Crossfire (6-27)

[streettopeschel]

Duke...without boring the board beyond where we already have, I'll not cc our previous posts.

Sooooo...you've always been concerned about ath/dept expenditures as it relates to dollars/student or it's a big deal now?

My position is nobody gave a shit when we were winning big and nobody including you, will give a shit when we're winning big again.

 

[java]

StP,

I don't think anyone will, including Duke, if we win like I think we will this season. Add to that, Steve is cutting back on personnel, even cutting positions he doesn't want to cut to trim the budget. That will probably be necessary, even at Texas, in the brave new college football world everyone envisions.

 

[Randolph Duke]

Duke...without boring the board beyond where we already have, I'll not cc our previous posts.

Sooooo...you've always been concerned about ath/dept expenditures as it relates to dollars/student or it's a big deal now?

My position is nobody gave a shit when we were winning big and nobody including you, will give a shit when we're winning big again.

Revenue is going to continue to grow at UT. We will be the first $200 million athletics program in the nation. We will be the first $250 million athletics program in the nation. The question is, "What are we going to do with that revenue?" As it stands, expenses have grown just as fast as revenues. Our spending is well over twice the spending rate on a per athlete basis as the national average.  On a per athlete basis, we spend 40% more than programs like Ohio State. For what? What is so much more expensive at Texas than at any other program in the nation?

UT is one of the few schools whose athletic department doesn't need financial support from the academic side. In fact, we transfer money from the athletics side to the academic side. We are one of (I believe) only two programs in the nation to do so. There has to be something more we can do with our financial excess than create a bloated and inefficient bureaucracy that does everything in its powers to insulate itself from having its financial resources wrenched from its grasped and diverted to fulfill the actual mission of the university.

I will give a shit when we are winning big again if what we are doing is throwing tens of millions into a bloated administration to support the football team when thousands of students could be assisted in their efforts to get an education if only we would cut the budget for the $500 throw pillows and God knows how much for napping couches for the staff in Bellmont and bring reform to that part of the university. Obviously, I am in the minority when I say Texas should be above the "win at any cost" mentality. 

 

[BudreauReye]

Revenue is going to continue to grow at UT. We will be the first $200 million athletics program in the nation. We will be the first $250 million athletics program in the nation. The question is, "What are we going to do with that revenue?" As it stands, expenses have grown just as fast as revenues. Our spending is well over twice the spending rate on a per athlete basis as the national average.  On a per athlete basis, we spend 40% more than programs like Ohio State. For what? What is so much more expensive at Texas than at any other program in the nation?

UT is one of the few schools whose athletic department doesn't need financial support from the academic side. In fact, we transfer money from the athletics side to the academic side. We are one of (I believe) only two programs in the nation to do so. There has to be something more we can do with our financial excess than create a bloated and inefficient bureaucracy that does everything in its powers to insulate itself from having its financial resources wrenched from its grasped and diverted to fulfill the actual mission of the university.

I will give a shit when we are winning big again if what we are doing is throwing tens of millions into a bloated administration to support the football team when thousands of students could be assisted in their efforts to get an education if only we would cut the budget for the $500 throw pillows and God knows how much for napping couches for the staff in Bellmont and bring reform to that part of the university. Obviously, I am in the minority when I say Texas should be above the "win at any cost" mentality. 

Randolf, you have made a believer out of me.  As others have said, perhaps this cannot be changed as fast as you have intimated that you would like.  Be that as it may, the overriding question is how do you get this message out to  a wider audience?  I think your message will resonate would resonate with folks if that can be done.  And I do not agree withthe sentiment that the majority of Texas Ex's would care less about this issue if they were made aware of it.  This would make a great Texas Monthly article.  I may not have read all of your posts, and something like this may have already occurred to you, but you should write a synopsis of such an article.  I'll bet that it would not be too difficult to get it in front of the right people who could get such an article published.

 

[Randolph Duke]

Randolf, you have made a believer out of me.  As others have said, perhaps this cannot be changed as fast as you have intimated that you would like.  Be that as it may, the overriding question is how do you get this message out to  a wider audience?  I think your message will resonate would resonate with folks if that can be done.  And I do not agree withthe sentiment that the majority of Texas Ex's would care less about this issue if they were made aware of it.  This would make a great Texas Monthly article.  I may not have read all of your posts, and something like this may have already occurred to you, but you should write a synopsis of such an article.  I'll bet that it would not be too difficult to get it in front of the right people who could get such an article published.

