Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DannyHoke

Back when cutting sports seemed like the abyss...

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

This year is the first time they actually followed through on making the cuts they said they would. The thing is they should have followed through on their plan 3-4 years ago then they wouldn't have needed to make such drastic changes now.

 

They set lofty goals of raising hundreds of millions of dollars. They never come close to hitting all those goals nor do they publish progress reports along the way. They might accomplish 25%-50% of what they wanted to do before they roll out the next one and it's even grander than the previous one. I'm waiting for the day the University sends me an email that says "Thank you for your contribution! We have currently completed our fundraising goal and don't need anymore of your money at this time."  

Paragraph 1:  The problem is the only news you hear about the university and probably a lot of universities like Akron is what they are cutting from their budget. What the Idaho president was saying was these cuts are self defeating in many ways and we could be in much worse shape today. Again, takes me back a couple of decades now, but Jack Welch was the "cutting" guy. Basically, he became famous for making obvious decisions look complicated by wrapping Six Sigma around them. Did it really take a 12 month Six Sigma study to figure out that after NAFTA, a company could make more money off of a $15 toaster made in Mexico vs the USA?  Over time GE became a shell of itself and could not support itself after the endless cuts. Five years ago, the stock closed around $30. Yesterday it closed around $8.50. Cuts may be needed, but they are not the same thing as thought and should not be defined as a success.

 

Paragraph 2:  Lofty goals are a good thing. I can't think of a worse idea than to tell the general public they no longer need their money. A university will always need money and in big chunks.

 

On a positive note, I like the administrative changes our current president has made at the university. The consolidation of administration will cut a lot of overhead without sacrificing the mission of education. It was a thoughtful direction. Unlike how cuts at GE impacted their customers in a negative way, these changes should not impact the students in a negative way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, GP1 said:

Paragraph 1:  The problem is the only news you hear about the university and probably a lot of universities like Akron is what they are cutting from their budget. What the Idaho president was saying was these cuts are self defeating in many ways and we could be in much worse shape today. Again, takes me back a couple of decades now, but Jack Welch was the "cutting" guy. Basically, he became famous for making obvious decisions look complicated by wrapping Six Sigma around them. Did it really take a 12 month Six Sigma study to figure out that after NAFTA, a company could make more money off of a $15 toaster made in Mexico vs the USA?  Over time GE became a shell of itself and could not support itself after the endless cuts. Five years ago, the stock closed around $30. Yesterday it closed around $8.50. Cuts may be needed, but they are not the same thing as thought and should not be defined as a success.

 

Paragraph 2:  Lofty goals are a good thing. I can't think of a worse idea than to tell the general public they no longer need their money. A university will always need money and in big chunks.

 

On a positive note, I like the administrative changes our current president has made at the university. The consolidation of administration will cut a lot of overhead without sacrificing the mission of education. It was a thoughtful direction. Unlike how cuts at GE impacted their customers in a negative way, these changes should not impact the students in a negative way.

 

You can look at my post history. I've long advocated that the scholarship cost is greatly overstated as it really doesn't cost 25k-30k to educate, house, and feed 1 additional student or multiple those figures by 10 if you want to look at 10 scholarship reduction. The cost of coaches, staff, travel, facilities etc are very real. Finding ways of reducing those overheads should be the focus. Ideally making all the olympic sports like baseball where it's self sustaining, or at least close to it, should be the goal.

 

The point I was making was we fail to complete 1 goal before moving to the next. Having overly ambitious goals can certainly have negative consequences. Look at all the debt Akron took on to expand its campus to accommodate an enrollment that it envisioned would surpass 40k. Now we're at less than half that and are still forced to service those debt payments on building we don't really even need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be fascinating to see what happens during the next round of head coach salary negotiations.  Surely the trend of replacing current coaches with more expensive coaches (or giving massive raises to retain coaches) will end at least for one "silly season."  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cykron said:

It will be fascinating to see what happens during the next round of head coach salary negotiations.  Surely the trend of replacing current coaches with more expensive coaches (or giving massive raises to retain coaches) will end at least for one "silly season."  

I think the current trend will continue for MAC level schools. The days of picking up a hot coordinator at a P5 school like we did with Brookhart is over and has been for a few years. They are making too much money at P5 schools to leave for less money and more responsibility. MAC level schools will take a risk on a much less proven position coach at a P5 school or a less proven coach from a lower division. I think the price point we got TA for will become a starting norm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kreed5120 said:

The point I was making was we fail to complete 1 goal before moving to the next. Having overly ambitious goals can certainly have negative consequences. Look at all the debt Akron took on to expand its campus to accommodate an enrollment that it envisioned would surpass 40k. Now we're at less than half that and are still forced to service those debt payments on building we don't really even need.

What we, and many schools like us, got caught up in was the "building process".  Universities were building buildings for the sake of building buildings. Akron went through a much needed construction cycle. There was little thought put in to what would happen other than "if you build it, they will come".  It was magical thinking but it made people happy because everyone likes new things. New provides a good energy and something leaders have to capitalize on. Ours didn't. When things started to go bad, they took it to another extreme and made cutting everything in their path the priority undercutting the mission of the university, which is to educate people and develop people into better citizens. The cutting process makes people upset because it is a symbol of failure and a very public one at that. As soon as possible, they need to stop talking about what is being cut and transition to talking about what the university does for the students alumni and larger NE Ohio community. Getting off of the negative should be a priority.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

 

 This year is the first time they actually followed through on making the cuts they said they would.

