|
Post by efg72 on Jun 16, 2024 22:13:46 GMT -5
Eliminate sports to get us to the minimum requirement to participate as a D1 institution
14 as an FCS institution 16 if we would ever move to FBS - never happen with this Board or Administration even if it made perfect sense
Currently we have 25, and few, if any are appropriately funded
I would start by keeping these 17 sports and leave it to others to question/change
Football M/w basketball M/W hockey Baseball/Softball M/W lax M/W track and x-country M/W soccer M/W golf Field Hockey
I would consider adding a club sport M Rugby
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 17, 2024 5:35:34 GMT -5
Eliminate sports to get us to the minimum requirement to participate as a D1 institution 14 as an FCS institution 16 if we would ever move to FBS - never happen with this Board or Administration even if it made perfect sense Currently we have 25, and few, if any are appropriately funded I would start by keeping these 17 sports and leave it to others to question/change Football M/w basketball M/W hockey Baseball/Softball M/W lax M/W track and x-country M/W soccer M/W golf Field Hockey I would consider adding a club sport M Rugby That solves nothing. Not enough women's sports to offset football.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Jun 17, 2024 7:08:50 GMT -5
Agree and understand the requirements
|
|
|
Post by rollders on Jun 17, 2024 13:41:55 GMT -5
While adding M Rugby would reflect the team's success as of late in addition to their alumni's support of the program, rugby for men is not an NCAA sport and would count towards the Men's Title IX cap, so bringing them under the athletics umbrella doesn't really do much to help a swelling budget. From purely a budget perspective, it would be wiser to throw money at the women's team, who had some success in years past but has been on a down trend as of late. With that being said, cuts do have to come eventually if HC wants to compete. The only question is where. Eliminate sports to get us to the minimum requirement to participate as a D1 institution 14 as an FCS institution 16 if we would ever move to FBS - never happen with this Board or Administration even if it made perfect sense Currently we have 25, and few, if any are appropriately funded I would start by keeping these 17 sports and leave it to others to question/change Football M/w basketball M/W hockey Baseball/Softball M/W lax M/W track and x-country M/W soccer M/W golf Field Hockey I would consider adding a club sport M Rugby
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Jun 17, 2024 21:50:59 GMT -5
While adding M Rugby would reflect the team's success as of late in addition to their alumni's support of the program, rugby for men is not an NCAA sport and would count towards the Men's Title IX cap, so bringing them under the athletics umbrella doesn't really do much to help a swelling budget. From purely a budget perspective, it would be wiser to throw money at the women's team, who had some success in years past but has been on a down trend as of late. With that being said, cuts do have to come eventually if HC wants to compete. The only question is where. Eliminate sports to get us to the minimum requirement to participate as a D1 institution 14 as an FCS institution 16 if we would ever move to FBS - never happen with this Board or Administration even if it made perfect sense Currently we have 25, and few, if any are appropriately funded I would start by keeping these 17 sports and leave it to others to question/change Football M/w basketball M/W hockey Baseball/Softball M/W lax M/W track and x-country M/W soccer M/W golf Field Hockey I would consider adding a club sport M Rugby Women's Rugby is a varsity sport at a few places....
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 17, 2024 22:54:01 GMT -5
I understand how culling some weak teams to provide more support for stronger teams makes dollars and sense. But the minor mostly non-scholarship sports benefit multiple college departments like Admissions to help keep HC as selective as possible, financial aid to preserve funds for others as many student athletes are full or close to full pay, Development as student athletes develop good time management and teamwork skills that foster successful careers which allows for future giving, Alumni Relations because student athletes actually wear the school name on their chest during their tenure which creates a strong bond, and all the academic departments because a large number of athletes are PL All Academic selections and the 98% or so graduation rate is routinely at or near the best in the nation.
Not too many areas where HC leads the nation. I think TPTB will be cautious about reducing reasons for qualified applicants with resources and options to choose Holy Cross. Not if the schools we are bunched up with in the National Liberal Arts College rankings aren't cutting sports.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 18, 2024 5:27:06 GMT -5
If one is seriously interested in cutting sports, and reallocating monies, start with M/W ice hockey.