Mimi Swartz over at Texas Monthly is a friend of mine. I have no doubt they will soon get an article about the finances to UT out soon.

People forget we have two million acres of land in west Texas that are producing oil and the annual royalties and bonus payments get added to our endowment. I haven't seen the latest numbers, but I believe the amount of new money that went into the UT endowment last year was greater than the existing endowment of Penn State. In other words, every year the taxpayers of Texas essentially write to the university of Texas to add to the PUF that is more then the entire existing endowment of one of the wealthiest public universities in the nation. This year the check will be even bigger. Soon we will be the first $200 million athletics budget in the nation. We already spend more in just coaches salaries than the entire athletics budget of 2/3 of all NCAA member schools. It is just a matter of time until Texas State, Tech, U of H and some other universities say "Enough is enough" and make a play to get at least a chunk of the PUF funds for their endowments.  How many $500 throw pillows do you think they are buying at Sam Houston, or TSU, or Texas State? ZERO.

If we don't show we are using every dollar to further the mission of the university, we have no argument against those who want to gain part of the UT endowment. After all, it is money that belongs to the people of the state of Texas. Every argument I am making now will be made against the university in the near future. Bellmont's outsized spending just paints a target on the university as an institution that has more money than it knows how to use responsibly. 

All I am asking is for Steve Patterson to get in front of the attacks and blunt the argument that UT has more money than it can responsibly manage and that the Legislature needs to reallocate the state's education resources. Once that door is opened, billions are going to flow through it. The best way we can keep that from happening is to use fewer dollars on maintaining Bellmont's bloated finances and to shift more money to fulfilling the mission of the university. 

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

RD,

I value your posts and opinions regarding our beloved University and athletic program. I totally understand your frustrations. Being a business minded person, efficiency is key for all departments to excel and grow. You and I want Texas to become leaders and benchmarks for other universities/programs. Your article regarding A&M made it to the WSJ. Agree with Bud's post, perhaps you can write an article regarding the economics of Texas athletic program. Send to WSJ.

 

[Randolph Duke]

RD,

I value your posts and opinions regarding our beloved University and athletic program. I totally understand your frustrations. Being a business minded person, efficiency is key for all departments to excel and grow. You and I want Texas to become leaders and benchmarks for other universities/programs. Your article regarding A&M made it to the WSJ. Agree with Bud's post, perhaps you can write an article regarding the economics of Texas athletic program. Send to WSJ.

In my opinion, until Steve Patterson gets the finances under control, the less attention the program gets, the better. People don't care about numbers like "$165 million" but when the numbers get to be breaking numbers like $200,000,000 or "one quarter of a billion dollars" the program is going to get some really nasty press, considering that 2/3 of NCAA programs have entire athletics budgets of less than $25 million. The $200 mil and $250 mil revenue numbers are inevitable. Unless we have our spending under control and we can show our athletics program adds to the academics mission (while the academic side of most universities subsidize the athletics program) we are going to get nothing but bad press. We need to get ready to explain how our outsized revenues are a positive for our university and why the spending levels of Bellmont are more than twice the national average, 40% more than leading programs like Ohio State and almost two and a half times more than Stanford, the winner of the Director's up for the last 20 consecutive years. 

If Steve Patterson gets Bellmont restructured, all will be great, because we will have a tremendous story to tell. If not, we will be an example of what is wrong with college athletics. 

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

In my opinion, until Steve Patterson gets the finances under control, the less attention the program gets, the better. People don't care about numbers like "$165 million" but when the numbers get to be breaking numbers like $200,000,000 or "one quarter of a billion dollars" the program is going to get some really nasty press, considering that 2/3 of NCAA programs have entire athletics budgets of less than $25 million. The $200 mil and $250 mil revenue numbers are inevitable. Unless we have our spending under control and we can show our athletics program adds to the academics mission (while the academic side of most universities subsidize the athletics program) we are going to get nothing but bad press. We need to get ready to explain how our outsized revenues are a positive for our university and why the spending levels of Bellmont are more than twice the national average, 40% more than leading programs like Ohio State and almost two and a half times more than Stanford, the winner of the Director's up for the last 20 consecutive years.

If Steve Patterson gets Bellmont restructured, all will be great, because we will have a tremendous story to tell. If not, we will be an example of what is wrong with college athletics.

Low cost, high profit margins, return on investment on playing field, charitable allocations to academia. Spending money wisely affects the greater good.