 

Agreed.  That feeds into my point that the COVID-19 crisis gave them the cover to did it with little or limited opposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, GP1 said:

What we, and many schools like us, got caught up in was the "building process".  Universities were building buildings for the sake of building buildings. Akron went through a much needed construction cycle. There was little thought put in to what would happen other than "if you build it, they will come".  It was magical thinking but it made people happy because everyone likes new things. New provides a good energy and something leaders have to capitalize on. Ours didn't. When things started to go bad, they took it to another extreme and made cutting everything in their path the priority undercutting the mission of the university, which is to educate people and develop people into better citizens. The cutting process makes people upset because it is a symbol of failure and a very public one at that. As soon as possible, they need to stop talking about what is being cut and transition to talking about what the university does for the students alumni and larger NE Ohio community. Getting off of the negative should be a priority.

 

And that's exactly why tuition has been raising so rapidly. Schools aren't competing with one another to offer the highest level education at the lowest cost possible. They're competing with one another to build the tallest rock climbing wall, coolest lazy river, most extravagant dorm apartments, etc. then pass that cost along to the students. Schools are doing this because not so street smart 18 year old kids are willing to borrow thousands of extra dollars per year for these things and thanks to the government they have access to near limitless capital. Of course these same kids after graduating then complain once they have to start repaying those loans. That's a whole other discussion.

Edited by kreed5120
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

I'm surprised that number isn't higher than 97. I'm sure more sports would have been cut had the NCAA approved dropping the minimum teams required.

 

Actually the number at the time I posted the article on ZipsNation was at least 100 because between publication of the article and my posting here Wright state dropped three sports.

One thing that makes the Wright State cuts extremely interesting is that they knew the cuts would drop them below the minimum number of sports required to qualify as a DI school. They plan to petition the NCAA for a waiver after the fact!

I think I heard the AD and university pres mumbling their new mantra "I have always relied on the kindness of strangers." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

 

And that's exactly why tuition has been raising so rapidly. Schools aren't competing with one another to offer the highest level education at the lowest cost possible. They're competing with one another to build the tallest rock climbing wall, coolest lazy river, most extravagant dorm apartments, etc. then pass that cost along to the students. Schools are doing this because not so street smart 18 year old kids are willing to borrow thousands of extra dollars per year for these things and thanks to the government they have access to near limitless capital. Of course these same kids after graduating then complain once they have to start repaying those loans. That's a whole other discussion.

 

 

In most institutions, the academic and the housing/dining operations are handled quite separately.  Housing/dining is its own profit center for institutions.  Of course, there is a trickle down that affects admissions, but I think the cost of many of these things are passed on to students, often students of the next generation when it comes to capital improvement projects.  This is all outside and on top of rising tuition costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Edited by DannyHoke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2020 at 8:34 AM, clarkwgriswold said:

Thanks for posting this. What we are witnessing some members of the ncaa force change upon the organization they run. The ncaa does not run the schools. The schools run the ncaa.

 

The ncaa can continue to deal with petition after petition after petition, or do something to create a structure where they do not have to deal with them. Create enough deviations to the rules and the rules no longer mean anything. Therefore, you have to create new rules.

 

Right about now would be a good time for MAClike schools to get together and decide what they want those rules to look like. That is, if they can break free from figuring out how many pencils they are going to cut out of the budget.  

Edited by GP1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, DannyHoke said:

Which players entered the portal?

 

Edit: Never mind. I took @zipsbb as basketball, but now see it's baseball.

Edited by kreed5120

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GP1 said:

Thanks for posting this. What we are witnessing some members of the ncaa force change upon the organization they run. The ncaa does not run the schools. The schools run the ncaa.

 

The ncaa can continue to deal with petition after petition after petition, or do something to create a structure where they do not have to deal with them. Create enough deviations to the rules and the rules no longer mean anything. Therefore, you have to create new rules.

 

Right about now would be a good time for MAClike schools to get together and decide what they want those rules to look like. That is, if they can break free from figuring out how many pencils they are going to cut out of the budget.  

 

Hopefully, it a start.  Unfortunately, the NCAA is all too often reactive as opposed to proactive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kreed5120 said:

Which players entered the portal?

 

Edit: Never mind. I took @zipsbb as basketball, but now see it's baseball.

 

They were 1-12 and on a very limited number of scholarships already.  I can't imagine there's a big market out there for the players entering the portal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, clarkwgriswold said:

 

They were 1-12 and on a very limited number of scholarships already.  I can't imagine there's a big market out there for the players entering the portal.

Clark maybe you can think of a clever title for a "new thread" that doesn't stem from such a negative place?  Cut day Thursday is long gone.  Need to look forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, NWAkron said:

Clark maybe you can think of a clever title for a "new thread" that doesn't stem from such a negative place?  Cut day Thursday is long gone.  Need to look forward.

 

I'm thinking "Emerging from the Cuts- Hope for the Future- Zips 2020."

 

Dre and Danny can then come in and take a big slimy dump on it.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zipmeister said:

The glass is half-full club

 

 

This will be the shortest thread on the site!  🤨

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, NWAkron said:

Clark maybe you can think of a clever title for a "new thread" that doesn't stem from such a negative place?  Cut day Thursday is long gone.  Need to look forward.

@DannyHoke has the option to rename the thread if he would like, since he created it. Just click on the title to edit if you feel the need. IMO, changing "is" to "was" would be a simple solution. Or just including the date in the title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reorientation Thursday would have been nice, but things don't seem to be going in that direction. 

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...