Smaller, Leaner athletic program...

[UA1987]

13 minutes ago, clarkwgriswold said:

 

Imagine that conversation in the private sector.  "We have this property that we're upside down in that nobody else wants and it's 10 years old and already decaying.  We'd like to refinance."  

 

Click.  "Hello.....hello?"

It would not be a conversation so much about the property (which I think is good), but about the university's ability to pay and the interest that could be earned by the financial institution. I don't think the Info could be the security on default as it is on campus, but some other arrangement probably could be made. If I were the AD (or UA Finance) I would look into it - this is a crisis after all. I've been close to similar deals on much worse properties that worked.            

Edited April 30, 2020 by UA1987

[kreed5120]

18 minutes ago, UA1987 said:

Agree on any non-revenue program cuts where allowed by affilation, but I don't think program and overhead cuts would get the University to the 20%, but I'm sure they are looking at cutting down to bone wherever possible. I would hope the AD does not consider administrative position changes that would handicap soccer, basketball and football. As I've said I'd like to allocate football additional funds to make sure we have highly thought of young coaches with an experienced one or two. Funk made a big difference here a few years ago here on the OL , till he left for more money. From charts I've seen posted on Zipsnation , if I remember correctly, our new assistant coaching staff is not being paid a whole lot. Most of the time you get what you pay for. This bump in assistant coaches salary would be wise too if we plan on playing another road OOC payday game or two (we need better recruiting and preparation). Anyhow, I think the Info stadium debt should be refinanced per my earlier post as this could save a ton right away - I sent the AD a note about refinacing the stadium debt - ha ha (he probably deleted it without reading) - but I'm sure they are already looking into it (you never know though).                        

 

Arth was brought in making ~50k more than what we were paying Bowden and Arth had 0 FBS experience and we gave him a 3x pay raise compared to what he was making at Chattanooga. We pretty much bid against ourselves as I didn't see anyone else bidding for his services. Why pay someone $500k when you can probably get him to do the job for $300k? It just doesn't seem like a solid business strategy. 

 

As you see more schools cut subsidies, the amount head coaches and assistants make is going to decrease, not increase. Not just at Akron, but everywhere. You're already seeing it happen at WMU. Last month they hired a basketball coach for about 60% of what they were paying Hawkins. As contracts expire, coaches will be forced to take pay cuts or they will be replaced by someone who will do the job for less. Salaries were artificially inflated due to institutional support. You take away that institutional support and make athletic programs become more self sufficient, those salary bubbles pop. Akron football brings in somewhere in the neighborhood of 6-7 million in revenue. No private business that does 7 million in revenue would pay their CEO $500k then have an additional 7 or so VPs making north of 6 figures. That's not a sustainable business model.

[clarkwgriswold]

7 minutes ago, UA1987 said:

It would not be a conversation so much about the property (which I think is good), but about the university's ability to pay and the interest that could be earned by the financial institution. I don't think the Info could be the security on default as it is on campus, but some other arrangement probably could be made. If I were the AD (or UA Finance) I would look into it - this is a crisis after all. I've been close to similar deals on much worse properties that worked.            

 

I didn't mean to infer it couldn't happen.  I was just referencing how it might work in the "real world", not the public institution/bond world.

[UA1987]

7 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

Arth was brought in making ~50k more than what we were paying Bowden and Arth had 0 FBS experience and we gave him a 3x pay raise compared to what he was making at Chattanooga. We pretty much bid against ourselves as I didn't see anyone else bidding for his services. Why pay someone $500k when you can probably get him to do the job for $300k? It just doesn't seem like a solid business strategy. 

 

As you see more schools cut subsidies, the amount head coaches and assistants make is going to decrease, not increase. Not just at Akron, but everywhere. You're already seeing it happen at WMU. Last month they hired a basketball coach for about 60% of what they were paying Hawkins. As contracts expire, coaches will be forced to take pay cuts or they will be replaced by someone who will do the job for less. Salaries were artificially inflated due to institutional support. You take away that institutional support and make athletic programs become more self sufficient, those salary bubbles pop. Akron football brings in somewhere in the neighborhood of 6-7 million in revenue. No private business that does 7 million in revenue would pay their CEO $500k then have an additional 7 or so VPs making north of 6 figures. That's not a sustainable business model.

Kreed - Per your 1st paragragh, above I mentioned assistant coaches in my note not HC. I think our HC might be overpaid, but position assistants get crumbs.  

Edited April 30, 2020 by UA1987

[kreed5120]

4 minutes ago, UA1987 said:

Kreed - Per your 1st paragragh, above I mentioned assistant coaches in my note not HC. I think our HC might be overpaid, but position assistants get crumbs.  

 

I'm not entirely sure what each of them make to be honest. They are all Arth's guys and Arth wanted them. None of them have prior FBS experience, at least for the most part, so they should be among the lowest paid assistants in the MAC. We should be paying people after they prove their worth, not before.

[Captain Kangaroo]

26 minutes ago, clarkwgriswold said:

 

Imagine that conversation in the private sector.  "We have this property that we're upside down in that nobody else wants and it's 10 years old and already decaying.  

