When UAB President Ray Watts shuttered the UAB Football program earlier this month, he did so under the guise of cost-cutting, claiming that running the program would cause the athletic department budget to increase by as much as $5M/year over the next 10 years after the various autonomy proposals went through. CBS got a copy of the financial study, and while Jon Solomon misses this, it basically details how Ray Watts was a big fat liar.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...n/24913760

Quote:"UAB has also cited new costs coming to college athletes, such as a cost-of-attendance stipend, as one reason it dropped football. The new benefits coming to athletes have been a major talking point in the media regarding the death of UAB football, raising questions if other universities will do the same.

Without football, Carr projects UAB will save between $299,246 to $479,012 per year in cost-of-attendance payments for all of its sports. The estimates use $5,442 as UAB's additional cost-of-attendance number for fall 2015.



Schools are now allowed to provide enhanced meals to athletes. Carr estimated UAB will save between $125,000 and $136,591 per year in that expense without football. He projected meal enhancements at $1,000 per athlete and a 3 percent annual increase."

Even at the maximum amounts, that only results in a $600K increase in costs per year for FCoA scholarships (on the P5 governance docket for January) and unlimited meals (already passed across all of D1). It does not mention the need for player likeness/image rights payments, so I am not sure where, if at all, that would fit in.

The report also mentions over $48M in requested capital projects, which I guess makes up the bulk of that $50M increase that Watts used to justify killing the program, but over half of those facilities listed in the capital projects ($26.6M) would not be for football, and nearly half of the football capital cost ($22M) would be for a multi-sport indoor facility ($9.5M).

UAB intends to add men's track/cross-country to remain a D1 school and hopes to remain in CUSA, but the chances are not good for that happening. The study is full of questionable projections, such as noting that donations to the athletic department would INCREASE after a year without football.

Quote:"Carr assumed a 20 percent drop in Blazer Club and Champion Club donations for 2015-16. By 2016-17, the study projects a 10 percent increase in Blazer Club donations for 2016-17 when reseating occurs at men's basketball games, followed by 5 percent annual increases. Champions Club giving is expected to increase by 4 percent beginning in 2016-17."

The study anticipates no cuts to the student athletic fee, nor to revenue loss from CUSA. UAB also assumes (poorly) that they may not have to buyout the remaining scheduled football games and that they can just get other schools to fill those dates.

It also noted that UAB was on a year-to-year lease with Legion Field and the City of Birmingham bought 5000 season tickets as part of the lease deal.

This whole thing reeks of collusion. Just like most studies, the conclusion is what the buyer wanted it to be, regardless of the methodology or correctness.

It's a major shame that UAB doesn't have a donor like T. Boone or a corporate entity like FedEx that wants to step up and try and right the ship.

As a UC fan, I still think of UAB as a partner school and I feel for them. What's happening down there is just wrong.

What happened to UAB Football wasn't about finances. It was about pettiness. It was about a letter Gene Bartow wrote accusing Alabama of cheating in basketball recruiting. The letter was suppose to have been kept private but amazingly it was leaked by the BOT.

Gene died two years ago, Bryant Jr. will be stepping away from the BOT in February due to turning 70. Jr had the opportunity to kill what Gene started before leaving the BOT and he did. It was several years in the planning so it wouldn't look so obvious but it was pettiness in the long run that killed UAB Football.

Epic cover up...

Quote:CBSSports.com also requested from UAB all emails discussing the football program's future among four key stakeholders over the past two years, and documentation showing Mackin's new job description and any compensation change since he resigned last month as athletic director to become special assistant to the university president for athletics. A university spokesman said, "There are no emails pursuant to your request, and there is not a document regarding Brian's reassignment."

"over half of those facilities listed in the capital projects ($26.6M) would not be for football"

The strangest one in the list, to me, is $2 million to renovate the baseball field, with no games played at Regions Field (a very fine minor league park right on the edge of campus), where UAB currently plays its home games. It's been a great venue and major recruiting plus. It's as though the plan includes "what happens when we really, really piss off the city of Birmingham."

(12-23-2014 11:05 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  What happened to UAB Football wasn't about finances. It was about pettiness. It was about a letter Gene Bartow wrote accusing Alabama of cheating in basketball recruiting. The letter was suppose to have been kept private but amazingly it was leaked by the BOT.

Gene died two years ago, Bryant Jr. will be stepping away from the BOT in February due to turning 70. Jr had the opportunity to kill what Gene started before leaving the BOT and he did. It was several years in the planning so it wouldn't look so obvious but it was pettiness in the long run that killed UAB Football.

