UConn bracing for ‘deep cuts’ to sports and academics

-
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
56,430
Likes
85,081

>>“One thing that was not discussed (publicly) is the conversation I’ve had with the university leadership and the board is it’s not a 25 percent reduction starting July 1,” Benedict said. “It’s getting to 25 percent over the next three years. However, you’re going to have that plan in place on how you’re going to get there in Year 1, Year 2, Year 3.”<<
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
3,375
Likes
4,858
Go back to the 90s. Make all cuts in education so people like me can get back into the college again. In fact cut an extra 10 million from academics and add it to the AD.
We are not getting into the Big 10 time to stop acting like it.
 

David 76

Forty years a fan
Joined
Nov 8, 2013
Messages
5,745
Likes
6,786
Devaluing the cost of an athletic scholarship to an in -state scholarship does nothing to help UConn's financials problems. It would look better for th Athletic but it is a shell game.
colleges are the only business that have far outpaced medical care in inflation over the past 50 years. Something like 1400%.
And while medicine looks entirely different from 50 years ago, college does not.
i love UConn and value education but a reckoning is coming, especially for private colleges without the highest prestige. I hope UConn adapts. They have gotten away with too much. Covid is accelerating the college crisis.
 
Joined
Nov 24, 2019
Messages
279
Likes
988

>>“One thing that was not discussed (publicly) is the conversation I’ve had with the university leadership and the board is it’s not a 25 percent reduction starting July 1,” Benedict said. “It’s getting to 25 percent over the next three years. However, you’re going to have that plan in place on how you’re going to get there in Year 1, Year 2, Year 3.”<<
“Football lost $13.3 million last year.” Yikes.... doesn’t take a genius to see that’s not sustainable. I get the independent route, buy games, new TV contract etc to make that gap up. I just still wonder what the end goal is and how they close the gap. People who follow football more than me, can you outline how they get into the green again? Or at least break even? And is basketball currently going to be the only non revenue generating sport? It’s just staggering to see the numbers actually outlined. Somethings gotta give at some point.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
56,430
Likes
85,081
“Football lost $13.3 million last year.” Yikes.... doesn’t take a genius to see that’s not sustainable. I get the independent route, buy games, new TV contract etc to make that gap up. I just still wonder what the end goal is and how they close the gap. People who follow football more than me, can you outline how they get into the green again? Or at least break even? And is basketball currently going to be the only non revenue generating sport? It’s just staggering to see the numbers actually outlined. Somethings gotta give at some point.
Here’s some background if you haven’t seen it before:
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
5,793
Likes
6,964
The football experiment has clearly failed. Let's admit it, and move on. That's a quarter of the deficit right there.
To call it an experiment is a disservice to the many kids that have played and fans that have paid. The real cost is the massive employee payroll and bloated benefits that make the sports programs look like peanuts. .
 
Joined
Sep 22, 2013
Messages
208
Likes
223
We are not cutting football. Why do people keep bringing this up?....
Caronimo ...... aren’t you one of the many posters that said UConn would never move to the Big East ?

The reality is that football provides a terrible return on the University’s investment, and impairs its image.

The many- many millions of dollars used to subsidize UConn football could be used to expand financial aid to UConn students, offer merit scholarships for exemplary students, or a number of other ways to expand the academic footprint of UConn.
 

CL82

The best thing about puppies is they become dogs!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
36,104
Likes
61,036
Some school's OOS tuition is still below the expenditure per student.
Where does there operating budget come from then. Does the legislature subsidize OOS tuition as well as in state?
All other units account for it in the same way. When my department brings in an out-of-state Masters student who pays far more for tuition than we spend on him/her, we don't keep the profit.
True but are you charged more than the student brings in?
some states have a hard cap on the number of out of state students allowed. They preserve seats for in-staters by law. This means that, if athletic departments did not reimburse the academic side fully, every out-of-state athlete is essentially a missed opportunity to profit from a a student willing to pay 50k.
Or alternatively, the school could simply not count athletes toward the OOS cap.
The academic side in the vast vast majority of cases subsidizes the entire athletic department, which makes this conversation moot.
Sort of, but the paper inflation of the cost of tuition for an athlete is net nothing to the extent it actually exceeds the actual education cost.

I'm just not a fan of inflated inter-department charges. It is, in my view deceptive accounting. I feel the same way about the cost to UConn for the use of the Rent or the XL Center.
 

CL82

The best thing about puppies is they become dogs!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
36,104
Likes
61,036
Caronimo ...... aren’t you one of the many posters that said UConn would never move to the Big East ?

The reality is that football provides a terrible return on the University’s investment, and impairs its image.

