(06-11-2014 01:11 PM)thxjoenovak Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:05 PM)Enaiu Wrote:  "An ELITE selection"... I swear, is that the only word they know???????????

"World Class" was taken.

That's gotta be it.

(06-11-2014 05:28 PM)bikechuck Wrote:  I think that PJ will be successful at WMU and sooner rather than later. He is out recruiting everyone and as the old saying goes. In college football its not about the x's and o's, its about the Jimmy's and the Joe's.

Yeah, not really though. You're basing his recruiting success on ratings from online recruiting services. Show me how good at predicting player success those have been for non-AQ programs. I don't disagree that he is getting some good talent but there is a lot more to it than that. It will also be interesting to see how many of his well regarded recruits make it to their junior season.

Biz cards are pretty cheap right now with all the web card printing companies competing with local printers; they likely only paid pennies per card and if it grabs a recruit or potential student's attention, it's worth what little extra cost.

I have children in their 20's living with us and what they find entertaining, cool or eye catching is not what would interest many 40's 50's aged people

(06-11-2014 10:49 AM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 09:44 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  He's tries really hard to drum up support/exposure for his program. More power to him. He has this forum clucking at every move he makes so apparently it's working.

As I jump back on the subsidy percentages of MAC schools here comes another school that isnt raising money in many other ways besides taxing their students. WMU is just behind EMU with a 74% subsidy or in dollars $21,260,855 dollars of their athletic budget is coming from student fees and school funds. No doubt the students paid for those fancy business cards.

The students paid for it, so...what's your point?

(06-11-2014 12:05 PM)Enaiu Wrote:  "An ELITE selection"... I swear, is that the only word they know???????????

Fake it 'til you make it.

(06-11-2014 01:11 PM)thxjoenovak Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:05 PM)Enaiu Wrote:  "An ELITE selection"... I swear, is that the only word they know???????????

"World Class" was taken.

Dang, you beat me to it.

(06-11-2014 11:27 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 01:11 PM)thxjoenovak Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 12:05 PM)Enaiu Wrote:  "An ELITE selection"... I swear, is that the only word they know???????????

"World Class" was taken.

Dang, you beat me to it.

....and I hear the WMU Rowing Team is none too happy about him taking "Row The Boat".

(06-11-2014 07:49 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 10:49 AM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 09:44 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  He's tries really hard to drum up support/exposure for his program. More power to him. He has this forum clucking at every move he makes so apparently it's working.

As I jump back on the subsidy percentages of MAC schools here comes another school that isnt raising money in many other ways besides taxing their students. WMU is just behind EMU with a 74% subsidy or in dollars $21,260,855 dollars of their athletic budget is coming from student fees and school funds. No doubt the students paid for those fancy business cards.

The students paid for it, so...what's your point?

My point is their athletic program is like a house of cards. PJ wants everyone to think WMU is the best program in the MAC when in fact they receive very little fan support or donations. It is an athletic program being heavily subsidized by student fees and school funds. That boat is sinking and it is getting worse every year!

(06-12-2014 12:50 PM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 07:49 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 10:49 AM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 09:44 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  He's tries really hard to drum up support/exposure for his program. More power to him. He has this forum clucking at every move he makes so apparently it's working.

As I jump back on the subsidy percentages of MAC schools here comes another school that isnt raising money in many other ways besides taxing their students. WMU is just behind EMU with a 74% subsidy or in dollars $21,260,855 dollars of their athletic budget is coming from student fees and school funds. No doubt the students paid for those fancy business cards.

The students paid for it, so...what's your point?

My point is their athletic program is like a house of cards. PJ wants everyone to think WMU is the best program in the MAC when in fact they receive very little fan support or donations. It is an athletic program being heavily subsidized by student fees and school funds. That boat is sinking and it is getting worse every year!

I'm going to give him two more seasons before I start saying that. I really want to see how his recruits pan out.

(06-12-2014 12:50 PM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 07:49 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 10:49 AM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 09:44 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  He's tries really hard to drum up support/exposure for his program. More power to him. He has this forum clucking at every move he makes so apparently it's working.

As I jump back on the subsidy percentages of MAC schools here comes another school that isnt raising money in many other ways besides taxing their students. WMU is just behind EMU with a 74% subsidy or in dollars $21,260,855 dollars of their athletic budget is coming from student fees and school funds. No doubt the students paid for those fancy business cards.