 

[java]

It is not the AD's responsibility to continually fund UT-Austin.  The AD is self-sufficient, and it should be.  Expenditures will soon be required for facilities that are required due to the new medical school.  All excess funds should first be set aside to help fund the new basketball arena and swim center. Once again, these are not being built on a whim, but are necessary due to the medical school.

C'mon, enough is enough!

 

[echeese]

It is not the AD's responsibility to continually fund UT-Austin.  The AD is self-sufficient, and it should be.  Expenditures will soon be required for facilities that are required due to the new medical school.  An excess funds should first be set aside to help fund the new basketball arena and swim center, once again, these are not being built on a whim, but they are necessary due to the medical school.

C'mon, enough is enough!

Well said. . . 

this has been interesting .. . and a great example of goal post moving. . . .

Originally this was an Anti CFS rant as RD does not like the hire.  . .. of course he has offered no viable alternate.  . .

Then it morphed into Patterson has not censored the media enough .. . .when pressed for what Patterson should have done .. . no alternative was given but posters who had the audacity to question our exhaulted expert where met with condescension .. 

Claims were made about the size of the Austin market as some magical "excuse" for our success ,, ,these turned out to be inaccurate .. .

Then it was claimed that Patterson has done nothing to effect change .. . true only if you ignore what he has done .. .hire CFS . . .1st College BBall game in China. . .etc .. . .

Now suddenly we want the AD office to be more fiscally efficient. . . .well no shit sherlock .. . outside of tax and spend liberals. . .anyone with any common sense wants money spent wisely .. . . .

But acting like this is Patterson's fault after 7 months on the job is bizarre. . . . 

PS, in case you are not aware. . . the AD's office has given MILLIONS every year back to the University to help the University .. . .much of that thanks to the increase in ticket sales, revenues and donations because of Mack .. . 

 

[echeese]

In my opinion, until Steve Patterson gets the finances under control, the less attention the program gets, the better. People don't care about numbers like "$165 million" but when the numbers get to be breaking numbers like $200,000,000 or "one quarter of a billion dollars" the program is going to get some really nasty press, considering that 2/3 of NCAA programs have entire athletics budgets of less than $25 million. The $200 mil and $250 mil revenue numbers are inevitable. Unless we have our spending under control and we can show our athletics program adds to the academics mission (while the academic side of most universities subsidize the athletics program) we are going to get nothing but bad press.

We need to get ready to explain how our outsized revenues are a positive for our university and why the spending levels of Bellmont are more than twice the national average, 40% more than leading programs like Ohio State and almost two and a half times more than Stanford, the winner of the Director's up for the last 20 consecutive years. 

If Steve Patterson gets Bellmont restructured, all will be great, because we will have a tremendous story to tell. If not, we will be an example of what is wrong with college athletics. 

Why would we get "nasty" press for being successful?

We "aid" the academics mission by sharing the athletic revenue with the academic side and by having the ENTIRE athletic budget be completely self sustaining. . .

That 2/3rds of the NCAA have budgets of less than $25 million is moot. . . .we live in a different world than the Tulane's of the world. . . I get that in your "collectivist" mind .. . we should all share equally but that is not the real world. . .

Again, same thing for spending levels. . .I'll wager you are comparing TEXAS to New Mexico State or worse .. . likely adding in the Wisconsin-White Waters of the world. . .

And both of those numbers are based on the assumption you finally got some of the facts right . .. history has shown you like to play fast and loose with the truth so why don't you document your sources?

Hate to break this to you but we already have a tremendous story to tell and I have little doubt 5 years from now it will be even better . . ..no thanks to your self loathing. . . .

 

[java]

Additional value-add from our athletic programs:

1)  Charlie Strong is adamant about academics, as am I, as a teacher. Athletic careers are over in a heartbeat, education lasts a lifetime. Louisville's NCAA academic rating for football was 1000, like ours was.  A 1000 APR costs money, if you don't like it, too bad. That, my friends, is a value add. PLUS

2)  Charlie Strong is adamant about building character and developing his players as young men, as am I, as a parent and a teacher and a Texan. If one of you are not, please don't tell me, it will be very disappointing. I do not want Texas players supplementing the practices of criminal defense attorneys.  PLUS!

      A. I tell student-athletes in my classes that there is a reason that student comes first in student-athletes. You would be shocked at        how many talented athletes (many of whom have had not had good guidance at home) have never head of the NCAA clearinghouse. Absurd!

