Jump to content

92.3 The Fan to discuss "Rumors" Football to move down


K-Roo

Recommended Posts

Terry Pluto chimes in on WAKR

https://soundcloud.com/wakr-newstalksports/terry-pluto-on-akron-athletics-ncaa-football

Fair and balanced, not condescending.

Without bringing emotion into it, isn't Terry Pluto being the adult it this situtation? Everything he said is correct, and has been mirrored in some manner on this forum by several members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without bringing emotion into it, isn't Terry Pluto being the adult it this situtation? Everything he said is correct, and has been mirrored in some manner on this forum by several members.

Agreed. I though the points he brought up were accurate and real. Two things that stood out to me in particular;

  1. It does not make sense to move from Division 1 to Division 1AA. If you do anything, you move to division 3 if you want to save money. Hopefully this will HELP put this dumbass topic our faculty members brought up to bed (maybe those people should move to the top of the cut list ;-). 1AA is not an option.
  2. The big issue with attendance may be difficult to overcome. UA lives in the BIG shadow of the Browns and Ohio State. High school football is incredibly popular and well supported. Can't is down the road (not a big threat but they do take a little away from us).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good interview with Pluto. That sounded like an audio version of our ZN.o conversations with the language cleaned up. Puts it all in proper perspective. That won't stop the biggest opponents of athletic spending at UA from protesting. They'll just want to drop further down the college football chain to the least expensive option or drop football completely. They exist at every university that isn't bringing more money in from sports than is going out. They tend to get the most media attention in times of financial distress.

This is all understandable because the primary purpose of institutions of higher learning is ... (drum roll) ... higher learning. Many people have traditionally believed that athletic competition has a role in higher education. But there's always been a debate about how big that role should be and there always will be. Nothing wrong with a healthy debate as long as it remains focused on facts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, I'm not in favor of dropping down in football, but I think the faculty has every right to ask that the option be explored. And below are some of the reasons why.

1) UA currently has to subsidize their ad to the tune of $22M a year. That's 70% of its budget and nearly 5% of the university's total budget. It equals more than 10% of the cost of tuition for a full time in-state student.

2) Over the last decade, the subsidy has increased every year and is now more than double what it was in 2005

3) YSU also subsidizes their ad by 70%, yet the subsidy is less than half that of UA due to an ad whose budget is less than half.

The athletic subsidies are a huge issue and given the state's and Governor's emphasis on cutting costs and affordability, it's only a matter of time before it becomes a political issue. It's best that UA get out in front on this issue before somebody steps in and starts dictating a solution. Personally, I think it's just one more factor favoring a merger with Can't. We could grow the combined ad while lowering the subsidy both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the ad and university budgets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Merger/consolidation is a long-term option worth consideration at some point. In addition to the Columbus Dispatch article I previously linked to regarding the new presidents of UA, Can't and YSU meeting to discuss partnership possibilities, I found another story on the subject. For the present the focus is on cooperating in specific areas such as purchasing. While there are no immediate plans to move beyond that, the following could obviously change in the future depending on circumstances:

University Presidents Discuss Possibilities For Partnerships

... Korey said that while rumors and earlier reports have used words such as consolidation and merger, those terms are “completely inappropriate.”

“Dr. Scarborough was very careful to talk about using words like partnerships and collaborations which mean something completely different in the world of academia and organizations,” Korey said.

Eric Mansfield, executive director of University Media Relations at Can't State University, said that President Beverly Warren is interested in collaborations but agreed with Korey’s statement when it comes to potential mergers or consolidation.

“Dr. Warren has been very open about wanting to collaborate with area universities where it makes sense and benefits students,” Mansfield said. “But the words consolidation and merger are not on the table. Unequivocally not on the table.” ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Merger/consolidation is a long-term option worth consideration at some point. In addition to the Columbus Dispatch article I previously linked to regarding the new presidents of UA, Can't and YSU meeting to discuss partnership possibilities, I found another story on the subject. For the present the focus is on cooperating in specific areas such as purchasing. While there are no immediate plans to move beyond that, the following could obviously change in the future depending on circumstances:

University Presidents Discuss Possibilities For Partnerships

It doesn't surprise me that the Presidents feel that way, empire building and turf protection and all that. When it comes--and I believe that it's a matter of when not if--it'll come from the Governor's office and the legislature. The fact that the Can't president is so adamantly against it suggests that--despite UA's current troubles--she might view UA as a possible dominant partner in the match. I also believe that the first of the two Presidents/Boards who get out in front of the issue will have the political support to influence it to a greater degree than the other.

