@MattJones36: At $35,837,395, JMU has the largest total athletics subsidy among 231 public DI schools. Its $44M budget ranks 61st https://t.co/RsNe0hwqfg/s/1vc3

Outstanding info. So, we've been living above our means for a long time. Good lesson to teach students before they vote for Bernie and free stuff.

Hmmmm...

Academic peers according to US News & World Report:

Elon, Rollins, The Citadel, Samford, Belmont, Stetson, etc.



Athletic peers according to Alger's COA letter:

VMI, New Hampshire, Vermont, Wofford, William & Mary, etc.



Athletic peers according to our budget:

Houston, Boise State, Memphis...just a few of the schools that have been ranked in the top 10 in FBS over the past 5 years and all have budgets below JMU.

Something isn't adding up

Considering JMU is getting so much of its money from mandatory student fees...I think there are some ethical inquiries into is it even fair to ask students to foot the bill when the university refuses to offer a comparable product for their investment. It would be like someone selling you a $1 million house but only putting $100,000 worth of material into it.

Absolutely Shameful

Words can not articulate the gross incompetence at JMU

Yet the enablers like Nation and Longhorn wonder why there are no big donors to support these clowns.

Student money driving this bus. Band together and drive out those who are pimples in the ass of progress.

61st highest budget.

So about half the Division 1A football programs have a smaller budget than us.

Great Job Admin - do less with way more.

(04-17-2016 04:20 PM)Dukester Wrote:  61st highest budget.

So about half the Division 1A football programs have a smaller budget than us.

Great Job Admin - do less with way more.

Nearly twice as much as W&M. Explain that to me JMU....

Disgraceful ROI

There is no question there are HUGE financial problems. Why on earth are we where we are and spending so much? We aren't even offering FBS scholarship amounts.
It certainly isn't regarding our coaches. Look at what the coaches of our financial peers are making and tell me something isn't wrong with that picture.
I've said it before... we are not getting what we are paying for.
They are spending Cadillac money on a scooter. Something is not adding up.

(04-17-2016 02:17 PM)DolleyMadison Wrote:  Hmmmm...

Academic peers according to US News & World Report:

Elon, Rollins, The Citadel, Samford, Belmont, Stetson, etc.



Athletic peers according to Alger's COA letter:

VMI, New Hampshire, Vermont, Wofford, William & Mary, etc.



Athletic peers according to our budget:

Houston, Boise State, Memphis...just a few of the schools that have been ranked in the top 10 in FBS over the past 5 years and all have budgets below JMU.

Something isn't adding up

Considering JMU is getting so much of its money from mandatory student fees...I think there are some ethical inquiries into is it even fair to ask students to foot the bill when the university refuses to offer a comparable product for their investment. It would be like someone selling you a $1 million house but only putting $100,000 worth of material into it.

As such a large public university the only school I can think of that's in the same underachieving boat as us is Delaware but at least they're recognized as a "national" university vs a "regional masters" school. It will be interesting to watch what their new leadership does, maybe they'll be the business case we need to wake up the BOV.

(04-17-2016 04:23 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 04:20 PM)Dukester Wrote:  61st highest budget.

So about half the Division 1A football programs have a smaller budget than us.

Great Job Admin - do less with way more.

Nearly twice as much as W&M. Explain that to me JMU....

Disgraceful ROI

Rule #1 never discuss accountability at the engaged university
Rule #2 never discuss accountability at the engaged university

If memory serves me .... I believe JMU is cranking in some of the debt for Bridgeforth/etal. into the athletic budget ... where other schools do not. A little bit of that goes a long way to making a budget look waaay out of line ... don't get your skivvies in a bunch .... We have Charlie King to cook the books .... until the $he-it hits the fan .....

(04-17-2016 05:45 PM)JMUTEKE Wrote:  If memory serves me .... I believe JMU is cranking in some of the debt for Bridgeforth/etal. into the athletic budget ... where other schools do not. A little bit of that goes a long way to making a budget look waaay out of line ... don't get your skivvies in a bunch .... We have Charlie King to cook the books .... until the $he-it hits the fan .....

Are other schools not building new facilities too? What makes you say that other schools are different than JMU in that respect?

(04-17-2016 08:34 PM)DolleyMadison Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 05:45 PM)JMUTEKE Wrote:  If memory serves me .... I believe JMU is cranking in some of the debt for Bridgeforth/etal. into the athletic budget ... where other schools do not. A little bit of that goes a long way to making a budget look waaay out of line ... don't get your skivvies in a bunch .... We have Charlie King to cook the books .... until the $he-it hits the fan .....

Are other schools not building new facilities too? What makes you say that other schools are different than JMU in that respect?

It keeps being suggested that JMU does athletic accounting a different way than other schools. Examples from previous threads include counting band trips in the athletic budget, paying for cheerleading from the athletic budget and paying for the stadium from the athletic budget among other things. This begs a couple questions.

1) if you do something a certain way that's different from others and it is looked upon unfavorably, why wouldn't you take time to explain it?

