OT: Maryland IPF

[rrlbees]

You said schools don't spend money on athletic facilities. The Phil Knight comment was to show you that they absolutely do, it's just not their own money they spend. "Phil didn't build those facilities on his own land".

You're just playing word games now. Schools don't spend their own money on facilities. They spend other people's money that is specifically earmarked for the facility.

 

[Chip]

You're just playing word games now. Schools don't spend their own money on facilities. They spend other people's money that is specifically earmarked for the facility.

Could they though? Is it a rule? Unless someone steps up to the plate or the fund raising department is successfully overhauled, SU is probably going to have to dip more into their own money than others.

 

[rrlbees]

Could they though? Is it a rule? Unless someone steps up to the plate or the fund raising department is successfully overhauled, SU is probably going to have to dip more into their own money than others.

Of course they could and they do in small ways or when the risk they took on when a facility is given the ok and only part of the money has been raised then the rest doesn't get 100% raised.

 

[Bayside44]

Departments at SU compete against each other to raise funds. It's all so stupid.

 

[nzm136]

This sounds like an organization that is deeply in debt (UMD athletics) is interested in spending a lot of money that they don't have. Isn't that what caused them to leave the ACC for the B1G? Well, good luck with the SEC Zincite, UMD. You're going to need it.

 

[CuseOnly]

You're just playing word games now. Schools don't spend their own money on facilities. They spend other people's money that is specifically earmarked for the facility.

In any case, it doesn't matter.

Maybe the current system works really well for others. Maybe state schools have an inherent advantage that a private school doesn't. We can complain about donors, fundraising, etc.

My original point was, if what they are doing isn't working...because it clearly isn't working for Syracuse Athletics, then you should change what you are doing. Period.

Change your approach, change tactics, change and spend some of your own money first and show the commitment to the department, maybe others will follow.

You keep talking about "what schools do" and what historically schools have done. This approach has never been successful for SU...so let's keep trying to push the immovable boulder uphill instead of find a different approach. We continue on this path, it will be more of the same and they will fall further behind. Just facts.

Unless of course someone on this board wins the Mega Millions or Powerball this weekend and we all know how likely that is.

 

[rrlbees]

In any case, it doesn't matter. Maybe the current system works really well for others. Maybe state schools have an inherent advantage that a private school doesn't. We can complain about donors, fundraising, etc. My original point was, if what they are doing isn't working...because it clearly isn't working for Syracuse Athletics, then you should change what you are doing. Period. Change your approach, change tactics, change and spend some of your own money first and show the commitment to the department, maybe others will follow. You keep talking about "what schools do" and what historically schools have done. This approach has never been successful for SU...so let's keep trying to push the immovable boulder uphill instead of find a different approach. We continue on this path, it will be more of the same and they will fall further behind. Just facts. Unless of course someone on this board wins the Mega Millions or Powerball this weekend and we all know how likely that is.

The only fact is academic institutions, including SU. are not going to spend millions hand over foot on athletic facilities. It's not a schools charter. Your gripe is with the wrong people.

 

[jorand]

This sounds like an organization that is deeply in debt (UMD athletics) is interested in spending a lot of money that they don't have. Isn't that what caused them to leave the ACC for the B1G? Well, good luck with the SEC Zincite, UMD. You're going to need it.

This will in large part be funded with private donor money.

 

[anomander]

Could they though? Is it a rule? Unless someone steps up to the plate or the fund raising department is successfully overhauled, SU is probably going to have to dip more into their own money than others.

There are plenty of places that used TV revenue towards their facilities.

 

[anomander]

This will in large part be funded with private donor money.

There is at least $25m from the state, $25m from B1G revenue, and the rest comes from a mix of things. I would probably say half from private donations.

 

[Bill Orange]

Paging Mr. Plank, Mr. Kevin Plank to the white courtesy phone, please!

He heard you. He's in for 25M.

 

[OburgOrange]

If you know if a single sugar daddy, let the AD know.

The new "FUCILLO DOME", it's HHhhhhuuuugggggeeeeeee!