The many- many millions of dollars used to subsidize UConn football could be used to expand financial aid to UConn students, offer merit scholarships for exemplary students, or a number of other ways to expand the academic footprint of UConn.
True, so could the millions spent on basketball, and every other sport though. So could cost of other non-sports extra curricular activities. The student rec center has a very low ROI as well.... well only if don't count it as making the college experience more attractive. Hey wait a minute that logic applies to sports as well, doesn't it?
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
1,093
Likes
762
the entire premise pursued by Lew Perkins' insistence that we move to Div 1 football was to preserve our spot in the future football driven revenue of the major football conferences. Now that it is clear that is not happening, is it time to cut bait?
 

the Q

Cold as December Snow
Joined
Mar 28, 2017
Messages
5,262
Likes
4,134
True, so could the millions spent on basketball, and every other sport though. So could cost of other non-sports extra curricular activities. The student rec center has a very low ROI as well.... well only if don't count it as making the college experience more attractive. Hey wait a minute that logic applies to sports as well, doesn't it?
Aren’t the students paying like 500 per semester in fees for it? That’s not an ROI?

Also gym is apparently a top 5 consideration for applying students.

The latter is similar to good fb and bb teams.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
56,430
Likes
85,081
List of Sponsored Scholarship Sport @ UConn:

008.png


Ignore highlighted sports - it means nothing (just hyperlinks)
 

CL82

The best thing about puppies is they become dogs!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
36,104
Likes
61,036
Aren’t the students paying like 500 per semester in fees for it? That’s not an ROI?

Also gym is apparently a top 5 consideration for applying students.

The latter is similar to good fb and bb teams.
I don’t know if it’s a hour away, as much as source of payment of ongoing expenses But my point was simply that the argument that football fans could be paid towards scholarships can be made about any other sports program or extracurricular activity. All of those things go into making a vibrant campus that is desirable to visit. The argument the poster I responded to was making was specious, in my opinion.
 

huskeynut

Leader of the Band
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
5,117
Likes
6,781
.500?! .500?! We can't even win a game! You're talking about .500?!
That's right - 500! You set a goal and hold the head coach's feet to the fire. If you caan't set a goal of reaching at least a .500 record, then what are you doing. Frankly, I do see Edsel as the savior. Fire him, get some one else in who may be able to bring the program to some level of respectability or drop the program.
 

CL82

The best thing about puppies is they become dogs!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
36,104
Likes
61,036
I'm disappointed in Anthony's columns of late...both his sports and non-sports columns have taken quite the depressing, doom is us tone.
Bring it, I say. It will make the story of our resurgence all the sweeter.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
20,449
Likes
21,207
the entire premise pursued by Lew Perkins' insistence that we move to Div 1 football was to preserve our spot in the future football driven revenue of the major football conferences. Now that it is clear that is not happening, is it time to cut bait?
That gets forgotten. If we didn't have FB, so the story went, we would lose our place at the table. Well we went and got football and lost our place anyway.
 
Joined
Nov 24, 2019
Messages
279
Likes
988
Any source on the numbers from the few years prior to 2019? The cuts to certain sports are inevitable. I just can’t help but look at that red herring that’s football and wonder if/when the line gets drawn. Don’t think it’s on the table now but if they have another 2-3 seasons of more of the same, then what?. I just don’t know what the long term goal of the program is, it’s eating money and there’s no clear path to being good again. Maybe a better way to phrase it is, how long has football been operating in the red and how long can it sustain that moving forward if the losses are significant? Genuine questions I have, maybe someone can help answer those for me.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
56,430
Likes
85,081
Any source on the numbers from the few years prior to 2019? The cuts to certain sports are inevitable. I just can’t help but look at that red herring that’s football and wonder if/when the line gets drawn. Don’t think it’s on the table now but if they have another 2-3 seasons of more of the same, then what?. I just don’t know what the long term goal of the program is, it’s eating money and there’s no clear path to being good again. Maybe a better way to phrase it is, how long has football been operating in the red and how long can it sustain that moving forward if the losses are significant? Genuine questions I have, maybe someone can help answer those for me.
Mike Anthony seemingly laid out the path to where AD Dave is headed (which is why I listed the scholarship sports):

>>Cutting sports is the most drastic measure a university can consider. It’s what no one wants. Until it’s necessary. “And it’s one of the reasons why you’re not going to get too many athletic directors talking publicly about it,” Benedict said. “Yes. Is that something that I believe has to be looked at and discussed? I believe so. But that’s all I would be able to say at this point.”

I say do it. Don’t cut two sports to save about $1 million a year. Cut eight and save about $5 million a year.
And you’re halfway home.

What else? The Board of Trustees should accept a proposal to assign a reduced value to athletic scholarships, the athletic department’s greatest expense. “That will be part of our plan,” Benedict said. UConn, for instance, currently counts each out-of-state athletic scholarship the same as tuition for any out-of-state student, roughly three times the rate of in-state tuition. If that can be reduced — and it’s nothing more than a change in numbers and a budget transfer — the subsidy shrinks by another $4 million or so.

