CSNbbs

http://jmusports.com/news/2016/9/1/bourn...tters.aspx

It doesn't get more transparent than this. Real numbers and a realistic financial expectation of what a move to FBS will mean.

The whole thing is a bit depressing, but I'd rather receive the real truth. What is apparent is that our budget is too large for what our institution currently is, an FCS school.

What are we going to do? Stay FCS and make budget cuts, or move forward and seek even slightly higher revenue in FBS? It's not an easy decision either way. Recent FCS move-ups are facing these same financial realities.

Why did he write this only to Nation? What about the rest of us? :D

Not a promising tone.

Also, when did the exit fee get bumped to 1.25mm?

Quote:FBS

While this article will not analyze the positives and negatives of any future invitations that might arise for the university, it is important to understand the financial impact with which we would be faced given such a decision. As already stated, the Cox Bill will require JMU to decrease its percentage of revenue generation from student fees from 58 percent currently to 55 percent. At the same time, a commitment to FBS means an increase in expenses in areas such as additional football scholarships, cost of attendance for additional sports, travel increases for all of our sport programs, increases to facility infrastructure and personnel cost increases. Additionally, we would face exit fees from the Colonial Athletic Association of $1,250,000 and entrance fees for the new league conservatively set between $2,000,000 - $2,500,000. As I just alluded to, further adding complexity to the financial issue, we have recently witnessed some FBS leagues outside of the power five have their television revenues decrease significantly under new agreements with their terms significantly reduced in length. That means JMU would need to find other internal sources to combat the increased costs associated with a move to FBS without a dependence on revenue generated from a new conference television package.

This looks like he's already making the case (excuse?) for not going FBS. I'd say this is the clearest indication we're not moving at all. So people like Purp and Dad can move on now. The fork is in it.

(09-02-2016 09:26 AM)JMaddy Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:FBS

While this article will not analyze the positives and negatives of any future invitations that might arise for the university, it is important to understand the financial impact with which we would be faced given such a decision. As already stated, the Cox Bill will require JMU to decrease its percentage of revenue generation from student fees from 58 percent currently to 55 percent. At the same time, a commitment to FBS means an increase in expenses in areas such as additional football scholarships, cost of attendance for additional sports, travel increases for all of our sport programs, increases to facility infrastructure and personnel cost increases. Additionally, we would face exit fees from the Colonial Athletic Association of $1,250,000 and entrance fees for the new league conservatively set between $2,000,000 - $2,500,000. As I just alluded to, further adding complexity to the financial issue, we have recently witnessed some FBS leagues outside of the power five have their television revenues decrease significantly under new agreements with their terms significantly reduced in length. That means JMU would need to find other internal sources to combat the increased costs associated with a move to FBS without a dependence on revenue generated from a new conference television package.

This looks like he's already making the case (excuse?) for not going FBS. I'd say this is the clearest indication we're not moving at all. So people like Purp and Dad can move on now. The fork is in it.

exactly! There it is folks in black and white (red and white considering the deficit?) #caa4lyfe settle in and start making signs for Elon. may as well schedule them every final game of the season and try to build some sort of rivalry.

(09-02-2016 09:26 AM)JMaddy Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:FBS

While this article will not analyze the positives and negatives of any future invitations that might arise for the university, it is important to understand the financial impact with which we would be faced given such a decision. As already stated, the Cox Bill will require JMU to decrease its percentage of revenue generation from student fees from 58 percent currently to 55 percent. At the same time, a commitment to FBS means an increase in expenses in areas such as additional football scholarships, cost of attendance for additional sports, travel increases for all of our sport programs, increases to facility infrastructure and personnel cost increases. Additionally, we would face exit fees from the Colonial Athletic Association of $1,250,000 and entrance fees for the new league conservatively set between $2,000,000 - $2,500,000. As I just alluded to, further adding complexity to the financial issue, we have recently witnessed some FBS leagues outside of the power five have their television revenues decrease significantly under new agreements with their terms significantly reduced in length. That means JMU would need to find other internal sources to combat the increased costs associated with a move to FBS without a dependence on revenue generated from a new conference television package.

This looks like he's already making the case (excuse?) for not going FBS. I'd say this is the clearest indication we're not moving at all. So people like Purp and Dad can move on now. The fork is in it.

I didn't read it that way at all. He's simply stating it doesn't come without its costs and still limited revenue streams. He's just not lying.
He said fbs many times in a tone that it's something the university is actively exploring. Many on here just don't want to believe it because it doesn't align with their perception of an admin that doesn't do anything.

I appreciate this detailed explanation of the financial picture of JMU Athletics.

All this does is show that the people who want FBS but decreased their giving just shot themselves in the foot

How can a school spend $200M on athletic infrastructure and then claim we can't afford a 1A conference move?

(09-02-2016 09:35 AM)Purplehazed Wrote: [ -> ]How can a school spend $200M on athletic infrastructure and then claim we can't afford a 1A conference move?

Huh

(09-02-2016 09:26 AM)JMaddy Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:FBS

While this article will not analyze the positives and negatives of any future invitations that might arise for the university, it is important to understand the financial impact with which we would be faced given such a decision. As already stated, the Cox Bill will require JMU to decrease its percentage of revenue generation from student fees from 58 percent currently to 55 percent. At the same time, a commitment to FBS means an increase in expenses in areas such as additional football scholarships, cost of attendance for additional sports, travel increases for all of our sport programs, increases to facility infrastructure and personnel cost increases. Additionally, we would face exit fees from the Colonial Athletic Association of $1,250,000 and entrance fees for the new league conservatively set between $2,000,000 - $2,500,000. As I just alluded to, further adding complexity to the financial issue, we have recently witnessed some FBS leagues outside of the power five have their television revenues decrease significantly under new agreements with their terms significantly reduced in length. That means JMU would need to find other internal sources to combat the increased costs associated with a move to FBS without a dependence on revenue generated from a new conference television package.