I think "decaying" is a bit of an exaggeration. There is some poor concrete that needs addressed. But as far as the stands, press box, bathrooms, field, etc go, it is a very nice stadium. One that would cost in excess of $150 million if it were built today.

[jupitertoo]

Frank Solich shares a portion of his salary with his top assistants.

[UA1987]

10 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

I'm not entirely sure what each of them make to be honest. They are all Arth's guys and Arth wanted them. None of them have prior FBS experience, at least for the most part, so they should be among the lowest paid assistants in the MAC. We should be paying people after they prove their worth, not before.

I think they may have already proved their worth last year.

[kreed5120]

4 minutes ago, UA1987 said:

I think they may have already proved their worth last year.

 

Your fear very well may be right. I thought it was a mistake for Arth not to bring in an experienced OC or DC to help him with the jump. Arth obviously has a lot off faith and loyalty with this staff as he has taken many of them from John Carroll to Chattanooga and now Akron. If we gave our assistants more money, I feel Arth would just split it up amongst his cronies, which means we'd just be paying more for the same people.

[GP1]

35 minutes ago, zips1989 said:

So does anyone have any insight as to when we might have a decision on this?

Thanks for bringing the bad roll out of this to the forefront.  Seriously, nobody knows and that is the problem.

[GP1]

1 hour ago, kreed5120 said:

Salaries were artificially inflated due to institutional support. 

It helped. What really inflated salaries was the rapid influx of money into conferences, specifically P5, that allowed salaries to be driven up. This trend followed in to the P5 coordinator ranks which used to be the nursery for MAC level schools head coaches. Those coordinators are hard to dislodge from their schools at this point so we have to take risks on P5 assistants or lower level head coaches which are significantly less proven. In any event, we and schools like ours are wildly overpaying for what we are getting.

 

This would be a question for the Matt Kauligs of the committee I propose. How do you build a great management team at a small to mid size business when you don't have the financial resources of your larger competitors to attract and maintain human talent?

Edited April 30, 2020 by GP1

[kreed5120]

28 minutes ago, Captain Kangaroo said:

I think "decaying" is a bit of an exaggeration. There is some poor concrete that needs addressed. But as far as the stands, press box, bathrooms, field, etc go, it is a very nice stadium. One that would cost in excess of $150 million if it were built today.

It should be in pristine condition. Very little wear and tear as we've been practicing social distancing at games for the past 10 or so years. 

[GP1]

5 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

It should be in pristine condition.

Over a 10 year period, Mother Nature will be more harsh on any NE Ohio stadium's concrete than if there were weekly sold out crowds.

 

Most new construction roofs are not expected to last very long because of the wear and tear during construction so The Big Dialer may be in need of a roof replacement in the next 4-5 years.

[kreed5120]

2 minutes ago, GP1 said:

Over a 10 year period, Mother Nature will be more harsh on any NE Ohio stadium's concrete than if there were weekly sold out crowds.

 

Most new construction roofs are not expected to last very long because of the wear and tear during construction so The Big Dialer may be in need of a roof replacement in the next 4-5 years.

My comment wasn't to be taken seriously. I was just making a small joke at our own expense.

[clarkwgriswold]

https://www.beaconjournal.com/news/20190412/ua-seeks-1-million-for-construction-deficiencies-at-infocision-stadium

[GP1]

47 minutes ago, clarkwgriswold said:

https://www.beaconjournal.com/news/20190412/ua-seeks-1-million-for-construction-deficiencies-at-infocision-stadium

Interesting.

 

The PR hit is not ideal for Welty or UofA, but things like this happen on state construction projects all of the time. It's just happening to us this time and why construction lawyer exist. $1 million is a lot to ask for. I'm sure they will settle out of court for a number lower than $1 million and the problems will get fixed.  

[jupitertoo]

That's over a year old.  I bet they have already settled.

[Hilltopper]

18 minutes ago, jupitertoo said:

That's over a year old.  I bet they have already settled.

They did

[Spin]

This thread shows me that this is a complex problem because of the number of sports and programs involved. Everybody has their favorite program in Zips athletics, and do not want changes to adversely affect their favorite.

 

Fans whose favorite program(s) is basketball and/or soccer are worried changes in the football program will affect those programs' Division 1 status and membership in the MAC.

 

Fans whose favorite is football see the fallacy of non-Five schools ever catching up with the P5 programs, no matter how much money they can scrape together to throw at it. They/we prefer to play at a level can where a program can progress to competing for a national championship someday at the proper level for their program. Just like basketball and soccer and every other Zips program. 

 

And they're (we're) not as excited about taking several beat downs a season, possibly sustaining key injuries and affecting bowl eligibility, to bankroll the rest of the athletic dept. Why should football be the sacrificial lamb?  How is that fair?

 

Everyone's opinions seem to be based on protecting their favorite Zips program. Myself included. There is nothing wrong with that. But if you're looking for a compromise among fans of the different programs, forget about it...

[Spin]

One thing was brought up when Baseball was announced to be coming back. In a couple places they talked about the goal being baseball being a "self sustaining model" within the next five years.

