in the above. So did the school really lose any money on a cash basis?

That money should be listed in AD revenues under donations. It is a revenue line.

 

[freescooter]

That isn't really my point. My point is that virtually every program in America loses money on an unsubsidized basis, including most P5 schools. Every D2 and D3 school has sports, and none of them make money either. High school sports don't make money (ok maybe football does in Texas). And yet, all of this stuff exists on every level. Each organization makes a determination as to how much pain they are willing to bear, and what the "value" of every athletic and academic program brings to the school.

http://chronicle.com/interactives/n...dec289e45aaa8f12757d89e52c2#id=details_129020

There are also a lot of ways to look at the math. In 2014 UCONN athletics had $71M of revenue, $17M of it was subsidies from the school. $10M from student fees. The student fees don't cost the school anything, and UCONN has record enrollment, so I'm going to pretend for a second that money doesn't matter.

http://www.foundation.uconn.edu/2015/12/08/the-fy15-uconn-foundation-annual-report/

BUT - the school also raised $16.9M through the foundation for athletics, and it doesn't look like any of that money is counted in the "revenues" in the above. So did the school really lose any money on a cash basis?

If you took athletics away, how much money would you have to spend on marketing in order to make the school attractive to students across the country? $5M? $10M? $20M? I have no idea.

What I'm trying to say is that athletics is part of a complex ecosystem and people LOVE to break out sports as a separate entity because it makes for a good read. But that isn't how you would look at it if you "ran" the business of UCONN as a whole. So it is silly to look at it that way if you are standing on the sidelines. Even "for profit" businesses do all sorts of things that aren't profitable in and of themselves for a variety of reasons. People that write these articles have an agenda.

I'm not saying that the finances don't matter - but you can't look at them in a vacuum.

I have been making this argument for decades now. Athletics are one part of the modern American university's program. The idea that it should make money is very very recent. If that is the standard you'd have 1-2 sports, only for men. Maybe not those. And they'd have a tough time finding opponents.

 

[whaler11]

I certainly see the marketing argument.

I just find kids borrowing money to pay fees which enrich coaches and admins with huge sums a bit... distasteful.

 

[J187Money]

I certainly see the marketing argument.

I just find kids borrowing money to pay fees which enrich coaches and admins with huge sums a bit... distasteful.

Conceptually I'm with you 100%. But to the extent that the Puppetry school loses money - part of your business school tuition goes to subsidize that. So I'm not sure getting upset about this v. that makes any sense. It just might be more visible.

 

[whaler11]

Conceptually I'm with you 100%. But to the extent that the Puppetry school loses money - part of your business school tuition goes to subsidize that. So I'm not sure getting upset about this v. that makes any sense. It just might be more visible.

Nobody in the puppetry school is making 8 figures over their contract.

 

[freescooter]

Whaler
I do think that's a legitimate issue. For that matter the idea that the basketball and football coaches make more than the governor and legislatures combined is ever so slightly weird too. But as to the basic concept I agree with J187money. The UConn orchestra doesn't make any money. The theatre department loses money on its shows. If it had to pay the true costs of its facilities it couldn't do it. Now if you want to argue that a school can do without a $30 million practice gym or something that's available to 20 people I get it. But the idea that sports shouldn't be subsidized by the university I'm not on board with you there.

 

[J187Money]

Nobody in the puppetry school is making 8 figures over their contract.

The only major coach that left here voluntarily (Edsall) left for more money, so hard to argue we are overpaying our coaches. Once we have decided that we are in the game, we need to play by the established rules.

 

[uconnphil2016]

I certainly see the marketing argument.

I just find kids borrowing money to pay fees which enrich coaches and admins with huge sums a bit... distasteful.

As a student, I totally understand and agree but there's nothing we can really do to change the larger structure of college sports as a business and where UConn fits into that picture. There's just no way on God's green earth that we're going to stop pumping money into our athletic dept, regardless of where the money comes from and who has to suffer in order to keep the cash cow grazing. Not sure on the exact numbers, but I think that its somewhere between 3-4K per student over the course of four years, taken from the 'student activity fee.' Kids probably don't make a huge stink about it because when we receive tuition statements, we're charged for very vague things (such as student activity fee) and have no idea what it means or entails. It probably takes a substantial amount of digging to find out exactly what that money funds and where the majority of it goes. Also, losing out on 3 or 4 K pales in comparison to the tens of thousands of dollars kids are screwed out of due to exorbitant interest rates on loans as well as just the larger outrageous cost of tuition to begin with. So, in short, kids probably (1) have bigger fish to fry and (2) are totally confused about where their money is actually going

 

[whaler11]

The only major coach that left here voluntarily (Edsall) left for more money, so hard to argue we are overpaying our coaches. Once we have decided that we are in the game, we need to play by the established rules.

I'm talking about the entire system nothing specific to UConn

 

[whaler11]

Whaler
I do think that's a legitimate issue. For that matter the idea that the basketball and football coaches make more than the governor and legislatures combined is ever so slightly weird too. But as to the basic concept I agree with J187money. The UConn orchestra doesn't make any money. The theatre department loses money on its shows. If it had to pay the true costs of its facilities it couldn't do it. Now if you want to argue that a school can do without a $30 million practice gym or something that's available to 20 people I get it. But the idea that sports shouldn't be subsidized by the university I'm not on board with you there.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be subsidized... but it's a fairly big chunk of money which is being lent to students to pay coaches and adminstrators.

Horse is out of the barn and clearly I don't care that much it's not like I stopped watching.

 

[J187Money]

I'm not saying it shouldn't be subsidized... but it's a fairly big chunk of money which is being lent to students to pay coaches and adminstrators.

Horse is out of the barn and clearly I don't care that much it's not like I stopped watching.

The entire financial model of higher education is fundamentally broken. Athletics, while something shiny to look at are a pimple on the ass of the elephant.