The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(05-15-2015 09:28 PM)PTBlazer Wrote:  I've got a couple of questions, which I'm sure are going to be asked at some point in the process,

1) The AATF was formed on January 20. As part of the charge, the AATF was permitted to appoint subcommittees. The fundraising subcommittee was appointed shortly thereafter. Why then, has the this $12.5MM been "reached in little over two weeks utilizing nothing more than word of mouth." What have they been doing over the past four months, and why hasn't there been an active public campaign?

2) The Carr Report, which is the document which has been accepted by the BOT and Watts, says that to make football competitive, it will take $49MM over a 5 year period. Regardless of whether you believe that or not, that it the number to disprove and the absolute starting point for restarting football. The Subcommittee has raised 5 year pledges of either $12MM or $12.5MM (depending on how you count the student fee increase). That is a shortfall of $36-37MM. How is this "donut hole" to be filled? I'm not saying it won't, I'm just saying that in the numbers outlines in the "Report" that killed football, this two week output is still woefully inadequate.

I'm not looking for screaming and rage here, but it seems to me there is some disconnect about what one side has stated publicly is needed, and what the AAFT has raised. I am genuinely concerned about this, and am confused by all the enthusiasm, given this delta.

I think a lot more is going on behind the scenes than meets the eye as far as the fundraising timeline. Craft & Co are just strategically playing their cards.

Are we really to believe no corporations or big donors have been engaged yet? I'd say that's pretty unlikely. My guess is the corporate and big donors were hit up quietly all throughout the process and that info (and $ raised) is being withheld from public domain so we can play our cards right at the end of the game.

With the numbers public, I wouldn't wait too long. Don't give Watts an opportunity. If they can crush the numbers, do it before he can respond.

(05-15-2015 03:54 PM)panama Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 03:14 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote:  This was just posted in the Save UAB Football group on Facebook:

I wanted to take this opportunity to update you on the progress of the fundraising efforts of the UAB Athletics Assessment Task Force (AATF) as we anticipate the arrival of the CSS report today.

As of this afternoon, we have received over $7.5 million in private pledges to support the return of the UAB football, rifle, and bowling programs. Including the commitments announced earlier this week by the UAB SGA and the City of Birmingham, the total amount pledged is now over $12.5 million. This number has been reached in little over two weeks utilizing nothing more than word of mouth.

The AATF has received a schedule for the arrival and review of the CSS report that outlines the timeline on when the decision regarding the future of UAB’s athletic programs will be made, culminating with an announcement on June 1. In the duration, the AATF will enter into the most aggressive fundraising period for the return of UAB football, bowling and rifle, targeting the top philanthropists and business owners in our community.

In addition to these commitments, Birmingham philanthropist Jimmy Filler is reviewing the CSS report and looks forward to making an announcement regarding the role that he will play in the fundraising efforts.

On December 2, 2014 we were told the decision to end UAB football was based on finances. Our community has rallied to meet those needs and forged together to raise a bridge over the "financial delta" that was the stated reason for eliminating football, bowling and rifle at UAB.

UAB is an institution of higher learning. It is our sincere hope that we have learned from the missteps surrounding the initial decision to end the football, bowling and rifle programs, and that they will not be repeated a second time.

UAB’s greatness is not in its buildings, or its labs, or in its new facilities. What makes UAB great are the people that fill them, because what is a university if not the sum of the people that comprise it? UAB’s students, faculty, alumni, employees, supporters and community partners have all demanded that our voices be heard, and that we be a part of this decision.

This is just a step. But it is a big one. If you have not yet pledged your support for reinstating these Blazer sports at UAB, we ask that you walk with us. You can download your pledge form at bhamforuab.com. Commit today.

Justin Craft

The proposed fee by the USGA will have to be approved by the BOT. Watch the June Board agenda to see if the proposal makes it into the books or gets shuttled before they even meet. An ignored on campus stadium proposal comes to mind....

(05-15-2015 09:28 PM)PTBlazer Wrote:  I've got a couple of questions, which I'm sure are going to be asked at some point in the process,

1) The AATF was formed on January 20. As part of the charge, the AATF was permitted to appoint subcommittees. The fundraising subcommittee was appointed shortly thereafter. Why then, has the this $12.5MM been "reached in little over two weeks utilizing nothing more than word of mouth." What have they been doing over the past four months, and why hasn't there been an active public campaign?

2) The Carr Report, which is the document which has been accepted by the BOT and Watts, says that to make football competitive, it will take $49MM over a 5 year period. Regardless of whether you believe that or not, that it the number to disprove and the absolute starting point for restarting football. The Subcommittee has raised 5 year pledges of either $12MM or $12.5MM (depending on how you count the student fee increase). That is a shortfall of $36-37MM. How is this "donut hole" to be filled? I'm not saying it won't, I'm just saying that in the numbers outlines in the "Report" that killed football, this two week output is still woefully inadequate.