HC M/W total expenses 2022-23: $4,635,000 (and 38 full scollies)
Colgate: $5,367,000 Boston Univ. $6,944,000 ----------------------- BC $7,656,000 Providence $7,012,000 UConn $4,778,000 Notre Dame $5,010,000 (men only) ^^^ All these four schools lost money on ice hockey. BC is the only one enumerating the loss: $1.4 million.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 18, 2024 12:33:51 GMT -5
If one is seriously interested in cutting sports, and reallocating monies, start with M/W ice hockey. HC M/W total expenses 2022-23: $4,635,000 (and 38 full scollies) Colgate: $5,367,000 Boston Univ. $6,944,000 ----------------------- BC $7,656,000 Providence $7,012,000 UConn $4,778,000 Notre Dame $5,010,000 (men only) ^^^ All these four schools lost money on ice hockey. BC is the only one enumerating the loss: $1.4 million. 1) How is UConn spending AHA dollars to play in H.E.? 2) I am definitely not in favor of cutting hockey. If Holy Cross is to ever win a third national championship, football and hockey are the least long shots to do so. Cutting any sport would put HC in the awkward position of continuously raising tuition while offering a skimpier product. How do you measure the deflation of spirit when one of the four(MHockey, WLax, FB, WBB) winning teams is ended just as it finally has turned around?
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 18, 2024 13:48:57 GMT -5
If one is seriously interested in cutting sports, and reallocating monies, start with M/W ice hockey. HC M/W total expenses 2022-23: $4,635,000 (and 38 full scollies) Colgate: $5,367,000 Boston Univ. $6,944,000 ----------------------- BC $7,656,000 Providence $7,012,000 UConn $4,778,000 Notre Dame $5,010,000 (men only) ^^^ All these four schools lost money on ice hockey. BC is the only one enumerating the loss: $1.4 million. 1) How is UConn spending AHA dollars to play in H.E.? 2) I am definitely not in favor of cutting hockey. If Holy Cross is to ever win a third national championship, football and hockey are the least long shots to do so. Cutting any sport would put HC in the awkward position of continuously raising tuition while offering a skimpier product. How do you measure the deflation of spirit when one of the four(MHockey, WLax, FB, WBB) winning teams is ended just as it finally has turned around? 1.) Cost of attendance, and thus cost of an athletic scholarship, is less than the other schools listed. One reason to think 3x before having a public university join a conference comprised exclusively of private schools. 2.) I was not advocating cutting ice hockey. But cutting golf, tennis, etc. doesn't buy much. HC M/W ice hockey expenses were only $100,000 less than the expenses for M/W basketball, the difference being that men's ice hockey costs about $100,000 less than men's hoops. HC ranks 4th in spending on M/W basketball in the PL. (of 8 schools, USMA and USNA excluded). HC ranks 8th of 8 in spending on M/W soccer. HC ranks 7th of 7 in M/W lacrosse. (AU excluded as it does not have a men's lacrosse team) HC ranks 7th of 7 in field hockey. (Loyola has no team).
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 18, 2024 15:55:11 GMT -5
1) How is UConn spending AHA dollars to play in H.E.? 2) I am definitely not in favor of cutting hockey. If Holy Cross is to ever win a third national championship, football and hockey are the least long shots to do so. Cutting any sport would put HC in the awkward position of continuously raising tuition while offering a skimpier product. How do you measure the deflation of spirit when one of the four(MHockey, WLax, FB, WBB) winning teams is ended just as it finally has turned around? 1.) Cost of attendance, and thus cost of an athletic scholarship, is less than the other schools listed. One reason to think 3x before having a public university join a conference comprised exclusively of private schools. 2.) I was not advocating cutting ice hockey. But cutting golf, tennis, etc. doesn't buy much. HC M/W ice hockey expenses were only $100,000 less than the expenses for M/W basketball, the difference being that men's ice hockey costs about $100,000 less than men's hoops. HC ranks 4th in spending on M/W basketball in the PL. (of 8 schools, USMA and USNA excluded). HC ranks 8th of 8 in spending on M/W soccer. HC ranks 7th of 7 in M/W lacrosse. (AU excluded as it does not have a men's lacrosse team) HC ranks 7th of 7 in field hockey. (Loyola has no team). This makes me feel good as a long time Patriots and thus Bill Belichick fan. His daughter Amanda can squeeze a buck as well as her father. It is very lauditory that WLax went 12-6, 6-3 and two games deep in the PLT with the least resources in the league.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Jun 19, 2024 14:41:00 GMT -5
There should be no reason we can't be in the top half of the league in our investments for each sport The CFO needs to open up and spend the money
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 20, 2024 6:47:40 GMT -5
There should be no reason we can't be in the top half of the league in our investments for each sport The CFO needs to open up and spend the money There is no CFO at Holy Cross. Budget decisions are made by the Board of Trustees.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Jun 20, 2024 9:31:04 GMT -5
Like other schools, the BOT often serves as a rubber stamp for the school leadership.
