In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 641
Online now 232 Record: 6210 (3/13/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
on Sirius radio. He was talking about the facilities arms race that continues to grow, especially within the SEC. He talked about the reason USC got Steve Spurrier was simply due to the commitment they (the university) made to him in the interview process with regards to facilities. USC promised him everything he was asking for, and they delivered. Then talked about the type of players USC was recruiting before Spurrier and the facility upgrades compared to the kids they are recruiting today. Night and day difference. He said that they used to struggle for any out of state kid that had a mid-tier or better SEC offer, but now when kids come to campus and see's the money that has been poured into the program, USC can compete with any school in the conference for a kid in the South.
As for the future, this gets interesting. He stated that USC has a new philosophy on facilities. He said that they are now re-doing or remodling many of the projects that they completed just 8-10 years ago. The AD stated "if you're not continually innovating and improving your product, your product will die in this envirnment". USC is following the path of Oregon to begin the planning for a state of the art Football Dorm that will house the entire team and will be nothing short of over the top posh. Said they'll have it ready in about 3 years and will more than likely be the first SEC program to pull it off, though he's heard several other programs are planning the similar MTV Cribs type living space for their football program..
Petty insane to think about just how big of a business SEC football has become. It's always been big, but the growith in the product over the last 10 years is nothing short of amazing. It's literally the NFL-light.
Yeah, UK's going to have to invest some money into the football program (some way, I know it will be difficult) if they ever want to field a decent team. This should have started years ago.
Think about it. Schools are tearing down and rebuilding projects that were built just 8-10 years ago because they're now considered outdated in today's day and age of the facilities arm's race. Let that sink in. We are simply in "no-man's land" with regards to trying to even be competitive.
by the time UK even gets a recruiting room, the rest of the SEC's recruiting rooms will put Taj Mahal to shame. The rest of the SEC will use this new big contract money to invest into the cash cow with coaches and facilities. We will spend it on soccer and softball.
If I am the UK president I take all that SEC FB money and improve my university from an academic perspective...as long I have facilities that meet the minimum required by the league and they don't kick us out.
I would have to step back and get some perspective on the whole situation and what my responsibilites are as THE university in the state of Kentucky. It is not FB. I will try to remain competitive but I will not enter the arms race in facilities.
competitive with most of the rest of the SEC, yeah looks bleak. Isnt a good excuse for what we have witnessed this season in game #1 against a Big East team and game #3 against a Sun Belt squad.
Wait, you're actually advocating the practice of taking each and every dime earned by UK Athletics (or are you just singling out football?) and adding it to the exponentially larger pool of money earned/garnered by the operation of a state university? Is this a serious post?
The University of Kentucky is responsible for educating the Commonwealth. It has a budget of approximately $2B to do so. It earns money through grants, federal and state funding, tuition, fees, licensing and donations.
Athletics earns its own money and is entitled to keep it. Football in particular has been bringing in profits of $12-20MM per year for over a decade. It has only been allowed to spend approximately $14MM total in that same time span, while UK Athletics has contributed more than $20MM to the academic side of things during that period.
We spent $30MM ensuring that 18 year old kids who will be around for 8 months don't have to mingle with the common folk, and made sure to hire them a private chef. $500,000 spent to recruit a handful of players. $400,000 spent to have a practice. The issue is not that football needs to be "put in perspective."
Athletics are a big dollar business and return monstrous gains to the University in terms of exposure, advertising, and, according to studies, tuition dollars and increased applications. Perspective is not lacking, but foresight and equal footing seems to be in short supply these days.
I couldn't agree more!!! If anyone questions this, they need to look at University of Miami (FL) and what a winning football program did for the budget and enrollment of that school.
Let me introduce a concept to you called "return on investment".......
I'm really interested to see how Barnhart plans to spend the allocated 70 million that he has been promised for football. That announcement should be made (WITH DETAILED PLANS ON HOW IT WILL BE USED) right before the coaching search begins. That makes the job somewhat more attractable. Mitch told me and some other guys last April that they were hoping the state would give them permission to be in the 200-250 million range as far as bonding goes to get the stadium upgraded to where it needs to be. 70 million is a long ways off from that. Beats nothing, though.
How the comment comes off...
What just happened to it in the comments...
This is me now...