I've talked about how over-saturated Ohio is with both four and two year public campuses and redundant doctoral programs. I'll do some digging and compare it to California, which has always been viewed nationally as the gold standard of a well organized and structured state university system. Not sure about this weekend, but I have some airport lounge time this coming week that I'll need to kill.

Have a good weekend, man. Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't surprise me that the Presidents feel that way, empire building and turf protection and all that.

It frankly does surprise me there is such adamant opposition and running away from the mention of consolidations, as if any one of the NEO U.'s has nothing to gain and everything to lose by it. I don't understand where it comes from. Presidential/Trustee egos? Alumni? Local politicians? More than anything, I think it may stem from everybody's fear of losing the university names and the identity and history that goes along with them. But at some point you have to look at the benefits of competing with the Cincinnati's, Pitt's, and Louisville's of the world rather than BG, Ball State, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It frankly does surprise me there is such adamant opposition and running away from the mention of consolidations, as if any one of the NEO U.'s has nothing to gain and everything to lose by it. I don't understand where it comes from. Presidential/Trustee egos? Alumni? Local politicians? More than anything, I think it may stem from everybody's fear of losing the university names and the identity and history that goes along with them. But at some point you have to look at the benefits of competing with the Cincinnati's, Pitt's, and Louisville's of the world rather than BG, Ball State, etc.

I agree. Pitt is a stretch: AAU member, Comprehensive Cancer Center, harder to get into than Penn State. Pitt--along with Minnesota--might be the most underrated public university in the country. Definitely think an AU-Can't-NEOMED merger would be a peer of UC and Louisville within a decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really should be no surprise that the presidents don't want to speak publicly of a potential merger right now. They know that would trigger heavy pushback from alumni who fear the university they graduated from would be losing its identity. Look at the pushback at UA about something as simple as changing the name. This could be a real problem if the biggest donors objected and cut back on their financial support.

It's much, much smarter to take it slowly a step at a time. Educate the public that the survival of some Ohio universities is at stake if the financial situation is not resolved. Start with something simple, non-controversial and non-identity threatening such as combined purchasing. Put it in place, document money saved and report that out to the public. Then pursue similar areas that save money and make all of the cooperating institutions financially stronger. After proving that works, do a study projecting how much more could be saved by a full merger and how that would enhance the longterm viability of the universities.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is a merger even being discussed on this forum at this point? With UA already differentiating itself as a Polytech University, its clear we aren't looking to merge with anybody and won't need to no matter what if all goes to plan and we end up on the "right side of that napkin". How many times are we going to regurgitate the same fairytale? The merger talk in seemingly every thread is clutter at this point. Last I checked, we've made all necessary expense cuts and will no longer be running a deficit. What's the problem again?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might want to talk about the fact that in August schools will be able to offer 'stipends' or whatever you want to call it of at least 5,000 big ones to 'athletes' in football and b.ball. Do you think schools in the MAC and other similar conferences are going to be able to pay athletes that much money and be able to compete with the bigs? No. Whether its deferred or not,schools like Akron don't generate that kind of money whether its deferred or not. Those schools fall further and further behind the BIG DI schools in recruiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is a merger even being discussed on this forum at this point? With UA already differentiating itself as a Polytech University, its clear we aren't looking to merge with anybody and won't need to no matter what if all goes to plan and we end up on the "right side of that napkin". How many times are we going to regurgitate the same fairytale? The merger talk in seemingly every thread is clutter at this point. Last I checked, we've made all necessary expense cuts and will no longer be running a deficit. What's the problem again?