We have a senior vice president for administration and finance and treasurer.
As always, I appreciate your input
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Jun 20, 2024 20:21:48 GMT -5
1) How is UConn spending AHA dollars to play in H.E.? 2) I am definitely not in favor of cutting hockey. If Holy Cross is to ever win a third national championship, football and hockey are the least long shots to do so. Cutting any sport would put HC in the awkward position of continuously raising tuition while offering a skimpier product. How do you measure the deflation of spirit when one of the four(MHockey, WLax, FB, WBB) winning teams is ended just as it finally has turned around? 1.) Cost of attendance, and thus cost of an athletic scholarship, is less than the other schools listed. One reason to think 3x before having a public university join a conference comprised exclusively of private schools. 2.) I was not advocating cutting ice hockey. But cutting golf, tennis, etc. doesn't buy much. HC M/W ice hockey expenses were only $100,000 less than the expenses for M/W basketball, the difference being that men's ice hockey costs about $100,000 less than men's hoops. HC ranks 4th in spending on M/W basketball in the PL. (of 8 schools, USMA and USNA excluded). HC ranks 8th of 8 in spending on M/W soccer. HC ranks 7th of 7 in M/W lacrosse. (AU excluded as it does not have a men's lacrosse team) HC ranks 7th of 7 in field hockey. (Loyola has no team). UConn had six members of the Men's team from Connecticut and one from the Nutmeg state on their Hockey East Women's Regular Season and Tournament Championship squad.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jun 22, 2024 7:47:06 GMT -5
This could change things. From The Athletic.
By Justin Williams Jun 21, 2024
Houston Christian University filed a motion to intervene in the House v. NCAA lawsuit on Thursday, arguing that HCU’s financial interests were not adequately represented by the proposed terms of the House settlement agreed to last month.
The motion, if granted, could signify the first of many objections from smaller universities that felt they did not have a sufficient voice in a potentially historic reshaping of college sports.
ADVERTISEMENT
HCU’s motion to intervene stems from dissension that arose in the weeks before the proposed settlement, with smaller Division I schools and conferences arguing a lack of input in the settlement negotiations and disproportionate financial responsibility. The House settlement terms, which have yet to be submitted to the judge for preliminary approval, include a future revenue-sharing model directly from schools to athletes as well as $2.75 billion in back-pay damages the NCAA will owe to former Division I athletes who were previously barred from earning name, image and likeness (NIL) compensation. An overwhelming portion of those damages are expected to be distributed to former power-conference athletes, according to sources briefed on the settlement.
“We’re in a position where we believe this raises some issues of fiduciary responsibility,” HCU general counsel Tyler Boyd told The Athletic. “We first and foremost want our interests to be heard.”
go-deeper GO DEEPER What to know about House v. NCAA settlement and a historic day for college sports Houston Christian, formerly known as Houston Baptist University, is a Division I school and FCS football program that competes in the Southland Conference. According to the proposed settlement terms, over the course of 10 years, the NCAA would be responsible for paying out roughly $1.2 billion of the back-pay damages using reserve funds, or roughly 41 percent of the total $2.75 billion. The power conferences would be responsible for about 25 percent in withheld future revenues, the Group of 5 for about 9 percent, FCS schools — such as HCU — for about 12 percent, and non-football DI schools about 12 percent, all based on the share of DI revenue distributions conferences received from 2016 to 2024.
For non-FBS football conferences without the benefit of lucrative television-rights contracts, those percentages represent a more significant financial burden. One Division I commissioner previously estimated to The Athletic that non-FBS conferences could be on the hook for $2.5 million per year in withheld revenues to help cover the NCAA’s back-pay costs, which can amount to as much as 25 percent of the annual distributions some universities receive from the NCAA. That’s despite antitrust lawsuits such as the House case seeking damages largely as restitution for the billions of dollars collected via those power-conference media deals.
ADVERTISEMENT
Multiple administrators from the 22 non-FBS conferences, collectively referred to as the CCA22, previously told The Athletic they were not briefed on the House settlement discussions until last month, after the financial structure of payouts had already been formulated. In late May, before the proposed settlement agreement, representatives from the CCA22 submitted a formal request to the NCAA’s Board of Governors and Division I Board of Directors to either delay a final decision on the financial breakdown or adjust it to a more proportionate rate of revenue reductions for each conference, but to no avail.