 

I've been interested in hearing more about this concept, but haven't heard anything in awhile. They could be onto something in this new reality of mid-major athletics.

Edited May 1, 2020 by Spin

[GP1]

9 hours ago, Spin said:

Everyone's opinions seem to be based on protecting their favorite Zips program. Myself included. There is nothing wrong with that. But if you're looking for a compromise among fans of the different programs, forget about it...

It's why schools and conferences like ours need to collectively and look at the options. One school cannot do it alone.  I don't even like to look at them as cuts. As much as I hate it, I'm about to use a corporate Americaism....."right sizing".  If everyone agreed to right size together, it is easier to take to the public. A school can claim to make decisions for the "greater good" or whatever sounds good at the time.

Edited May 1, 2020 by GP1

[kreed5120]

For the most part the people who I've seen posting that they wanted the football program to drop to a lower level are the ones who are very anti-football. The football fans for the most part are the ones who want to stay in the MAC. Akron wasn't competing for national championships before they joined FBS. Why would they start competing for them now if they dropped down? In fact, they never even won a I-AA playoff game. Personally, I don't see what's wrong with playing 2 buy games per year. If Akron can't go 6-4 in the remaining 10 games while playing in what is by far the worst division in all of FBS, they don't deserve to make the postseason.

 

Slightly off topic, I'm not sure MAC soccer will survive this. Akron may prioritize its soccer program, but it's not nearly the same priority at the other schools. We may need to look for a new home for the soccer program regardless if we want to or not.

Edited May 1, 2020 by kreed5120

[GP1]

Ludwig von Mises 3 Elements of Change.  In order for someone to make a change, three elements are required. The second cannot take place without getting past the first and so on.

 

First, the person is uncomfortable with the current state. If you think the current state of G5 sports is good, you don't go to question 2.

 

Second, there is a vision of a better state.  I don't like the current state of G5 sports and I would like one where we compete well against one another while giving communities, fans and alumni something enjoyable.

 

Third, a belief that the vision of a better state is achievable.  This is the hard one. I believe it is achievable but I don't know how to get there. I do believe things have gotten so bad compared to the P5 conferences it is going to take a lot of really smart people to figure out. See my previous comments in this topic on this subject.  We are so far past deciding how much to charge for a ticket is isn't even funny. I am not sure the first questions they should ask are even about money.

 

We and schools like ours have a lot to offer fans, alumni and communities. I don't believe it is what the P5 conferences offer but that's not necessarily a bad thing either. We just need to put our best foot forward, whatever that may be. If we go about this right, our better days are in front of us. Now is the time for optimism, not fear (unless UofA is planning another unilateral decision).

Edited May 1, 2020 by GP1

[clarkwgriswold]

31 minutes ago, GP1 said:

Ludwig von Mises 3 Elements of Change.  In order for someone to make a change, three elements are required. The second cannot take place without getting past the first and so on.

 

First, the person is uncomfortable with the current state. If you think the current state of G5 sports is good, you don't go to question 2.

 

Second, there is a vision of a better state.  I don't like the current state of G5 sports and I would like one where we compete well against one another while giving communities, fans and alumni something enjoyable.

 

Third, a belief that the vision of a better state is achievable.  This is the hard one. I believe it is achievable but I don't know how to get there. I do believe things have gotten so bad compared to the P5 conferences it is going to take a lot of really smart people to figure out. See my previous comments in this topic on this subject.  We are so far past deciding how much to charge for a ticket is isn't even funny. I am not sure the first questions they should ask are even about money.

 

We and schools like ours have a lot to offer fans, alumni and communities. I don't believe it is what the P5 conferences offer but that's not necessarily a bad thing either. We just need to put our best foot forward, whatever that may be. If we go about this right, our better days are in front of us. Now is the time for optimism, not fear (unless UofA is planning another unilateral decision).

 

I would say that collectively the University of Akron as a whole cannot get past step one as the administration and students by and large do not give a **** about athletics.  Looking at the crowds tells you the students don't care.  Looking at history tells you that the administration has never made athletics a priority or acknowledged the benefits a strong athletic program can have on a campus.  They can't be uncomfortable with the current state as they don't care.

[ZippyRulz]

47 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

For the most part the people who I've seen posting that they wanted the football program to drop to a lower level are the ones who are very anti-football. The football fans for the most part are the ones who want to stay in the MAC. Akron wasn't competing for national championships before they joined FBS. Why would they start competing for them now if they dropped down? In fact, they never even won a I-AA playoff game. Personally, I don't see what's wrong with playing 2 buy games per year. If Akron can't go 6-4 in the remaining 10 games while playing in what is by far the worst division in all of FBS, they don't deserve to make the postseason.

 

Slightly off topic, I'm not sure MAC soccer will survive this. Akron may prioritize its soccer program, but it's not nearly the same priority at the other schools. We may need to look for a new home for the soccer program regardless if we want to or not.

 

It would be interesting to see the isolated financials of the soccer program. There is some revenue from tickets but no TV and no major buy games. The team size is large and has to travel farther and wider since there are fewer teams within the regular MAC footprint. Talk about a painful cut -- it would be, but in budget cost saving terms it has to be on the table.