 

[rrlbees]

There are plenty of places that used TV revenue towards their facilities.

Can you name one of any significance?

 

[rrlbees]

There is at least $25m from the state, $25m from B1G revenue, and the rest comes from a mix of things. I would probably say half from private donations.

How much you want to bet the $25m of institutional funds are going towards the academic and research facility's?

 

[oldpinepoint]

A couple of things here on donations and this is just my opinion and i could be completely wrong. I probably am but my thoughts

1. The fundraising by the Athletic department is just downright awful. Not sure they have the right people in place and I'm not sure they know how to do it effectively
2. I don't think Dr. Gross is well liked by the Alumni
3. I don't think our former Chancellor was well liked at all.
4. Gross was necessary to build up our brand and get the school into the ACC. He is not a fundraiser or a good manager of the department. He is a marketer. He has been here 10 years, i expect him to be out the door after june 30 of this year. No info, just rumblings from others.
5. I would love to hear the vision for the athletic department from the new chancellor.

 

[rrlbees]

A couple of things here on donations and this is just my opinion and i could be completely wrong. I probably am but my thoughts 1. The fundraising by the Athletic department is just downright awful. Not sure they have the right people in place and I'm not sure they know how to do it effectively 2. I don't think Dr. Gross is well liked by the Alumni 3. I don't think our former Chancellor was well liked at all. 4. Gross was necessary to build up our brand and get the school into the ACC. He is not a fundraiser or a good manager of the department. He is a marketer. He has been here 10 years, i expect him to be out the door after june 30 of this year. No info, just rumblings from others. 5. I would love to hear the vision for the athletic department from the new chancellor.

You pretty much nailed it all.

 

[anomander]

Can you name one of any significance?

Have you seen all of the new facilities that have gone up in the past 5 years alone? With the huge amount of money the Pac12 and Big10 are making off their tv deals they have been investing back in the program. I know Washington St's athletic dept. paid for part of their new facilities. Iowa got accepted $35m in private donations for their $55m facility, the rest was paid for with Athletic Dept. funds. Sure most of the places have received large chunks of private donations, but athletic departments have been pitching in.

 

[anomander]

A couple of things here on donations and this is just my opinion and i could be completely wrong. I probably am but my thoughts

1. The fundraising by the Athletic department is just downright awful. Not sure they have the right people in place and I'm not sure they know how to do it effectively
2. I don't think Dr. Gross is well liked by the Alumni
3. I don't think our former Chancellor was well liked at all.
4. Gross was necessary to build up our brand and get the school into the ACC. He is not a fundraiser or a good manager of the department. He is a marketer. He has been here 10 years, i expect him to be out the door after june 30 of this year. No info, just rumblings from others.
5. I would love to hear the vision for the athletic department from the new chancellor.

THIS IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING!! Our fundraising is terrible. We need professionals, which I believe someone was just hired.

 

[rrlbees]

Have you seen all of the new facilities that have gone up in the past 5 years alone? With the huge amount of money the Pac12 and Big10 are making off their tv deals they have been investing back in the program. I know Washington St's athletic dept. paid for part of their new facilities. Iowa got accepted $35m in private donations for their $55m facility, the rest was paid for with Athletic Dept. funds. Sure most of the places have received large chunks of private donations, but athletic departments have been pitching in.

The Iowa facility may or may not have used any university funds. The $35m which was actually a goal of $40m+ was for naming rights of various parts of the facility. The other $20, or less, was paid by a loan Iowa took out with the hopes of some or most of it being offset by smaller donations, not naming rights. They called these donations, public support. So they took some risk. If they come up $10m short, it's on them. Same if it's $1m short. SU does the same thing. They keep trying to get donations to pay off every penny. The Melo Center still isn't completely funded by donations. Even the $5m lockers, offices etc upgrade was being funded by donations. Su put up the money but the intent was to replace it with donations. Last time I was at manley, they had one of those thermometer looking thing tracking those donations. They were close but still short.