“I understand this change will not be easy to manage, but given the challenges facing college sports over the last few decades, change is inevitable,” Baker wrote in the letter sent to NCAA membership last month regarding the proposed settlement terms.
go-deeper GO DEEPER How the House v. NCAA settlement could reshape college sports: What you need to know HCU’s motion to intervene seeks a legal intervention in a settlement the university argues will unfairly “divert funds from academics to athletics” due to the NCAA’s withholdings and would negatively impact its students, athletes and non-athletes alike.
If granted, the motion would essentially add HCU as a defendant alongside the power conferences and NCAA at-large, which could open the door for other universities to do the same and potentially send the settlement back to the negotiating table.
Broadly, HCU’s efforts further illustrate the many divisions and oppositions among NCAA institutions, and why the organization has often struggled to appease such a wide-ranging membership. HCU was technically represented as a defendant in the House suit by the NCAA, which voted to approve the settlement agreement via the Board of Governors and Division I Board of Directors. Yet the motion makes clear the school did not feel properly advocated for in negotiations.
go-deeper GO DEEPER If NCAA House settlement is approved, smaller schools could take the brunt of the impact Steve Berman, one of the lead plaintiff attorneys in the House case, told The Athletic via email: “There is no settlement that has been finalized or filed, so I question how this school can intervene in opposition to something that is not done.
“Contrary to what is claimed, there is nothing in the settlement that requires Houston Christian University to spend any more in the future,” Berman continued. “Rather, it gives universities the choice to spend on its athletes under a more free and fair system. If HCU doesn’t want to do so, it doesn’t have to.”
ADVERTISEMENT
A source briefed on HCU’s decision to file the motion to intervene told The Athletic that doing so now, before the settlement terms are officially submitted or approved, was the best opportunity to object to the settlement as agreed to and be given a more adequate voice in the negotiations.
In a statement provided to The Athletic on Friday, the NCAA said: “This proposed settlement is a massive step toward creating a future for all three NCAA divisions that is fair, stable and sustainable, while also ensuring that providing educational opportunities for all student-athletes remains a foundational element of college athletics. The proposal also allows for significant flexibility by allowing Division I schools to direct additional financial benefits to student-athletes based on each school’s specific priorities and financial abilities if they chose to. The future revenue reductions will be spread equitably across all of Division I with the national office and A5 taking on 66 percent of the cost and for the average non-A5 school, this revenue reduction will account for approximately 1-2 percent of a school’s athletics funding.”
The impact of HCU’s motion will be determined by whether Judge Claudia Wilken, who is presiding over this case in the Northern District of California, ultimately grants the intervention. It is also possible that other universities could file similar motions before the judge delivering a decision on HCU, and that the judge could collectively decide on multiple motions to intervene, a source familiar with the case told The Athletic.
“We believe that this case raises the issues of financial responsibility for the mission of the university, including those funds that could be directed away from university operations. Because it impacts the university as a whole and the students who are attending the university that are not student athletes. The intervention really represents the interests of those who we serve as our students.”
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 22, 2024 13:57:43 GMT -5
1) Thank you for sharing these subscription articles from The Athletic.
2) Are all of the NCAA distributions to colleges like HCU and HC "found money" in the sense that they come from profitable events like the NCAA national basketball tournaments that generate intetest and revenue that an HCU or HC wouldn't have access to without being members of the NCAA?
A related question would be if all fees and dues paid to the NCAA by HC level schools and PL level leagues are basically a wash because they purchase services the schools would have to recreate and pay for if they left the NCAA and continued interscholastic sports under a different umbrella?
If the answers are yes then why cry over losing 12-20% of revenue you only get because you are a member of the NCAA?
