Big article in this week's UALR Forum (campus newspaper) about the tennis being cut due a large athletic department budget deficit- specifically $850,000. Apparently a lot of the deficit is due to a decrease in student fees because enrollment was down this year. Cutting tennis will save close to 200k, but that leaves $650,000. Where will that come from? I may buy a couple of extra tickets, but that won't help much. I assume we may see a couple of extra "money games" for the men. Really not sure how else you make that money up. Increased season ticket sales would help but, of course, you need money to advertise and promote which we obviously don't have at the moment.
We may have to do like the SWAC teams - lose some for the cause.
(04-18-2013 11:54 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Big article in this week's UALR Forum (campus newspaper) about the tennis being cut due a large athletic department budget deficit- specifically $850,000. Apparently a lot of the deficit is due to a decrease in student fees because enrollment was down this year. Cutting tennis will save close to 200k, but that leaves $650,000. Where will that come from? I may buy a couple of extra tickets, but that won't help much. I assume we may see a couple of extra "money games" for the men. Really not sure how else you make that money up. Increased season ticket sales would help but, of course, you need money to advertise and promote which we obviously don't have at the moment.
Can't blame this on Mike Newell. Must be another drunken sailor around. Don't suppose that we're paying more money for our men's basketball coach than we're getting in return so you?
(04-18-2013 03:02 PM)LRTrojan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-18-2013 11:54 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Big article in this week's UALR Forum (campus newspaper) about the tennis being cut due a large athletic department budget deficit- specifically $850,000. Apparently a lot of the deficit is due to a decrease in student fees because enrollment was down this year. Cutting tennis will save close to 200k, but that leaves $650,000. Where will that come from? I may buy a couple of extra tickets, but that won't help much. I assume we may see a couple of extra "money games" for the men. Really not sure how else you make that money up. Increased season ticket sales would help but, of course, you need money to advertise and promote which we obviously don't have at the moment.
I just watched "Moneyball" on TV last night. Maybe there's a computer program we can use to teach us how to compete with the big boys "on the cheap".
Can't blame this on Mike Newell. Must be another drunken sailor around. Don't suppose that we're paying more money for our men's basketball coach than we're getting in return so you?
I know I'm part of the minority on the question of Money Games. I have never objected to playing them. If I was the AD I would be for at least 3 such games. If a big dog school is willing to pay big bucks, why not take it? Regardless of the season record the Trojans will not get an At-Large bid to the tournament. Seems to me it would be good for recruiting. Most athletes want to compete against the best and in years to come be able to say, they onced played against a UNC, Kansas, Syracuse etc. As a fan, I would like to know how the Trojans would compete against such teams. I would think it has helped Joe Foley to tell recruits he has LSU and Univ. of Texas on the schedule.
If we can afford it, I would not play them. If we need the money, then have at it, but get the best money we can.
(04-18-2013 11:54 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Big article in this week's UALR Forum (campus newspaper) about the tennis being cut due a large athletic department budget deficit- specifically $850,000. Apparently a lot of the deficit is due to a decrease in student fees because enrollment was down this year. Cutting tennis will save close to 200k, but that leaves $650,000. Where will that come from? I may buy a couple of extra tickets, but that won't help much. I assume we may see a couple of extra "money games" for the men. Really not sure how else you make that money up. Increased season ticket sales would help but, of course, you need money to advertise and promote which we obviously don't have at the moment.
The shortfall also stems from a lack of a fan base, which is something our AD hasn't done anything to increase. This shortfall falls directly on the extremely poor leadership of the athletic department since our current AD took over. He's had more to work with than any AD in the history of the program and has done less than any in increasing fan support.
(04-18-2013 06:23 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote: [ -> ]If we can afford it, I would not play them. If we need the money, then have at it, but get the best money we can.
Playing "body bag" games can be very demoralizing. We lost our two last year by an average of 35 points. The best of both worlds is playing BCS schools that aren't particularly good (ex. Auburn, Mississippi State, etc.). But with everybody back, no way those kind of schools will schedule us. May be headed back to Kentucky next season.
Pick the three bottom teams in each of the power leagues and let that be your scheduling pool.
(04-18-2013 08:36 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote: [ -> ]Pick the three bottom teams in each of the power leagues and let that be your scheduling pool.
Naturally that's what we would like to do. But from what I can gather from the coaches, the last thing those teams want to do is schedule solid midmajors they might lose to. Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, and the like, will by happy to take our calls. Auburn, Northwestern, Wake Forest- not so much.
(04-18-2013 08:43 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Naturally that's what we would like to do. But from what I can gather from the coaches, the last thing those teams want to do is schedule solid midmajors they might lose to. Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, and the like, will by happy to take our calls. Auburn, Northwestern, Wake Forest- not so much.
I wouldn't necessarily call us a 'solid mid-major'. Western Kentucky would be a solid mid-major. I'd consider us a mediocre mid-major. Our overall record for the past ten years is mediocre at best. One season of post season in ten years, and that was coming off a bad year, and we just got hot and lucky in the tournament.
And I don't blame those schools for not wanting to pay good money to schedule a mid-major team that they might lose to. That's why those teams first look to the SWAC for those games. Never could figure why the SWAC basketball team has to play the part of the prostitute all the time. Why can't the football team play two or three of the body bag games? They are the ones benefiting most from the basketball team's prostitution.
(04-18-2013 09:21 PM)LRTrojan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-18-2013 08:43 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]Naturally that's what we would like to do. But from what I can gather from the coaches, the last thing those teams want to do is schedule solid midmajors they might lose to. Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, and the like, will by happy to take our calls. Auburn, Northwestern, Wake Forest- not so much.
I wouldn't necessarily call us a 'solid mid-major'. Western Kentucky would be a solid mid-major. I'd consider us a mediocre mid-major. Our overall record for the past ten years is mediocre at best. One season of post season in ten years, and that was coming off a bad year, and we just got hot and lucky in the tournament.
And I don't blame those schools for not wanting to pay good money to schedule a mid-major team that they might lose to. That's why those teams first look to the SWAC for those games. Never could figure why the SWAC basketball team has to play the part of the prostitute all the time. Why can't the football team play two or three of the body bag games? They are the ones benefiting most from the basketball team's prostitution.
SWAC football teams draw big crowds. The basketball teams don't.