Everyone is assuming that CSS will follow the same methodology used by OSKR and find that UAB football was not the costly program which the Carr report described. While I really hope I am wrong, but I think that there is a good possibility the CSS report will look a lot more like the Carr Report than the report produced by OSKR. Here are the reasons why:
First, UAB (Watts) is paying for CSS to do the study and the way CSS, Carr and Associates and others play the game, the customers gets what they pay for. Why do you think Wes Smith and Watts wanted CSS to do the report? There is too much riding on this so if you don't think somebody high up in the administration has already made a call to CSS, as they did to Bill Carr, you're naive.
Second, everyone is assuming that since OSKR put out a 156 page report that proves that Football actually made money, CSS would be forced to come to the same conclusion or they would be embarrassed nationally. Unfortunately, they could pull a Carr, with less mistakes, and they might get away with it..
OSKR did the football cost/benefit exactly right and it would stand up under against attack in a court of law. (The methodology was was already successfully used in the O'Bannon vs. the NCAA case where Schwarz was a key witness.) However, It is also true that if CSS were to follow the Carr methodology, for instance using the full cost of scholarships in their study, it may not stand up in court, but it doesn't have to. Remember, it will be Watts and the BOT, not a court of law, who will decide if the methodology is valid. We have already seen that those b@st@rds will use any narrative that sounds good on the surface even though anyone with a brain knows it's wrong.
As for CSS being embarrassed, just remember what I have been saying, you can make a close study come out anyway you want by using the right (wrong) assumptions. All CSS has to do is assume that the numbers generated by the athletic cost accounting system are valid. Now we know that that system puts out BS numbers that are designed to make it look like most athletic programs lose money, but every college and university is using it. That's enough of a fig leaf for CSS to hide behind.
Lastly, Watts and company are already setting up everyone with their "real numbers" statement. Don't you think the Watts and his buddies are talking behind the scenes with CSS. Given their blatant lack of integrity, I would be surprised if they weren't. So they probably already know what methodology CSS is using. Their "real numbers" statement is not only useful for attacking the OSKR report, but it is also useful for setting up a defense of the CSS report when comes out using figures produced from UAB's cost accounting systems. This is the cost accounting system everyone in college sports uses - the "real numbers".
One good thing, if CSS chooses to go in that direction, you can bet Andy Schwarz will do his best to in articles to beat CSS over the head with with their own report. And Watts and the BOT will again accuse him of being prejudice. The question will be whether the media, both local and national, picks up their queue from Andy Schwarz and puts the CSS report through the ringer.
Again, I hope to heck I'm wrong, but I have a sneaky feeling.......
Attalla has alluded to the contrary..
The same assumptions could be made by Watts and co. about UAB boosters paying for the OSKR report. The Carr report was picked apart by more outlets than just OSKR... CSS knows that.
I believe the CSS report will support UAB football. I also believe the admin knows this. Which to me explains the rush to hire a new AD and the desired move to a basketball only conference. Additionally, if RLW accepts the findings, he can still feign regret over an ill-advised but well-intentioned decision while using the added (read: prohibitive) costs to reinstate the cut sports as political cover... especially if the admin stalls long enough (while they "evaluate" the report) to force conference removal. Just my thoughts.
I don't believe the CSS report will be as nice as the OSKR report is, but I contribute a lot of that to how OSKR handled the accounting practices you mentioned. I fully expect CSS to simply use the practices that already fall into compliance.
The results of their report will be information that administrators across the country will review, something that the media are anxiously waiting on, and even material that your average person will be interested in. Carr could make some kind of excuse that administration fed his people falsified information or something, but CSS doesn't have that luxury. They have the access, and all eyes are on them.
It's just too much money in college football to straight up call it off. I don't expect the CSS report to be nearly as rosy as OSKR's, but the only way I could see it being on the other end of the spectrum is if they straight up narrow the scope of their review as much as they can and make the worst assumptions at every juncture.
I just want/need to know if enrollment is down due to buffoonery of Watts.
Let the public know those numbers from end of April 2014 and today as far as enrollment for the following fall term. I think they are down. What is that cost. ?
Shiny new freshman dorm to open in the fall. Shiny new EMPTY freshman dorm.
I'm not going to speculate. We'll know in a week or two anyhow.
Just keep the pressure on in any way we can. The next big event I know of is the NAS meeting on 5/2.