The students paid for it, so...what's your point?

My point is their athletic program is like a house of cards. PJ wants everyone to think WMU is the best program in the MAC when in fact they receive very little fan support or donations. It is an athletic program being heavily subsidized by student fees and school funds. That boat is sinking and it is getting worse every year!

Stop. There is plenty to pick apart in regards to Fleck....but don't attempt to make a statement like that and expect it to fly. Fan support and donations stack up very well when compared to the rest of the MAC.

(06-12-2014 01:44 PM)EA3 Wrote:  

(06-12-2014 12:50 PM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 07:49 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 10:49 AM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 09:44 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  He's tries really hard to drum up support/exposure for his program. More power to him. He has this forum clucking at every move he makes so apparently it's working.

As I jump back on the subsidy percentages of MAC schools here comes another school that isnt raising money in many other ways besides taxing their students. WMU is just behind EMU with a 74% subsidy or in dollars $21,260,855 dollars of their athletic budget is coming from student fees and school funds. No doubt the students paid for those fancy business cards.

The students paid for it, so...what's your point?

My point is their athletic program is like a house of cards. PJ wants everyone to think WMU is the best program in the MAC when in fact they receive very little fan support or donations. It is an athletic program being heavily subsidized by student fees and school funds. That boat is sinking and it is getting worse every year!

Stop. There is plenty to pick apart in regards to Fleck....but don't attempt to make a statement like that and expect it to fly. Fan support and donations stack up very well when compared to the rest of the MAC.

Its just a shame for Huskie fans to see their once great player have fallen so bad, he is making a joke out of himself, he is not ready for this type of job, its just a sad state of affairs unfortunately.

(06-12-2014 12:50 PM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 07:49 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 10:49 AM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 09:44 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  He's tries really hard to drum up support/exposure for his program. More power to him. He has this forum clucking at every move he makes so apparently it's working.

As I jump back on the subsidy percentages of MAC schools here comes another school that isnt raising money in many other ways besides taxing their students. WMU is just behind EMU with a 74% subsidy or in dollars $21,260,855 dollars of their athletic budget is coming from student fees and school funds. No doubt the students paid for those fancy business cards.

The students paid for it, so...what's your point?

My point is their athletic program is like a house of cards. PJ wants everyone to think WMU is the best program in the MAC when in fact they receive very little fan support or donations. It is an athletic program being heavily subsidized by student fees and school funds. That boat is sinking and it is getting worse every year!

Fair point, appreciate the response.

(06-12-2014 05:47 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(06-12-2014 12:50 PM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 07:49 PM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 10:49 AM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-11-2014 09:44 AM)PrideinthePack Wrote:  He's tries really hard to drum up support/exposure for his program. More power to him. He has this forum clucking at every move he makes so apparently it's working.

As I jump back on the subsidy percentages of MAC schools here comes another school that isnt raising money in many other ways besides taxing their students. WMU is just behind EMU with a 74% subsidy or in dollars $21,260,855 dollars of their athletic budget is coming from student fees and school funds. No doubt the students paid for those fancy business cards.

The students paid for it, so...what's your point?

My point is their athletic program is like a house of cards. PJ wants everyone to think WMU is the best program in the MAC when in fact they receive very little fan support or donations. It is an athletic program being heavily subsidized by student fees and school funds. That boat is sinking and it is getting worse every year!

Fair point, appreciate the response.

It's not a fair point. It's garbage spin. It's quite possibly the most ridiculous point of view that I've read on this board in the last 12 months.

It's about as accurate as me pointing towards this thread/website/info and making a blanket statement.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-691603.html

(06-12-2014 06:58 PM)EA3 Wrote:  It's about as accurate as me pointing towards this thread/website/info and making a blanket statement.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-691603.html

Fair point, appreciate the response.

Quote:

Quote:It's about as accurate as me pointing towards this thread/website/info and making a blanket statement.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-691603.html

Fair point, appreciate the response.

Why are you purposely being annoying? Because you can? You could justify your response, or at least back down from it.

(06-13-2014 12:26 AM)Enaiu Wrote:  

Quote:

Quote:It's about as accurate as me pointing towards this thread/website/info and making a blanket statement.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-691603.html

Fair point, appreciate the response.

Why are you purposely being annoying? Because you can? You could justify your response, or at least back down from it.

Fair point, appreciate the response.