There. With a reduction to 16 sports, preserving the most high-profile teams, you’re just about at $10 million saved.<<

Would appear AD Dave has Jacobs and Anthony greasing the skids (for this round)...
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 24, 2019
Messages
279
Likes
988
Mike Anthony seemingly laid out the path to where AD Dave is headed (which is why I listed the scholarship sports):

>>Cutting sports is the most drastic measure a university can consider. It’s what no one wants. Until it’s necessary. “And it’s one of the reasons why you’re not going to get too many athletic directors talking publicly about it,” Benedict said. “Yes. Is that something that I believe has to be looked at and discussed? I believe so. But that’s all I would be able to say at this point.”

I say do it. Don’t cut two sports to save about $1 million a year. Cut eight and save about $5 million a year.
And you’re halfway home.

What else? The Board of Trustees should accept a proposal to assign a reduced value to athletic scholarships, the athletic department’s greatest expense. “That will be part of our plan,” Benedict said. UConn, for instance, currently counts each out-of-state athletic scholarship the same as tuition for any out-of-state student, roughly three times the rate of in-state tuition. If that can be reduced — and it’s nothing more than a change in numbers and a budget transfer — the subsidy shrinks by another $4 million or so.

There. With a reduction to 16 sports, preserving the most high-profile teams, you’re just about at $10 million saved.<<

Would appear AD Dave has Jacobs and Anthony greasing the skids (for this round)...
Yeah I think your correct about that last piece, greasing the skids so to speak. Cutting certain sports you outlined was inevitable even before Covid with how much their costs ballooned, now more people are focusing on it. So I get how they get to $10 million, that’s the immediate plan. Thank you for sharing that.

I just keep wondering what happens with football. I’d love to see what the numbers look like revenue wise from like 2011-to future projections. They’re 30-79 since that time and since Edsall came back, they’re 6-30. How much longer can they do that? Maybe they’ve been in the red for that long, but it seems to be getting worse. idk, again I’m not following football as closely as many others here. I just see the numbers and the product on the field and it’s not pretty. Not advocating for cutting the football team, but when it comes to a deep conversation about cuts, football needs to have a very detailed, outlined plan as to how they improve those numbers and what the trajectory of the program. Is .500 and a bowl game the expectation? Or is it schedule big P5 teams for buy games to simply keep the program afloat? The future schedules look pretty good, but what do they do if they go 6-30 again the next 3 years? Just things I keep coming back to.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
2,267
Likes
3,539
“Football lost $13.3 million last year.” Yikes.... doesn’t take a genius to see that’s not sustainable. I get the independent route, buy games, new TV contract etc to make that gap up. I just still wonder what the end goal is and how they close the gap. People who follow football more than me, can you outline how they get into the green again? Or at least break even? And is basketball currently going to be the only non revenue generating sport? It’s just staggering to see the numbers actually outlined. Somethings gotta give at some point.
Apparently, to the blind on this board, those of us who understand math are "village idiots." Football at the University of CT from a financial standpoint right now is an absolute liability. No one can refute that. And it is completely non-competitive, has been for years and is clearly direction-less. So what do we keep it around for? The P5 game of musical chairs has been played for the better part of a decade and we are still standing. Does anyone really think that is going to change anytime soon? Unfortunately, this is now becoming about business, plain and simple. Do I wish football worked? Of course. But the undeniable truth is hasn't, we are now in a non-football league and it's time to cut the cord and be financially responsible. For the football supporters, give me evidence why the plug shouldn't be pulled. What does it do for the University or the athletic program now except lose money?
 
Joined
Nov 24, 2019
Messages
279
Likes
988
Apparently, to the blind on this board, those of us who understand math are "village idiots." Football at the University of CT from a financial standpoint right now is an absolute liability. No one can refute that. And it is completely non-competitive, has been for years and is clearly direction-less. So what do we keep it around for? The P5 game of musical chairs has been played for the better part of a decade and we are still standing. Does anyone really think that is going to change anytime soon? Unfortunately, this is now becoming about business, plain and simple. Do I wish football worked? Of course. But the undeniable truth is hasn't, we are now in a non-football league and it's time to cut the cord and be financially responsible. For the football supporters, give me evidence why the plug shouldn't be pulled. What does it do for the University or the athletic program now except lose money?
As a casual fan, I view it differently than someone whose following the program closer. It’s one thing to run a major deficit and be a decent team. If they had a large deficit but had steady 6-6 or 7-5 type seasons the past few years, decent crowds, good enthusiasm around the program etc there’s justification for the cost. Could justify it for branding, overall entertainment for the state, things like that. But right now, it’s about as low as it can get, it’s irresponsible to continue running up that large of a deficit with that product and being one of the worst teams in cfb during that time.

I feel like they basically like 3-4 years to either: become a winning program consistently making bowl games and not worry about the deficit they run up, or be bad but have a neutral cost to the program. They can’t have another 3-4 year run of what just happened at that cost, because people will call for action if that happens. I’m hoping it works out, used to love going to games. But at a certain point, somethings gotta give there.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
110
Likes
183
The only thing that'll save the football program is bringing in an elite coach and staff to work a miracle turnaround. That would take money we don't have. THE END.
 

Top