It will be somewhere in between CSS and Carr IMHO. I know the folks I talk to, some say it will be favorable and some say they are hopeful. Watch closely, If our two main warriors bail on this thing you know the fix is in. If they stick with it to the end the report will be more favorable.
I feel the CSS report will show Football is viable with a certain amount of private money factored in. The X factor will be that amount we (boosters) must pony up. I think what will happen is Watts will say that the boosters have not ponied up and promised funds do not count. He will want cash donations up front. He will also point to additional costs not figured as in buying additional equipment, repairing the practice field. (Still a POS and goal posts have been removed). Watts will orchestrate the exit from C-USA into a league with no FBS football. He will site an exit fee from C-USA and a entrance fee to an FBS league. He will then say the new league we just joined will require and exit fee and penalties for not even being in the league a year. He will site many more additional costs and say football is just not feasible at this time.
So in short the CSS report may not be a great as the OSKR report but it will show Football, bowling, and rifle are viable and Watts will counter and say it's not. Then the fight is on. Can we put the pressure on and make him resign?
As I have said many times. Unless the BOT tells him to reinstate football no matter what the CSS report says Watts is simply NOT reinstating the cut sports. As someone stated in another thread one of us could hit the lotto and donate 100 million and Watts would find a way to reject it and not reinstate the cut sports. Watts DOES NOT GET HIS BIG PAYDAY if he reinstates the cut sports.
Go back to Clay Ryan and the numbers he used a couple weeks ago. (Someone find it and post it) You will find which way the Watts stench is blowing.
In summary, its not about what the CSS report says, its that Watts and his team already have the reasons why they will shoot it down sitting ready unleash as soon as this report is released.
In the mean time we must keep the pressure on them all. Watts should not be allowed to rest for one minute.
The reason I disagree is that CSS will want future customers. No AD will want to hire a firm that signed off on killing programs. Boosters would riot.
(04-27-2015 08:28 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote: [ -> ]I feel the CSS report will show Football is viable with a certain amount of private money factored in. The X factor will be that amount we (boosters) must pony up. I think what will happen is Watts will say that the boosters have not ponied up and promised funds do not count. He will want cash donations up front.
This.
The number is XXXXX and it must be committed and in the bank. I have heard this from two separate highly credible sources, believe it, and hope that the Football Foundation has this money already raised, and in the bank. If not they have 18 days. If it happens as Attalla says, and I'd say this is spot on, there is no one to blame but the Foundation. This should be no surprise to them, and they assumed this responsibility long ago.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, this is what I believe it comes down to. More is better, but nothing less will get it done.
We have to be real, though. If the report comes back and is favorable to us in the slightest, then how can you really counter that?
No one really even bothers if a report you funded returns with stuff favorable to you, but you can't discredit a report that you sanctioned. You can't release an official statement against an official report that you funded. You can't call the professionals you hired wrong so that's out. You can't call it mistake, either. Post favorable report, you can't stand in front of people and say you made just made a mistake after, what, nearly half a year of standing by it? You can't throw someone under the bus this time. Mackin is gone. Dr. Lucas and Bolton can't take one for the team when you stood up and said it was all you. Apologies? This is the same person that didn't apologize to anyone throughout the entire affair. He can't say that he has the support of any of the functioning bodies on campus. As far as I know, the faculty senate, student government, and the NAS are all actively opposed to him to this day.
The only thing he could say is the sentiment expressed after the no confidence votes. The board has his back. That's true, but we'll see.
(04-27-2015 09:49 AM)PTBlazer Wrote: [ -> ] (04-27-2015 08:28 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote: [ -> ]I feel the CSS report will show Football is viable with a certain amount of private money factored in. The X factor will be that amount we (boosters) must pony up. I think what will happen is Watts will say that the boosters have not ponied up and promised funds do not count. He will want cash donations up front.
This. The number is XXXX and it must be committed and in the bank. I have heard this from two separate highly credible sources, believe it, and hope that the Football Foundation has this money already raised. If not they have 18 days. And in the bank. If it happens as Attalla says, and I'd say this is spot on, there is no one to blame but the Foundation. They assumed this responsibility long ago.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, this is what I believe it comes down to. More is good, but nothing less.
I don't disagree with you except for blaming on the foundation... if this $$ has to be IN THE BANK, it will almost assuredly not be met. What person would actually donate to a program that they do not know will be there or not? I'm sure they've got something planned though.