I'm not looking for screaming and rage here, but it seems to me there is some disconnect about what one side has stated publicly is needed, and what the AAFT has raised. I am genuinely concerned about this, and am confused by all the enthusiasm, given this delta.

the answer to #2 is easy...its a bs #

the answer to #1 is a little bit tougher. i have ZERO inside knowledge of the process. however, i do believe that the committee was probably addressing the fundraising capabilities in a more theoretical way. taking the approach that they could say "we've talked to donors, and believe that fundraising would provide X dollars."
however, a couple weeks ago, there came the "if we don't have the official pledges, they don't count" BS from a couple different sources. thats when the current push started

i have no doubt that this committee has been working very hard

(05-16-2015 01:21 AM)hooverblazer Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 09:28 PM)PTBlazer Wrote:  I've got a couple of questions, which I'm sure are going to be asked at some point in the process,

1) The AATF was formed on January 20. As part of the charge, the AATF was permitted to appoint subcommittees. The fundraising subcommittee was appointed shortly thereafter. Why then, has the this $12.5MM been "reached in little over two weeks utilizing nothing more than word of mouth." What have they been doing over the past four months, and why hasn't there been an active public campaign?

2) The Carr Report, which is the document which has been accepted by the BOT and Watts, says that to make football competitive, it will take $49MM over a 5 year period. Regardless of whether you believe that or not, that it the number to disprove and the absolute starting point for restarting football. The Subcommittee has raised 5 year pledges of either $12MM or $12.5MM (depending on how you count the student fee increase). That is a shortfall of $36-37MM. How is this "donut hole" to be filled? I'm not saying it won't, I'm just saying that in the numbers outlines in the "Report" that killed football, this two week output is still woefully inadequate.

I'm not looking for screaming and rage here, but it seems to me there is some disconnect about what one side has stated publicly is needed, and what the AAFT has raised. I am genuinely concerned about this, and am confused by all the enthusiasm, given this delta.

I think a lot more is going on behind the scenes than meets the eye as far as the fundraising timeline. Craft & Co are just strategically playing their cards.

Are we really to believe no corporations or big donors have been engaged yet? I'd say that's pretty unlikely. My guess is the corporate and big donors were hit up quietly all throughout the process and that info (and $ raised) is being withheld from public domain so we can play our cards right at the end of the game.

I also think that many corporate donors and sponsors might not want to deal with the ATF or the Foundation, so their money might not show up in these numbers. That's great, though, since the money is already there without significant corporate support.

Once the University is officially on board and involved, then the business community will come along and the numbers will shoot up even higher.

Something else to note, these numbers are all 100% donations. When you add in what is going to be a huge increase in ticket sales, that revenue number is going to be even smaller. At this point, with donations filling the entire "donut hole", ticket sales are going to be 100% profit. I believe with the level of support that exists now you could build the stadium.

(05-16-2015 07:31 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 01:21 AM)hooverblazer Wrote:  

(05-15-2015 09:28 PM)PTBlazer Wrote:  I've got a couple of questions, which I'm sure are going to be asked at some point in the process,

1) The AATF was formed on January 20. As part of the charge, the AATF was permitted to appoint subcommittees. The fundraising subcommittee was appointed shortly thereafter. Why then, has the this $12.5MM been "reached in little over two weeks utilizing nothing more than word of mouth." What have they been doing over the past four months, and why hasn't there been an active public campaign?

2) The Carr Report, which is the document which has been accepted by the BOT and Watts, says that to make football competitive, it will take $49MM over a 5 year period. Regardless of whether you believe that or not, that it the number to disprove and the absolute starting point for restarting football. The Subcommittee has raised 5 year pledges of either $12MM or $12.5MM (depending on how you count the student fee increase). That is a shortfall of $36-37MM. How is this "donut hole" to be filled? I'm not saying it won't, I'm just saying that in the numbers outlines in the "Report" that killed football, this two week output is still woefully inadequate.

I'm not looking for screaming and rage here, but it seems to me there is some disconnect about what one side has stated publicly is needed, and what the AAFT has raised. I am genuinely concerned about this, and am confused by all the enthusiasm, given this delta.

I think a lot more is going on behind the scenes than meets the eye as far as the fundraising timeline. Craft & Co are just strategically playing their cards.

Are we really to believe no corporations or big donors have been engaged yet? I'd say that's pretty unlikely. My guess is the corporate and big donors were hit up quietly all throughout the process and that info (and $ raised) is being withheld from public domain so we can play our cards right at the end of the game.

I also think that many corporate donors and sponsors might not want to deal with the ATF or the Foundation, so their money might not show up in these numbers. That's great, though, since the money is already there without significant corporate support.

Once the University is officially on board and involved, then the business community will come along and the numbers will shoot up even higher.

Something else to note, these numbers are all 100% donations. When you add in what is going to be a huge increase in ticket sales, that revenue number is going to be even smaller. At this point, with donations filling the entire "donut hole", ticket sales are going to be 100% profit. I believe with the level of support that exists now you could build the stadium.

+1

We just need a fair chance, something we've never been given. The increased level of media scrutiny that has come out of this fiasco could act as something of a check on the BOT's abuse of power if we get football back.