While the pettiness is definitely there, Ray Watts is all in on dismantling everything outside the School of Medicine. The assault started with the "pack of elitists" in the honors college, not with football, and hit the business school right before the football attack came into the open.

The leak of the famous letter came from the NCAA Enforcement Office, not the Trustees, curiously enough about the same time as Alabama's successful golf-centric lobbying campaign to lift the Antonio Langham sanctions.

(12-23-2014 09:26 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  This whole thing reeks of collusion. Just like most studies, the conclusion is what the buyer wanted it to be, regardless of the methodology or correctness.

At best, you provided some evidence that the UAB administration's study relied on questionable projections. But since projections are always questionable (nobody ever knows what's going to happen in the future for sure so there's always room for disagreement), that's not something to indict them about.

Bottom line: You didn't show any proof of "lying", so your header is pure hyperbole.

(12-24-2014 11:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-23-2014 09:26 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  This whole thing reeks of collusion. Just like most studies, the conclusion is what the buyer wanted it to be, regardless of the methodology or correctness.

At best, you provided some evidence that the UAB administration's study relied on questionable projections. But since projections are always questionable (nobody ever knows what's going to happen in the future for sure so there's always room for disagreement), that's not something to indict them about.

Bottom line: You didn't show any proof of "lying", so your header is pure hyperbole.

I'm glad at least one person noticed this.

They assumed they'd be able to get out of the football games without a buyout? That's more than questionable.

(12-24-2014 11:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-23-2014 09:26 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  This whole thing reeks of collusion. Just like most studies, the conclusion is what the buyer wanted it to be, regardless of the methodology or correctness.

At best, you provided some evidence that the UAB administration's study relied on questionable projections. But since projections are always questionable (nobody ever knows what's going to happen in the future for sure so there's always room for disagreement), that's not something to indict them about.

Bottom line: You didn't show any proof of "lying", so your header is pure hyperbole.

Ray Watts stated in his comments to the public that keeping football would cost UAB athletics over $50M more than the current costs over the next 10 years, yet this study shows that number to be far less, more like $28M if you include the football-related capital projects, which can be amortized over many years, if they even have to be built at all. I'd call that a pretty blatant lie, at worst, and a gross exaggeration of the truth at the least.

(12-24-2014 11:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-23-2014 09:26 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  This whole thing reeks of collusion. Just like most studies, the conclusion is what the buyer wanted it to be, regardless of the methodology or correctness.

At best, you provided some evidence that the UAB administration's study relied on questionable projections. But since projections are always questionable (nobody ever knows what's going to happen in the future for sure so there's always room for disagreement), that's not something to indict them about.

Bottom line: You didn't show any proof of "lying", so your header is pure hyperbole.

^^^^^ Hopes to meet Santa tonight ^^^^^^^

Ray Watts also lied when he told the band director, assistants and students that there would be "no decrease in funding." The report drops band funding from 450K to 225K (Exhibit 2, page 10).

The Faculty Senate votes on its No Confidence motion on 15 January. Coincidentally (an actual coincidence), that's when the SACS on-site review team arrives on campus for the University of Alabama System's regular re-certification process. And that whole "one university" thing the WalMart bammers strut and preen over? It means that whatever happens here takes Tuscaloosa with us.

The ugliness has only just begun.

(12-24-2014 11:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-23-2014 09:26 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  This whole thing reeks of collusion. Just like most studies, the conclusion is what the buyer wanted it to be, regardless of the methodology or correctness.

At best, you provided some evidence that the UAB administration's study relied on questionable projections. But since projections are always questionable (nobody ever knows what's going to happen in the future for sure so there's always room for disagreement), that's not something to indict them about.

Bottom line: You didn't show any proof of "lying", so your header is pure hyperbole.

Its about as close to it as one can get.

The implication was that cutting football at UAB would result in a 50 million dollar savings to UAB's bottom line. At least that's how it was sold.

You know how UAT could save enough money to keep UAB's football program in the red? Not use taxpayer funds to subsidize 72 million dollars to build fraternity and sorority houses at the Tuscaloosa campus. Exactly what benefit do the taxpayers get from building some palaces with taxpayer funds for a bunch of rich brats to have private clubs? At least with UAB football, there's an economic benefit and social benefit to the institution.