I sincerely hope the optimism found here proves to be warranted. However, don't expect the CSS report to be criticized by other university administrators if CSS resorts to using aspects of the athletics cost accounting data, such as using the full cost of scholarships, to make the UAB football financial situation look worst than it really is. Remember, it is in the best interest of administrators everywhere to have their sports programs look like they are losing money, not making money, or at least not making as much money as they really are. Someone said CSS needs to be concerned about future business. The university administrators are where their future business will come from. Do you think CSS wants to tick them off by discrediting the cost accounting system they all use.
The rigged cost account system allows administrators to pry more money out of boosters and helps fend of college athletes who might want a piece of the very lucrative pie that has been created out of their talent and hard work. I suspect that only the media (including independent sports websites) will cause a stir if CSS tries to make things look worst than they are by using cost accounting numbers. I wonder if big sports media companies, like ESPN, are going have the guts to criticize phoney cost accounting systems of the university sports programs that they rely on for programing. That would be like biting the hand that feed them.
Someone said above that he didn't expect the CSS report to be as rosy as the OSKR report, and I believe he is absolutely right. The only question is how much less rosy will it be. Andy Schwarz believes there is a going to be a "donut hole", or loss attributed to the UAB football program by the CSS report unless Watts wants a graceful way to get out of a really bad situation by restoring football. I really don't think that is going to happen. What will be important is whether boosters are ready to step forward and fill that donut hole no matter how big it is and provide funding for the facilities necessary to make the program truy successful.
Part of the issue is that the Carr report and Watts said we need nearly $50mil over the next five years for capital improvements... what university pays off construction bonds in 5 years? The BOT hasn't allowed capital projects for football EVER... what's the big deal about doing it RIGHT NOW or not at all and just kill it? We compete with MTSU, Troy, USA, GA State, USM, & WKU in football... we've done ok with facilities worse than all of them.
(04-27-2015 10:25 AM)Hopeful Wrote: [ -> ]We have to be real, though. If the report comes back and is favorable to us in the slightest, then how can you really counter that?
They just ignore it, the same as the repeated NoCon votes and the marches and chants. All we can do is bring the heat and make it ugly and uncomfortable.
(04-27-2015 11:40 AM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ] (04-27-2015 10:25 AM)Hopeful Wrote: [ -> ]We have to be real, though. If the report comes back and is favorable to us in the slightest, then how can you really counter that?
They just ignore it, the same as the repeated NoCon votes and the marches and chants. All we can do is bring the heat and make it ugly and uncomfortable.
I would be looking for a way out and saving face if I were President Watts right now.
I remain optimistic he will reinstate the athletic programs. Not because he wants to, but because the damage this has done to his reputation.
I think Saturday summed it really well. A former football player held his helmet up and the crowd roared in support. There is plenty of support for UAB football, but hardly any for Watts.
(04-27-2015 11:49 AM)nicknitro19 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-27-2015 11:40 AM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ] (04-27-2015 10:25 AM)Hopeful Wrote: [ -> ]We have to be real, though. If the report comes back and is favorable to us in the slightest, then how can you really counter that?
They just ignore it, the same as the repeated NoCon votes and the marches and chants. All we can do is bring the heat and make it ugly and uncomfortable.
I would be looking for a way out and saving face if I were President Watts right now.
I remain optimistic he will reinstate the athletic programs. Not because he wants to, but because the damage this has done to his reputation.
I think Saturday summed it really well. A former football player held his helmet up and the crowd roared in support. There is plenty of support for UAB football, but hardly any for Watts.
I'm afraid that the time for face saving gestures has long since pasted. He has already flushed his reputation down the toilet and is irretrievable. First, he is a man on a mission - a mission that he firmly believes in. Second, given the the support of the BOT for a President who has handled this situation very badly, it is more than evident it was a mission that was given to him by certain Trustees.
Regardless of what the CSS report says, I think that Watts and his PR minions will find try to find a a way to use it or at least counter it and avoid giving in. It will take more than economic report blow this fish out of the water.
They view time is there friend and that sooner or later we will get tired and this will all die down. They don't know that they are dead wrong on that score.
PR firms, lawyers, and now no bid contracts. I disagree because they are fighting a costly battle and they never had the one thing they thought they had, which is public apathy.
We will win this battle but it won't be in Montgomery, with the Task Force, or any place. We will win due to attrition. Time favors us because our cause is genuine while theirs is deceitful and wrong polished with expensive lawyers and PR work.
In other words, they can't wage a long term battle because even now their costs are skyrocketing and have quickly outpaced the rewards.