2) JMU's athletic administration includes actual people trained as accountants. Shouldn't they be able to make these numbers appear better using acceptable accounting methods?

JMU fully funds 17 programs. If you recall, that was the commitment they made to athletics when they cut 12 sports several years ago. Other schools do not fully fund all minor sports.

I would think the budget is available under the freedom of information act. I would prefer to have the facts before I judge how money is being spent.

JMU is getting bang for their buck. Look how many programs have finished first or tied for first this season. I think it has been at least six so far. Very few are near the bottom of the conference standings.

The issue is so many of you on these boards feel football and men's basketball are all that matter. We have a very good athletics program. Are women's program is #1 is the state. Besides FBS ans COA, why on earth are you complaining about the quality and competitiveness of JMU athletics?

(04-17-2016 09:10 PM)JMUETC Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 08:34 PM)DolleyMadison Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 05:45 PM)JMUTEKE Wrote:  If memory serves me .... I believe JMU is cranking in some of the debt for Bridgeforth/etal. into the athletic budget ... where other schools do not. A little bit of that goes a long way to making a budget look waaay out of line ... don't get your skivvies in a bunch .... We have Charlie King to cook the books .... until the $he-it hits the fan .....

Are other schools not building new facilities too? What makes you say that other schools are different than JMU in that respect?

It keeps being suggested that JMU does athletic accounting a different way than other schools. Examples from previous threads include counting band trips in the athletic budget, paying for cheerleading from the athletic budget and paying for the stadium from the athletic budget among other things. This begs a couple questions.

1) if you do something a certain way that's different from others and it is looked upon unfavorably, why wouldn't you take time to explain it?

2) JMU's athletic administration includes actual people trained as accountants. Shouldn't they be able to make these numbers appear better using acceptable accounting methods?

The skeptic in me says the reason they don't address it is because, while all schools don't have identical accounting processes, that they are similar. I just don't buy the fact that JMU is burdened with all these other expenses that other schools don't have to count. It sounds like more spin from the admin to justify the ridiculous budget for a mediocre product (mediocre compared to the FBS institutions we are on par with, not putting down our student-athletes and their accomplishments).

Freedom of Information Act.

When folks compare our budget to Delaware or W&M doesn't the youth of JMU as a D1 Co-Ed university factor in? Those two institutions have been around a lot longer than JMU and have endowments that dwarf JMUs.

I was with a coach and others employed by a D1 University this weekend.

I asked some questions about athletic budgets.

It is widely recognized that JMU has grossly mismanaged their resources.

Sadly, there is a complete lack of respect for the leadership at JMU.

In addition to the MRDs, the cheerleading squad, bridgeforth debt and fully funding all sports as previously mentioned, JMU also counts part of the campus wide grounds keeping cost in the athletic budget. As every JMU alum knows, JMU definitely spends money to keep the grass green. Just a couple months back UVA baseball, yeah you know that UVA baseball team, was traveling to JMU to practice because their fields were not cleared.

Why JMU counts all the above towards athletics when other schools don't? Well, probably because it is a "truer" cost of athletics. I can understand including the above items from a budgeting standpoint. However, other schools are smart enough to know that a SCHOOL looks better when they are spending money for educational reasons and not athletics. Why JMU hasn't made the switch is crazy to me but until they do, JMU will always have an asterisk beside our budget figures.

To the skeptics (and I'd include myself in that group), Carr validated all of this during the feasibility study.

Take those things out and I'm like 99% sure we are still spending more than our CAA peers as we appear to have bloated spending in other areas as well. I don't remember the specifics but when we lost the EKU bid, I believe the FOIA pointed out that EKU only needed like $20K for event overheard type stuff (ticket takers, security, etc.) when JMU had budgeted $180K. I have no proof but I bet we spend more on marketing than most of our peers, I'm willing to bet that we have a higher staff to athlete ratio than most of our peers too, and I imagine our football salaries are a good bit larger than CAA peers.

I'm just pointing out that if you take everything into consideration, which would be near impossible to feasibly do for every D1 school, JMU would drop in the rankings. Let me be clear, YES we do have some spending problems, but it isn't as bad as this ranking seems to imply.

(04-18-2016 05:23 AM)Dukeman Wrote:  I was with a coach and others employed by a D1 University this weekend.

I asked some questions about athletic budgets.

It is widely recognized that JMU has grossly mismanaged their resources.

Sadly, there is a complete lack of respect for the leadership at JMU.

If this "coach and others" only have info concerning budgeting (on paper) of athletics at another school ... I submit that they would have to understand exactly what the budget process is at that school. We are JMU fans ... we dig into it and ask questions why, & how, certain #s are included in the JMU budget. Those at other schools have no reason to dig further and just look at the bottom line. I wouldn't put much credibility in the statements they made about JMU as it doesn't reflect how they prepare their own budgets. It's comparing apples and oranges .... but you can take what you want from their statements. I expect nothing less ....