You act like all our troubles are behind us, and it's full steam ahead with Dr. P's rosy, pumped sunshine visions for UA. UA has staunched the bleeding for the moment, but that doesn't mean the patient is healthy and in no further need of care. We have no idea what form the polytechnic rebranding will take nor how successful it will be. Hell, the ink isn't even dry on the proposal. The budget has not been dealt with. All we did was close a single year's deficit with some pretty Draconian cuts and doing an end around the Regents and Governor and raising $20M in student "fees." The long-term structural budget problems still exist. There's no way that the Regents allow UA to pull the fee card again and in fact will be looking to see those fees rolled back. We still have a huge debt burden. We still have an unsustainable athletic department subsidy. We still have declining enrollment and no improvements in our freshmen class profiles. We're still failing to meet the state's new funding guidelines on retention and graduation rates. We still exist in a region where there is an unhealthy amount of inter-university competition--where the liberal arts university, the engineering and sciences university and the med school are each independent campuses. We still exist in a state system with too many universities for its population and level of state funding while attempting to maintain too many expensive, lowly ranked graduate programs.

UA is no closer to the right side of the napkin than it was on the day SS took office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might want to talk about the fact that in August schools will be able to offer 'stipends' or whatever you want to call it of at least 5,000 big ones to 'athletes' in football and b.ball. Do you think schools in the MAC and other similar conferences are going to be able to pay athletes that much money and be able to compete with the bigs? No. Whether its deferred or not,schools like Akron don't generate that kind of money whether its deferred or not. Those schools fall further and further behind the BIG DI schools in recruiting.

Schools have gave out monthly stipends for years.

Source: UA tennis player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might want to talk about the fact that in August schools will be able to offer 'stipends' or whatever you want to call it of at least 5,000 big ones to 'athletes' in football and b.ball. Do you think schools in the MAC and other similar conferences are going to be able to pay athletes that much money and be able to compete with the bigs? No. Whether its deferred or not,schools like Akron don't generate that kind of money whether its deferred or not. Those schools fall further and further behind the BIG DI schools in recruiting.

Scholarships now are based on Full Cost of Attendance, not just Tuition and Room and Board. FCOA is used by the US Dept of Education to determine how much federal aid a school receives, among other things.

It's not something that can be fudged in the name of football without severe consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is a merger even being discussed on this forum at this point? With UA already differentiating itself as a Polytech University, its clear we aren't looking to merge with anybody and won't need to no matter what if all goes to plan and we end up on the "right side of that napkin". How many times are we going to regurgitate the same fairytale? The merger talk in seemingly every thread is clutter at this point. Last I checked, we've made all necessary expense cuts and will no longer be running a deficit. What's the problem again?

If there wasn't a problem, the presidents of UA, Can't and YSU wouldn't be meeting to discuss partnerships and collaborations that could help the universities cut costs beyond what have already been announced. In effect they're discussing the merger of certain functions and services. They were careful to say that they are not discussing a merger of the universities at this time, which is a way to keep speculation from running wild. That doesn't make it against the law to discuss that as a future possibility. Speculative discussions like this tend to go on as long more than one person is interested. When it reaches the point of repetition with little participation, it probably deserves to go dormant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't surprise me that the Presidents feel that way, empire building and turf protection and all that. When it comes--and I believe that it's a matter of when not if--it'll come from the Governor's office and the legislature. The fact that the Can't president is so adamantly against it suggests that--despite UA's current troubles--she might view UA as a possible dominant partner in the match. I also believe that the first of the two Presidents/Boards who get out in front of the issue will have the political support to influence it to a greater degree than the other.

I've talked about how over-saturated Ohio is with both four and two year public campuses and redundant doctoral programs. I'll do some digging and compare it to California, which has always been viewed nationally as the gold standard of a well organized and structured state university system. Not sure about this weekend, but I have some airport lounge time this coming week that I'll need to kill.

Have a good weekend, man. Cheers.

BINGO. That is why I feel the initiatives SS has on the table are very smart. Specializing and the "Polytechnic" re-branding are consistent with what the state seems to want. I said it in a post a while ago - I am not surprised the other presidents were pissed at our announcement. I also think it was smart to try and keep this under wraps as long as possible (not be so transparent right now). We beat them to the punch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really should be no surprise that the presidents don't want to speak publicly of a potential merger right now. They know that would trigger heavy pushback from alumni who fear the university they graduated from would be losing its identity. Look at the pushback at UA about something as simple as changing the name. This could be a real problem if the biggest donors objected and cut back on their financial support.

