The Coyle decision | Page 20 | Syracusefan.com

The Coyle decision

Dipping into the endowment is nearly always a political quagmire and a non-starter. A Dome renovation is not the same as "if emergency, break glass".
I'm aware of that. I still feel it's important to bring it up and for people to be aware of it.
 
The University has an endowment. Every single concern about money can disappear because of that. It wouldn't be used in that way, but any time a University like us talks about not having the money to do.something, that's not actually true. It's a choice that the money isn't there.
Academia on the Hill would revolt if one dollar from the endowment ever went to AD to make a coaching change. Most of the endowment is in mutual funds/investments anyway.

I know you are saying it won't happen because it won't. Most of the endowment isn't in liquidated into cash. It is land/investments/stocks. I bet the Chancellor has a a discretionary account but he wouldn't use it on athletics or the BOT would be all over him.

The AD could take a loan from the University but it would need collateral and approval. Collateral is easy with the TV money we get annually. The approval of a loan would be need to be met with an actual presentation and working with academia. The easiest solution is for the AD to hit up boosters who care about athletics to write huge checks.
 
If it's coming out of the AD budget and there are issues with paying a new coaching staff while doing a done renovation - sounds like every bit matters.

I get the feeling (and I'm not advocating this) if this were post Dome renovation and the academic side saw how fiscally smart Coyle is running things - he'd have little trouble politically to make the move and pay what he believes will get us there.
I disagree. I doubt the academic side would ever agree to help athletics without getting something.
Academia doesn't care about athletics they care about academia. I would bet if you polled the facility at most P5 schools if they could get rid of college athletics most would. Even though athletics brings students to schools.
 
so we're all set on Moglia as the new HC then? Guy won't break the bank, will self fund the Shafer buy out and is a former HC.

He's our fiscal white whale.
 
The one thing that Coyle can take solace in, if he does fire Shafer, is the fact that he won't have to hire a firm to find a new coach. We have more than enough people here with the knowledge and expertise to come up with recommendations for a new coach. Just think of all the money that will be saved to help pay for a new coach and staff. Whether he fires Shafer or not, it ultimately falls on his shoulders
 
OttoinGrotto said:
I'm aware of that. I still feel it's important to bring it up and for people to be aware of it.

It just highlights the correct and healthy placement athletics has on the list of priorities.

I'd be ticked if we used endowment money and I love SU athletics.
 
Alsacs said:
I disagree. I doubt the academic side would ever agree to help athletics without getting something. Academia doesn't care about athletics they care about academia. I would bet if you polled the facility at most P5 schools if they could get rid of college athletics most would. Even though athletics brings students to schools.

Oh - I know. My wife works at a college remember?

But it certainly would be an easier fight.
 
OttoinGrotto said:
The University has an endowment. Every single concern about money can disappear because of that. It wouldn't be used in that way, but any time a University like us talks about not having the money to do.something, that's not actually true. It's a choice that the money isn't there.

Not sure you know how endowments work.
 
This is partially or mostly Shafer's fault. Marrone had less money to pay his assistants but put together a better staff. Shafer is the one who hired the O-Line coach with no experience and an OC with a limited track record and from the Cubit tree.

Do we know why Shafer wasn't able to keep Pat Perles (who I think everyone regards as a capable line coach) after the first year? Don't recall much discussion about this. Seemed that something was odd about that departure. Was he another of the guys who didn't want to work with McDonald?
 
The University has an endowment. Every single concern about money can disappear because of that. It wouldn't be used in that way, but any time a University like us talks about not having the money to do.something, that's not actually true. It's a choice that the money isn't there.

Most people do not understand university endowments. They are not these general war chests that can be raided any time they feel like it.
1. Most of the money in the endowment is restricted for specific purposes (i.e. financial aid, endowed chairs, etc) and the donor has stipulated that it must be used for that purpose.
2. Universities have spending guidelines that protect the endowment from being raided. The goal is to preserve the endowment to benefit future generations. NYS law mandates that and has adopted prudent spending guidelines.
3. As of 6/30/14, "only" $641M of their $1,156M is unrestricted, meaning a portion might be able to be used for general purposes. However, pulling that money out of the endowment has a significant negative impact on the operating budget. The academics and board would never let that happen.
4. Issuing tax exempt debt, fundraising and partnering with the state is the most probable outcome.
 
Do we know why Shafer wasn't able to keep Pat Perles (who I think everyone regards as a capable line coach) after the first year? Don't recall much discussion about this. Seemed that something was odd about that departure. Was he another of the guys who didn't want to work with McDonald?
I was told McDonald was a micromanager/control freak with little knowledge, which made him unpopular with the rest of the coaching staff, especially the ones that reported to him on the offensive side.

Perles couldn't stand him. GM is the reason we lost a good OL coach and got something else as a replacement.
 