Priorities. Priorities. That's what you get with a self perpetuating BOT accountable to no one.

And I'm not a UAB graduate, just an Alabama taxpayer (non-resident now - but still a taxpayer).

Don't let reality get in the way of a good story...

The University if subsidizing the moving of several sororities. They are forcing them to move. Thus, they are subsidizing the cost. The Greek houses are worth a fortune to the school, so it isn't a losing proposition.

Tom is just out pretending to know what is going on again.

"Rich brats," spoken like a loser on the outside. GDI

The UAB folk's real enemy isn't UA, or the BOT. It's the medical school, which is embarrassed to be associated with the rest of that school. Why wouldn't they? They are a world class school medical institution connected to a third rate university.

(12-24-2014 01:36 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Don't let reality get in the way of a good story...

The University if subsidizing the moving of several sororities. They are forcing them to move. Thus, they are subsidizing the cost. The Greek houses are worth a fortune to the school, so it isn't a losing proposition.

Tom is just out pretending to know what is going on again.

"Rich brats," spoken like a loser on the outside. GDI

I'm Greek (albeit at a non-machine University). Both my parents were in Machine Greek organizations at UAT. Not GDI, just don't think the fact that I chose to join a private club makes me better than everyone else or deserving of special benefits from the taxpayers. Unlike the Machine Greeks. I specifically chose to not attend UAT in part because I'd be pressured to join a group of people who beat pledges and just generally weren't the nicest people. I'd rather not attend a "Who rides the Bus" party where people dress up in blackface. There's Greek, then there's UAT's Machine.

The Sororities can afford to move themselves. Easily. No need for the taxpayers to pay for their new private palaces. I heard that a few of them actually might allow African American members.

I'm very familiar with the Greek system at UAT. Not everyone in the system is bad, but the system is run for their benefit, to the detriment of the institution. There's a question of degree.

You don't know me.

---

But this is part and parcel of the UAT attitude. Everything for the white rich kids at UAT. Crumbs for everyone else, including the other students at UAT. Its what you get with a self perpetuating board comprised of insiders.

(12-24-2014 02:02 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-24-2014 01:36 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Don't let reality get in the way of a good story...

The University if subsidizing the moving of several sororities. They are forcing them to move. Thus, they are subsidizing the cost. The Greek houses are worth a fortune to the school, so it isn't a losing proposition.

Tom is just out pretending to know what is going on again.

"Rich brats," spoken like a loser on the outside. GDI

I'm Greek (albeit at a non-machine University). Both my parents were in Machine Greek organizations at UAT. Not GDI, just don't think the fact that I chose to join a private club makes me better than everyone else or deserving of special benefits from the taxpayers. Unlike the Machine Greeks. I specifically chose to not attend UAT in part because I'd be pressured to join a group of people who beat pledges and just generally weren't the nicest people. I'd rather not attend a "Who rides the Bus" party where people dress up in blackface. There's Greek, then there's UAT's Machine.

The Sororities can afford to move themselves. Easily. No need for the taxpayers to pay for their new private palaces. I heard that a few of them actually might allow African American members.

I'm very familiar with the Greek system at UAT. Not everyone in the system is bad, but the system is run for their benefit, to the detriment of the institution. There's a question of degree.

You don't know me.

---

But this is part and parcel of the UAT attitude. Everything for the white rich kids at UAT. Crumbs for everyone else, including the other students at UAT. Its what you get with a self perpetuating board comprised of insiders.

Nothing but the usual GDI lines here folks.

(12-24-2014 01:42 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The UAB folk's real enemy isn't UA, or the BOT. It's the medical school, which is embarrassed to be associated with the rest of that school. Why wouldn't they? They are a world class school medical institution connected to a third rate university.

Really, "Come You're In" throwing smack at UAB?

{Post Deleted}

Well, it's Xmas eve.

My apologies, I'm not going to start slinging mud with Tom.

Merry Christmas to everybody!

(12-24-2014 02:11 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(12-24-2014 02:09 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-24-2014 01:42 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The UAB folk's real enemy isn't UA, or the BOT. It's the medical school, which is embarrassed to be associated with the rest of that school. Why wouldn't they? They are a world class school medical institution connected to a third rate university.

Really, "Come You're In" throwing smack at UAB?

Do you even have to apply to USA?

My USA degree got me a scholarship to a top 25 MBA program. And the sad part was....USA's business classes were harder than many of my classes in grad school. Your UAT degree got you to..."Come You're In". Congrats.