3)   Some here and other places have contended that Texas is not doing enough with the money we make.  Forgive me, but I call bullshit.  If in doubt, ask Vince Young about that.  He was the first in his family to graduate from college, and though the NFL was not kind to him, he now has a job at UT.  It is a job that he has earned and for which I believe he is uniquely qualified.  If I'm not mistaken, UT paid for him, and other UT athletes that leave early for the pros, to complete their degrees, on our dime.  That is an invaluable benefit.  Education is an invaluable benefit.  PLUS!

Of course, we could save money by taking that benefit away, but if you argue for it, I will flame away until there is nothing left but ashes!

4)  I don't pretend to be familiar with multiple accounting methods, but I would think that one of our costs in the expenditure section is that for medical scholarships for players who were forced to give up football due to injury.  It's another case of 'the right thing to do'.  If you object to it, fine, you pay for them to finish school.  Your choice.

Texas goes above and beyond to take care of our student athletes.  Certainly, some duplication and excess has been created in Belmont in recent years, but I believe that is due to the Mack Brown phenomenon more than anything else.  Mack craved approval.  When fans became critical, he surrounded himself with people he knew would not oppose him or criticize him.  Of course they received glowing reviews.  They weren't going to be burned for doing their jobs and saying, 'Yes, sir!'.  That will take time to correct.

Folks, it's time to move on and look forward to the season.  I am excited about it, and I am excited about the interest that athletes are showing in the program.

Hook 'em!

 

[BudreauReye]

Well said. . . 

this has been interesting .. . and a great example of goal post moving. . . .

Originally this was an Anti CFS rant as RD does not like the hire.  . .. of course he has offered no viable alternate.  . .

Then it morphed into Patterson has not censored the media enough .. . .when pressed for what Patterson should have done .. . no alternative was given but posters who had the audacity to question our exhaulted expert where met with condescension .. 

Claims were made about the size of the Austin market as some magical "excuse" for our success ,, ,these turned out to be inaccurate .. .

Then it was claimed that Patterson has done nothing to effect change .. . true only if you ignore what he has done .. .hire CFS . . .1st College BBall game in China. . .etc .. . .

Now suddenly we want the AD office to be more fiscally efficient. . . .well no shit sherlock .. . outside of tax and spend liberals. . .anyone with any common sense wants money spent wisely .. . . .

But acting like this is Patterson's fault after 7 months on the job is bizarre. . . . 

PS, in case you are not aware. . . the AD's office has given MILLIONS every year back to the University to help the University .. . .much of that thanks to the increase in ticket sales, revenues and donations because of Mack .. . 

You know cheese, I have read this discussion as it has progressed, and if truth be told, there has been more than a little goal post moving from the both of you.  Both you and Duke have had some very good things to say that are worthy of consideration on their own merit within the grander scheme of the "valid discussion".  By "valid discussion", I mean that the both of you have made it rather difficult at times to WANT to follow the "Discussion of Merit" (Hmmm!  Both of those sound good!  I wonder If I can get away with saying that they are the same thing?).  At the same time, the insistence of both of you to constantly push back against the other, well, quite frankly, it distorts and obscures what ever validity that your messages have had in the first place.

Not that what I think should matter to anybody, but I wish the both of you would take a break and come back at this with your egos checked at the door.  Let the merits of your arguments stand on their own.  You might just find that the two of you might be able to inspire MORE thoughtful discussion from folks that have just turned off the discussion.

 

[echeese]

You are welcome to your opinion. . . . ..it is interesting that you quote and address your comments to me . .. but it's OK. . . people tend to lean to their biases and do not like those being questioned. . .. 

I'm pushing back against mis-reported and misleading claims and flat out fabrications. . . .

To me, those are important factors in determining the "merits' of a discussion . . .but sadly, cognitive dissonance is strong and people tend to believe what fits their beliefs .. . .the old adage . ..they use facts like a drunk uses a light pole. . .for support rather than illumination . .. . 

When I catch someone making up crap to support their argument. . .whether I agree with their point or not. . .I begin to distrust their "thought process/their ability to critically think" vs emotionally rant. . . .

For the record. . .NET income of the TEXAS athletic dept has risen from $10 million per year to $25 million (2008 through 2011). . . now while success can mask inefficiencies at times. . .this is still an indication TEXAS is operating fairly well .. . 

ESPECIALLY compared to the Median income for FBS which sees most FBS programs operating in the red. . . and worse. . . unlike TEXAS where revenues are rising faster than expenses . .. .the median FBS program has seen expenses rise 40% faster than revenues. . .. 

https://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4306-revenues-and-expenses-2004-2012-ncaa-division-i-intercollegiate-athletics-programs-report.aspx

OTOH. . ..I welcome you to point out even one time I have 'moved the goal posts". . . . 

