Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="rrlbees, post: 514748, member: 96"]
A couple people here can correct me if I am wrong, but the BOT has been supportive of this for awhile. They have to vote to move forward on it but do not vote on it until there is enough "seed" money to make it viable at which time they approve the ground breaking and the announcement of a major campaign. They do not pay for it themselves as the school although some trustees may be donors themselves. It's not as simple as saying we have more $$$ coming in from the ACC because that $$$ is not in our hands yet. It would be a risk, even if low, to bank on that money. What happens if a few schools do leave for the SEC or B10? Will that change the landscape enough that future ACC monies won't be what people "project" right now.
 
Basically I can see the AD going to the BOT with a business plan. We have $X now and will still need $Y but here are our plans for raising that $Y and here are the benefits for moving forth with this project now, etc. If the money for Y isn't raised, or enough of it, then that is where the school has to evaluate their risk because other monies will be needed to complete the project.
 
TGD has been at work it seems both getting that seed money and making his business plan. It was never that the BOT did not want an IPF because they were anti football. When it comes to facilities, schools aren't in the business of paying for them. It's always the state, local govt, donation campaigns, or single big donors.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?