It's much, much smarter to take it slowly a step at a time. Educate the public that the survival of some Ohio universities is at stake if the financial situation is not resolved. Start with something simple, non-controversial and non-identity threatening such as combined purchasing. Put it in place, document money saved and report that out to the public. Then pursue similar areas that save money and make all of the cooperating institutions financially stronger. After proving that works, do a study projecting how much more could be saved by a full merger and how that would enhance the longterm viability of the universities.

It's not that they don't want to speak publicly right now...according to the article you linked to, they are speaking publicly through the media and stating that potential mergers are completely off the table, even if it were to benefit the economy and future of NEO. I too am glad UA is not waiting around for the other universities but instead establishing a position of strength for if/when the state makes a move.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have no idea what form the polytechnic rebranding will take nor how successful it will be. Hell, the ink isn't even dry on the proposal. The budget has not been dealt with. All we did was close a single year's deficit with some pretty Draconian cuts and doing an end around the Regents and Governor and raising $20M in student "fees." The long-term structural budget problems still exist. There's no way that the Regents allow UA to pull the fee card again and in fact will be looking to see those fees rolled back. We still have a huge debt burden. We still have an unsustainable athletic department subsidy. We still have declining enrollment and no improvements in our freshmen class profiles. We're still failing to meet the state's new funding guidelines on retention and graduation rates. We still exist in a region where there is an unhealthy amount of inter-university competition--where the liberal arts university, the engineering and sciences university and the med school are each independent campuses. We still exist in a state system with too many universities for its population and level of state funding while attempting to maintain too many expensive, lowly ranked graduate programs.

UA is no closer to the right side of the napkin than it was on the day SS took office.

Obviously no material progress is going to happen overnight, but my point is that the University has chosen the direction they want to to go so now it's time to see how it plays out. They aren't all of the sudden going to scrap the Polytech idea and decide to merge with Can't. You are not correct about fixing a single year deficit. The changes made are permanent, therefore will reduce costs annually. Steps have been taken to improve most of the issues, but it takes time for this stuff to happen. Ex. How do you expect graduation rates to improve when the current seniors were enrolled when UA was still open enrollment?

If there wasn't a problem, the presidents of UA, Can't and YSU wouldn't be meeting to discuss partnerships and collaborations that could help the universities cut costs beyond what have already been announced. In effect they're discussing the merger of certain functions and services. They were careful to say that they are not discussing a merger of the universities at this time, which is a way to keep speculation from running wild. That doesn't make it against the law to discuss that as a future possibility. Speculative discussions like this tend to go on as long more than one person is interested. When it reaches the point of repetition with little participation, it probably deserves to go dormant.

I admittedly must have missed them meeting to discuss some partnership to cut costs. Can you provide a source?

NEO med would probably make a good case study for some full-on merger of the regional universities. I don't know enough to form my own opinion on it, but from most accounts on here it seems as its considered a disappointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, I'm not in favor of dropping down in football, but I think the faculty has every right to ask that the option be explored. And below are some of the reasons why.

I met several faculty members who are very jealous of the athletics spending, and were not afraid to make that known. Some were staunch tOSU fans (speaking of SPENDING) and it remined me the old saying about who butters your bread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is a merger even being discussed on this forum at this point? With UA already differentiating itself as a Polytech University, its clear we aren't looking to merge with anybody and won't need to no matter what if all goes to plan and we end up on the "right side of that napkin". How many times are we going to regurgitate the same fairytale? The merger talk in seemingly every thread is clutter at this point. Last I checked, we've made all necessary expense cuts and will no longer be running a deficit. What's the problem again?

Agreed. This could be its own topic, right alongside the ACC and Spring Football fantasies.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I met several faculty members who are very jealous of the athletics spending, and were not afraid to make that known. Some were staunch tOSU fans (speaking of SPENDING) and it remined me the old saying about who butters your bread.

They can't be stupid enough to believe that if they eliminated athletics, they would get the money instead. It doesn't get redistributed, it's just plain gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can't be stupid enough to believe that if they eliminated athletics, they would get the money instead. It doesn't get redistributed, it's just plain gone.

If they are stupid enough to think that, UA has a lot bigger problems than we thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not that they don't want to speak publicly right now...according to the article you linked to, they are speaking publicly through the media and stating that potential mergers are completely off the table ...

Off the table means that it's not currently being discussed, not that it will never be discussed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...