 

[BudreauReye]

You are welcome to your opinion. . . . ..it is interesting that you quote and address your comments to me . .. but it's OK. . . people tend to lean to their biases and do not like those being questioned. . .. 

I'm pushing back against mis-reported and misleading claims and flat out fabrications. . . .

To me, those are important factors in determining the "merits' of a discussion . . .but sadly, cognitive dissonance is strong and people tend to believe what fits their beliefs .. . .the old adage . ..they use facts like a drunk uses a light pole. . .for support rather than illumination . .. . 

When I catch someone making up crap to support their argument. . .whether I agree with their point or not. . .I begin to distrust their "thought process/their ability to critically think" vs emotionally rant. . . .

For the record. . .NET income of the TEXAS athletic dept has risen from $10 million per year to $25 million (2008 through 2011). . . now while success can mask inefficiencies at times. . .this is still an indication TEXAS is operating fairly well .. . 

ESPECIALLY compared to the Median income for FBS which sees most FBS programs operating in the red. . . and worse. . . unlike TEXAS where revenues are rising faster than expenses . .. .the median FBS program has seen expenses rise 40% faster than revenues. . .. 

https://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4306-revenues-and-expenses-2004-2012-ncaa-division-i-intercollegiate-athletics-programs-report.aspx

OTOH. . ..I welcome you to point out even one time I have 'moved the goal posts". . . . 

I only addressed my comments to you because I was responding to your e-mail which was the last one on the list by the two of you.  In fact, I pretty much gave the two of you equal billing in my response.  I do not have a dog in the fight between the two of you. As to your request, I do not have to point out anything to either of you, unless I want to.  And I do not wish to be drawn into the acrimony between the two of you.  I am only pointing out behavior that has been rather obvious on this forum for a while - the pissing match between the two of you just so happens to be the one that we are talking about at the moment.  I have appreciated posts that both of you have made in the past, but I have to tell you that, despite the fact that there is some content of merit in this discussion, the discussion itself reached the state of tedium some time ago.  I am all for letting bitch slap fests like this run their due course, so I hope Darrell lets this one die its' own natural death.  The pity is that any discussion of merit herein will probably be lost in the process.  Let me express this caveat very directly.  Once again, I am not directing this rant at YOU, but rather at all of the pissers on this board!

 

[echeese]

Again, you quoted me and you opened your post using my name. . . .not sure how that equates to "equal billing' but as I said, that's OK . . .likely an example of cognitive dissonance. . . .

but you also claimed I moved the goal posts.. . . I simply asked you for an example of that. . . it is hardly unreasonable to ask someone to support their claims. . . 

As to your claim you are addressing your rant to everyone. . . .then why quote my comments?   Normally one quotes someone's comments when they are directing remarks at them. . . .

There is an old adage. . .what you are doing is talking so loud. . .I cannot hear what you are saying. . . .

 

[BudreauReye]

NO!  I will not play your game!

 

[echeese]

NO!  I will not play your game!

Hmmm,

You claimed I moved the goal posts. . . . .

I asked for an example to support your comment and now I'm playing a game?

 

[BudreauReye]

 

[echeese]

. . . . . . .  and why the spending levels of Bellmont are more than twice the national average, 40% more than leading programs like Ohio State and

almost two and a half times more than Stanford,

the winner of the Director's up for the last 20 consecutive years. 

An interesting claim .. . .Per ESPN Stanford's athletic spending was $90 million in 2013 while TEXAS was $146 million

To be 2 and a half times. . . . . .We would have to increase our spending to $220 million .. . .

Of course anyone with even a  business course to their credit realizes that spending is one variable of the bottom line. . . revenues the other. . .even with our larger spending number. . .I'll wager we significantly lead Stanford in Net Income 

In a similar fashion, we supposedly spent more than 40% above tOSU. . . reality shows it at about a 21% difference . . ..math clearly isn't a strong suit. . . 

https://b2.caspio.com/dp.asp

These are the type of overly emotional hyperbole used to paint a false or misleading picture. . . .if we care at all about the "merits" of a discussion .. . . that is if intellectual honesty is an issue. . . .

Like any large organization. . .we have fat .. . .and the bigger the organization is. . .the bigger the amount of fat becomes even if the % of fat remains unchanged. . . . .can we be more efficient. . .certainly. .. . are we in as dire shape as the hysteria being offered. . . not even close. . . .