Also, can an HCU/HC level school avoid any responsibility for compensating former power conference athletes by quitting the NCAA and joining NAIA or another arrangement? They aren't being billed, they just will have lower future distributions if they remain in the NCAA and no NCAA distributions if they leave.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 23, 2024 16:54:46 GMT -5
1) Thank you for sharing these subscription articles from The Athletic. 2) Are all of the NCAA distributions to colleges like HCU and HC "found money" in the sense that they come from profitable events like the NCAA national basketball tournaments that generate intetest and revenue that an HCU or HC wouldn't have access to without being members of the NCAA? A related question would be if all fees and dues paid to the NCAA by HC level schools and PL level leagues are basically a wash because they purchase services the schools would have to recreate and pay for if they left the NCAA and continued interscholastic sports under a different umbrella? If the answers are yes then why cry over losing 12-20% of revenue you only get because you are a member of the NCAA? Also, can an HCU/HC level school avoid any responsibility for compensating former power conference athletes by quitting the NCAA and joining NAIA or another arrangement? They aren't being billed, they just will have lower future distributions if they remain in the NCAA and no NCAA distributions if they leave. Most of the NCAA distribution is 'found money' as you term it. In 2022-23, March Madness generated $1 billion in revenue. Other media rights sales that would generate revenue would be championships in sports other than FBS football, but those revenues pale in comparison to March Madness. All the Div I conferences have their own media rights deals for regular season competition, and conference championships. I do not know if there are distributions for championships, e.g., the Frozen Four, that go to schools that don't play ice hockey. Though I doubt it. For example, I expect that media rights revenue for the FCS championships would be distributed to only schools competing in the FCS subdivision. IIRC, with respect to the proposed settlement in the House case, if a school opted not to be part of the settlement, then it potentially could be sued individually for damages. The legal cost of responding to such lawsuits might be greater than the amount of reduced NCAA revenue it might expect as a result of the settlement under House.
|
|
|
Post by hc69 on Jun 23, 2024 18:16:19 GMT -5
The NCAA is a voluntary association. The membership agreed to the by-law that banned NIL, the one that has since been found to be unconstitutional. HCU could have bailed out any time and gone elsewhere. They chose not to. They don't get a mulligan.
|
|
|
Post by Chu Chu on Jul 8, 2024 12:10:43 GMT -5
The NCAA is a voluntary association. The membership agreed to the by-law that banned NIL, the one that has since been found to be unconstitutional. HCU could have bailed out any time and gone elsewhere. They chose not to. They don't get a mulligan. It seems to me, however, that the point they raise in their lawsuit is reasonable. The fact is, these cost will be more difficult for smaller programs and FBS schools to bear. The revenue stream is simply not the same as power five schools.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jul 8, 2024 20:24:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Jul 9, 2024 11:15:22 GMT -5
The French Club at Whatsamatta U. just went on strike.🙂 If it is decided that only student athletes playing on teams that charge admission are employees, it might make sense for HC level schools to stop charging admission. If a team has to be profitable to make student athletes employees, HC is protected. The Dartmouth athletes who brought the lawsuit seeking recognition as employees do not play on teams that generate a profit. Does any sport at Dartmouth or even HC generate a profit? Unless you are a P4 school (even some of their programs), intercollegiate athletics is a place that loses money for a university.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Jul 9, 2024 11:39:10 GMT -5
If a company had to make a profit for its workers to be employees, that would be a radical change in the definition of an employee. Lots of companies don’t make a profit, not to mention “non-profit” companies.
|
|
|
Post by midwestsader05 on Jul 9, 2024 11:55:49 GMT -5
Rutgers athletics lost over $50M last fiscal year. Houston lost in The high 40’s.
And despite that RU is putting together the best recruiting class in their football history right now. Top 10 nationally. So clearly they have a Robust NIL program(s) and that’s what matters at that level.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jul 9, 2024 14:24:47 GMT -5
The Dartmouth athletes who brought the lawsuit seeking recognition as employees do not play on teams that generate a profit. Does any sport at Dartmouth or even HC generate a profit? Unless you are a P4 school (even some of their programs), intercollegiate athletics is a place that loses money for a university. Even with zero scollie expenses, no sport at Dartmouth generates a profit. In theory, if a particular sport at Dartmouth was fully endowed, then it might turn a profit. By fully endowed, I am referring to the Legacy Fund for Duke men's basketball. The Legacy Fund has an endowment value of around $160 million, IIRC. $160 million x 4.5 percent annual distribution = $7.2 million. That's enough to cover the scollies of all the players, managers, and cover the coaches' compensation. Ticket sales, media rights, etc. might then be more than enough to cover operating expenses, and under those circumstances, a sport at Dartmouth might generate a 'profit'. Or if certain movie producers paid $8 million annually for naming rights to Dartmouth's arena, with the proviso it be named Blutarsky Court, then Dartmouth's M/W hoops would most defintely turn a 'profit'.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jul 9, 2024 17:44:50 GMT -5
$800 annually would be closer to the market value of the naming rights.
Are the Dartmouth cagers picketing over the summer?
|
|