(06-13-2014 12:26 AM)Enaiu Wrote:  

Quote:

Quote:It's about as accurate as me pointing towards this thread/website/info and making a blanket statement.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-691603.html

Fair point, appreciate the response.

Why are you purposely being annoying? Because you can? You could justify your response, or at least back down from it.

Are you referring to me?

If so, then here would be my response.

The assertion yesterday that WMU's athletic dept. is a "house of cards" that receives "little fan support and donations" is absolutely ridiculous. The statement was made because the poster above wanted to use the general fund numbers as evidence. I would argue that those numbers do not tell the whole story...for the following reasons:

1. Comparing WMU to the rest of the MAC is not apples to apples. Only BGSU and Miami are comparable. Why would I say make that statement? Because we are the only 3 MAC schools that support DI hockey. That makes a huge difference in the numbers that are being discussed.

2. In regards to the "little fan support" and the lack of donations...I'd say that's unbelievably false. Why? Because we just came off a two years stretch that saw our football team go 4-20. Attendance is directly correlated to winning. If WMU wins, the fans show up. If they don't, the average attendance falls between 12k-15k on average...very similar to other MAC schools. The attendance ceiling hasn't be approached since the 99 and 00 seasons. When WMU does win, people show up. And in regards to the donations, I'm not sure where someone would have to bury their head to be completely ignorant in regards to the recent renovations our football facilities have implemented (around 4 million), the 800k scoreboard in University Arena that is getting installed this summer, the renovations at Lawson ice arena in the last two years, and the baseball stadium upgrades that occurred four years ago. All were made possible because of donations. Not saying WMU is superior to any MAC school here...just saying we are very comparable to our peer institutions and we are nothing like the "house of cards" the poster described.

3. Unless someone is an accountant for a MAC school, making sense of how healthy a athletic dept is hardly a exact science. There is no universal accounting formula used by every school.

4. Implying that schools which have a higher percentage of general fund usage are not as financially healthy as those who have a lower percentage is misleading. In fact, one could argue that a school which receives more money from it's general fund MIGHT be because the school is financially stable and can afford to do such. Not saying that is the case, just stating there is more than one way to interpret data.


I get it. PJ isn't winning the favorite alumni contest on the Dog Pound. But the blanket statement made above would qualify as ridiculous. In fact, I would challenge him/her to prove such statements.

Sorry for the rant fellas. The vast majority of NIU posters I respect and enjoy conversing with. I just couldn't look the other way on this one. I would expect you guys to do the same if some knucklehead on the Stampede made similar statement regarding NIU.

(06-13-2014 08:20 AM)EA3 Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 12:26 AM)Enaiu Wrote:  

Quote:

Quote:It's about as accurate as me pointing towards this thread/website/info and making a blanket statement.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-691603.html

Fair point, appreciate the response.

Why are you purposely being annoying? Because you can? You could justify your response, or at least back down from it.

Are you referring to me?

If so, then here would be my response.

The assertion yesterday that WMU's athletic dept. is a "house of cards" that receives "little fan support and donations" is absolutely ridiculous. The statement was made because the poster above wanted to use the general fund numbers as evidence. I would argue that those numbers do not tell the whole story...for the following reasons:

1. Comparing WMU to the rest of the MAC is not apples to apples. Only BGSU and Miami are comparable. Why would I say make that statement? Because we are the only 3 MAC schools that support DI hockey. That makes a huge difference in the numbers that are being discussed.

2. In regards to the "little fan support" and the lack of donations...I'd say that's unbelievably false. Why? Because we just came off a two years stretch that saw our football team go 4-20. Attendance is directly correlated to winning. If WMU wins, the fans show up. If they don't, the average attendance falls between 12k-15k on average...very similar to other MAC schools. The attendance ceiling hasn't be approached since the 99 and 00 seasons. When WMU does win, people show up. And in regards to the donations, I'm not sure where someone would have to bury their head to be completely ignorant in regards to the recent renovations our football facilities have implemented (around 4 million), the 800k scoreboard in University Arena that is getting installed this summer, the renovations at Lawson ice arena in the last two years, and the baseball stadium upgrades that occurred four years ago. All were made possible because of donations. Not saying WMU is superior to any MAC school here...just saying we are very comparable to our peer institutions and we are nothing like the "house of cards" the poster described.