This looks like he's already making the case (excuse?) for not going FBS. I'd say this is the clearest indication we're not moving at all. So people like Purp and Dad can move on now. The fork is in it.

My read as well

(09-02-2016 09:34 AM)DirtyDukes Wrote: [ -> ]All this does is show that the people who want FBS but decreased their giving just shot themselves in the foot

Dirty you're delusional, I didn't shoot anything, the admin did. I HIGHLY doubt my 5k donation level, that I'm not longer pledging, moves the needle on the 10m increased revenue needed that JB just spelled out.

If the admin can't see the value of the move after last night's Appy game, I have MUCH better places to put that money in my life. The age old mantra of you have to spend money to make money stands true. If they don't think they can make up that 3% in corporate sponsors alone by being FBS by 2021-22 then there really is no hope. Small thinking will continue to yield small results.

(09-02-2016 09:39 AM)JMUrcc06 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-02-2016 09:34 AM)DirtyDukes Wrote: [ -> ]All this does is show that the people who want FBS but decreased their giving just shot themselves in the foot

Dirty you're delusional, I didn't shoot anything, the admin did. I HIGHLY doubt my 5k donation level, that I'm not longer pledging, moves the needle on the 10m increased revenue needed that JB just spelled out.

If the admin can't see the value of the move after last night's Appy game, I have MUCH better places to put that money in my life. The age old mantra of you have to spend money to make money stands true. If they don't think they can make up that 3% in corporate sponsors alone by being FBS by 2021-22 then there really is no hope. Small thinking will continue to yield small results.

You're the delusional one if you think giving less helps us achieve our goals. It's not just your 5k donation, it's everyone's together.

We have no money. We have a tiny endowment, and the only reason we're able to do so much is student fees. If we want to move up as a fanbase, we're going to have to give more. It's always been that way.

I think maybe 4 years ago it was 7% of JMU alums give back. Your line of thinking will mean that number will only go down.

(09-02-2016 09:39 AM)JMUrcc06 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-02-2016 09:34 AM)DirtyDukes Wrote: [ -> ]All this does is show that the people who want FBS but decreased their giving just shot themselves in the foot

Dirty you're delusional, I didn't shoot anything, the admin did. I HIGHLY doubt my 5k donation level, that I'm not longer pledging, moves the needle on the 10m increased revenue needed that JB just spelled out.

If the admin can't see the value of the move after last night's Appy game, I have MUCH better places to put that money in my life. The age old mantra of you have to spend money to make money stands true. If they don't think they can make up that 3% in corporate sponsors alone by being FBS by 2021-22 then there really is no hope. Small thinking will continue to yield small results.

Spot on

Instead of giving to the university itself, maybe we needed to promise to help alleviate the cost of the move if that should ever happen. 3.75 Mil.

i make this comment without saying yay or nay to any point made.

despite many of bourne's points having been addressed on this forum dozens of times by dozens of people before, at least now it comes straight from JMU.

now people can't claim there is no transparency.

Why is it that Bourne chooses to talk about only the added expanse side of the ledger for FBS but doesn't touch on the added revenue potential there that could offset it? Because he's using this as an excuse for failed leadership once again and trying to proactively manage the obvious backlash that will come when we are stuck in the CAA for eternity. He talks about the potential dried up revenue stream from FBS teams not scheduling FCS teams in the future but doesn't talk about how that is a key business driver for moving to FBS.

While I appreciate his attempt at transparency, this is politics at its best whereby he's simply only stating the parts of the argument that support his agenda.

(09-02-2016 09:52 AM)atljmualum Wrote: [ -> ]Why is it that Bourne chooses to talk about only the added expanse side of the ledger for FBS but doesn't touch on the added revenue potential there that could offset it?................

A couple (out of many) possible reasons:

1) To rustle your jimmies.

2) Hoping it will spur some to donate more?

(09-02-2016 09:57 AM)GaryMatthews Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-02-2016 09:52 AM)atljmualum Wrote: [ -> ]Why is it that Bourne chooses to talk about only the added expanse side of the ledger for FBS but doesn't touch on the added revenue potential there that could offset it?................

A couple (of many) possible reasons:

1) To rustle your jimmies.

2) Hoping it will spur some to donate more?

Oh his Jimmies are SOOOOOOOOO rustled

(09-02-2016 09:52 AM)atljmualum Wrote: [ -> ]Why is it that Bourne chooses to talk about only the added expanse side of the ledger for FBS but doesn't touch on the added revenue potential there that could offset it? Because he's using this as an excuse for failed leadership once again and trying to proactively manage the obvious backlash that will come when we are stuck in the CAA for eternity. He talks about the potential dried up revenue stream from FBS teams not scheduling FCS teams in the future but doesn't talk about how that is a key business driver for moving to FBS.

While I appreciate his attempt at transparency, this is politics at its best whereby he's simply only stating the parts of the argument that support his agenda.

I appreciate the transparency and I understand exactly what he is trying to do with these dialogues. I get it.

But I do read this and see that they are presenting how things are currently done as if there is only one way to do things. He is addressing how JMU handles an issue (again, which I appreciate) but is not presenting any alternatives that may create a different result.

Solving this will take two things, a will to solve it and strong leadership. I think JMU is lacking at least one and probably both.