I was told McDonald was a micromanager/control freak with little knowledge, which made him unpopular with the rest of the coaching staff, especially the ones that reported to him on the offensive side.

Perles couldn't stand him. GM is the reason we lost a good OL coach and got something else as a replacement.


Perles was solid when he was here for sure. Also still had a coach on the field back in that day as well
 
Do we know why Shafer wasn't able to keep Pat Perles (who I think everyone regards as a capable line coach) after the first year? Don't recall much discussion about this. Seemed that something was odd about that departure. Was he another of the guys who didn't want to work with McDonald?
I seem to remember there was a family issue at the time. Looks like he's scouting now for the Bucs. Probably allows him longer periods with the family (broken up with scouting trips in season).
 
Academia on the Hill would revolt if one dollar from the endowment ever went to AD to make a coaching change. Most of the endowment is in mutual funds/investments anyway.

I know you are saying it won't happen because it won't. Most of the endowment isn't in liquidated into cash. It is land/investments/stocks. I bet the Chancellor has a a discretionary account but he wouldn't use it on athletics or the BOT would be all over him.

The AD could take a loan from the University but it would need collateral and approval. Collateral is easy with the TV money we get annually. The approval of a loan would be need to be met with an actual presentation and working with academia. The easiest solution is for the AD to hit up boosters who care about athletics to write huge checks.
Boosters to write huge checks for athletics... remember SU had trouble raising money for an IPF.
 
Houston just doubled Tom Herman's salary from 1.5 to 3 million. He was making more than SS right now by 100k we need to wake up and realize the HC FB coach and his staff need higher compensation to compete. I hope Syverud(who I have confidence in) and BOT realize they need to give Coyle the budget to do it right.
I was told McDonald was a micromanager/control freak with little knowledge, which made him unpopular with the rest of the coaching staff, especially the ones that reported to him on the offensive side.

Perles couldn't stand him. GM is the reason we lost a good OL coach and got something else as a replacement.
Would feel better about the staff if we could get Perles back
 
My goodness, you need to apply the question to your second sentence. Every potential hire will have more warm and fuzzies than Shafer or they won't be on the list.

Just about 45 days ago you stated the following in regard to someone suggesting HCSS may end up not making it past this year:

"With the kids he has recruited (HCSS) it would be lunacy (emphasis added) not to let this play out for a least a couple of more years. Mark Coyle is not a lunatic."

How quickly the worm has turned. Welcome to the asylum Mr. Coyle. ;)
 
Do we know why Shafer wasn't able to keep Pat Perles (who I think everyone regards as a capable line coach) after the first year? Don't recall much discussion about this. Seemed that something was odd about that departure. Was he another of the guys who didn't want to work with McDonald?

You answered your own question.
 
Not sure you know how endowments work.
Most people do not understand university endowments. They are not these general war chests that can be raided any time they feel like it.
1. Most of the money in the endowment is restricted for specific purposes (i.e. financial aid, endowed chairs, etc) and the donor has stipulated that it must be used for that purpose.
2. Universities have spending guidelines that protect the endowment from being raided. The goal is to preserve the endowment to benefit future generations. NYS law mandates that and has adopted prudent spending guidelines.
3. As of 6/30/14, "only" $641M of their $1,156M is unrestricted, meaning a portion might be able to be used for general purposes. However, pulling that money out of the endowment has a significant negative impact on the operating budget. The academics and board would never let that happen.
4. Issuing tax exempt debt, fundraising and partnering with the state is the most probable outcome.
I work in education, and actually know exactly how this works. I know it's not happening. I simply want to suggest that schools are not being completely honest when they cry no money for budgets. Money is there, they choose not deploy it. There may be good reason for that, but it is a choice.
 
I work in education, and actually no exactly how this works. I know it's not happening. I simply want to suggest that schools are not being completely honest when they cry no money for budgets. Money is there, they choose not deploy it. There may be good reason for that, but it is a choice.
Was this deliberate? lol
 
I work in education, and actually know exactly how this works. I know it's not happening. I simply want to suggest that schools are not being completely honest when they cry no money for budgets. Money is there, they choose not deploy it. There may be good reason for that, but it is a choice.
An endowment is rarely a blank check. Usually the funds are earmarked for certain things and legally cannot be touched.
 
An endowment is rarely a blank check. Usually the funds are earmarked for certain things and legally cannot be touched.
It is true it is not a blank check. It is true that funds are earmarked for certain things. It is sometimes true that they can't legally be touched.

The excessive endowments at some schools is a very bizarre inefficiency in our education system.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,767
Messages
4,726,183
Members
5,920
Latest member
CoachDiddi

Online statistics

Members online
39
Guests online
1,289
Total visitors
1,328


Top Bottom