3. Unless someone is an accountant for a MAC school, making sense of how healthy a athletic dept is hardly a exact science. There is no universal accounting formula used by every school.

4. Implying that schools which have a higher percentage of general fund usage are not as financially healthy as those who have a lower percentage is misleading. In fact, one could argue that a school which receives more money from it's general fund MIGHT be because the school is financially stable and can afford to do such. Not saying that is the case, just stating there is more than one way to interpret data.


I get it. PJ isn't winning the favorite alumni contest on the Dog Pound. But the blanket statement made above would qualify as ridiculous. In fact, I would challenge him/her to prove such statements.

Sorry for the rant fellas. The vast majority of NIU posters I respect and enjoy conversing with. I just couldn't look the other way on this one. I would expect you guys to do the same if some knucklehead on the Stampede made similar statement regarding NIU.

WMU is the 2nd most subsidized (2nd poorest budget position) school in the MAC just behind EMU. Miami ang BGSU are doing a much better job on true revenues that are not derived from school funds or student fees. Just check the USA today numbers and click on your school. I wouldnt be happy with that at all if that was my school.

(06-13-2014 09:45 AM)tampabayrocketfan Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 08:20 AM)EA3 Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 12:26 AM)Enaiu Wrote:  

Quote:

Quote:It's about as accurate as me pointing towards this thread/website/info and making a blanket statement.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-691603.html

Fair point, appreciate the response.

Why are you purposely being annoying? Because you can? You could justify your response, or at least back down from it.

Are you referring to me?

If so, then here would be my response.

The assertion yesterday that WMU's athletic dept. is a "house of cards" that receives "little fan support and donations" is absolutely ridiculous. The statement was made because the poster above wanted to use the general fund numbers as evidence. I would argue that those numbers do not tell the whole story...for the following reasons:

1. Comparing WMU to the rest of the MAC is not apples to apples. Only BGSU and Miami are comparable. Why would I say make that statement? Because we are the only 3 MAC schools that support DI hockey. That makes a huge difference in the numbers that are being discussed.

2. In regards to the "little fan support" and the lack of donations...I'd say that's unbelievably false. Why? Because we just came off a two years stretch that saw our football team go 4-20. Attendance is directly correlated to winning. If WMU wins, the fans show up. If they don't, the average attendance falls between 12k-15k on average...very similar to other MAC schools. The attendance ceiling hasn't be approached since the 99 and 00 seasons. When WMU does win, people show up. And in regards to the donations, I'm not sure where someone would have to bury their head to be completely ignorant in regards to the recent renovations our football facilities have implemented (around 4 million), the 800k scoreboard in University Arena that is getting installed this summer, the renovations at Lawson ice arena in the last two years, and the baseball stadium upgrades that occurred four years ago. All were made possible because of donations. Not saying WMU is superior to any MAC school here...just saying we are very comparable to our peer institutions and we are nothing like the "house of cards" the poster described.

3. Unless someone is an accountant for a MAC school, making sense of how healthy a athletic dept is hardly a exact science. There is no universal accounting formula used by every school.

4. Implying that schools which have a higher percentage of general fund usage are not as financially healthy as those who have a lower percentage is misleading. In fact, one could argue that a school which receives more money from it's general fund MIGHT be because the school is financially stable and can afford to do such. Not saying that is the case, just stating there is more than one way to interpret data.


I get it. PJ isn't winning the favorite alumni contest on the Dog Pound. But the blanket statement made above would qualify as ridiculous. In fact, I would challenge him/her to prove such statements.

Sorry for the rant fellas. The vast majority of NIU posters I respect and enjoy conversing with. I just couldn't look the other way on this one. I would expect you guys to do the same if some knucklehead on the Stampede made similar statement regarding NIU.

WMU is the 2nd most subsidized (2nd poorest budget position) school in the MAC just behind EMU. Miami ang BGSU are doing a much better job on true revenues that are not derived from school funds or student fees. Just check the USA today numbers and click on your school. I wouldnt be happy with that at all if that was my school.

Again...that is the danger of looking at one piece of data and crowning it. How about I look at the website copied above and point to the fact that NIU shows the 3rd lowest revenues in the MAC. Under your logic, that must mean NIU has little fan support and receives hardly any donations. Must be a house of cards over in DeKalb. Get the point now?

If you think the 2nd most subsidized athletic dept in the MAC = 2nd poorest budget position....then you are grossly uneducated in the matter.