This post was edited by jamccain 19 months ago
I think it may be time to face facts and saw we aren't going to make it as a competitive football program in the SEC.
Get happy with getting 7-8 wins at best or get busy moving to another conference.
While we aren't going to win games this year in any conference, next year we might be able to beat Indiana, Northwestern, Penn St., Illinois, Iowa is down...We would be middle of the pack. Or, we could beat Duke, UNC, Maryland, NC State, Virginia, Miami is way down...another middle of the pack finish.
At this point, I'm just tired of beating my head against the wall...for the first time EVER, I am fine with a conference move as it has become obvious we will only continue to battle Vandy for the basement in the SEC. Both conference move cases would put us at 7-9 wins and we should be able to sustain something like that. I think that would be a nice place to live for awhile and maybe every decade or so we could get to 10 wins. The long term view in the SEC looks more like 4-6 wins with a high point around 8 wins.
Maybe the SEC would trade us out for FSU with the ACC....ha ha ha.
Support the movement or just accuse me of being with Sander's and Crew after a little.....
Gotta have a plan before you can find the money to fund it. I haven't even seen that.
Simply not true.
Nothing will be finalized until march when the legislature provides the bonding capacity. Further, the university will request in the neighborhood for $300,000,000 for the entire university of which about half will go to athletics.
This post was edited by hoptownukfan 19 months ago
Ok, it hasn't been "finazlized" on paper. But UK has been essentially guarenteed a huge pot of additional bonding capacity. The promise has been made to Eli Capaluto. UK will get 500 million in total. UK athletics will get 100 million. 70 million for C.W.S., 30 million for baseball and some other sports. It's going to happen
You lecturing about perspective defines irony.
What was 30 million spent on?
If you are referring to the basketball dorm it didnt cost 30 million and calipari raised every dime dime from private donors. Not a dime of that came from football.
Your inference that only 12 million has been spent on football is wrong too.
Last year alone over 4 million were spent on the ribbon boards, jumbo trons sound system and nutter facility facelift. Another 4 million was spent on the practice fields and nutter field house. Yet another 2 million was spent on the practice and game day licker rooms and another 5 million was spent on the nutter facility 7 years ago on a complete renovation.
Please learn facts Before you post.
Again, false. It's not done. The legislature has to approve. To say its done is beyond silly.
What uk is hoping for is to put over 100 million into football facilities.
Didn't Couch donate the money for the practice fields and wasn't the money for the ribbon boards a donation as well?
What's your point? 90% of the b-ball upgrades have been from direct donations too. 100% of the new b-ball dorm was paid for by coal operators, hence the name. Joe craft center was built on a private donation and bonding.
I hear your arguement but I reject it. The people of Kentucky need UK to be more than a FB factory. I don't disagree that CWS needs an upgrade... I would like to see an 80 - 85K capacity and some new bells and whistles. I think it is needed to keep in line with being a member of the SEC. I don't feel the need at all to try to compete in the manner discussed by the SC AD.
Besides its more about people than facilities when it comes to attracting the real resources to win championships in FB ...those resources are players. You think kids go to AL because of their facilities...no, they go there because of Nick Saban. Granted the AL tradition does not hurt but when AL had bad coaches their facilities and tradition did not keep them from going 500 ...and losing to UK as I recall. Do you think kids go to SC because of their facilities...no, they go there because of Steve Spurrier. Where was SC before Spurrier?
It does not matter how much UK spends on facilities, coaches like Saban and Spurrier are not coming to UK because the state of Kentucky cannot provide them with the resources they covet most of all ...players. So if you are UK and you are trying to spend to keep up with the SEC Jones' you are going to reach the point of diminishing returns must faster than most other schools in the SEC. So why get caught up in that situation, step back, know who you are and where you are and know that monies can be spent in a more meaningful manner than those being discussed by the OP.
You should be happy then becasue that's what they are apparently doing, for now anyway.
"Ignorance is constricted awareness" - Deepak Chopra
Not only do you misuse the word "irony" and "defines" but you take a shot at me, a guy who has been a pretty darn reasonable poster around here?
Let's recap your post in response to mine:
$30MM doesn't just reflect the dormitory, but numerous basketball upgrades, spending I've pointed out in response to Angus' assertion that the darn evil football program needs to stop hoarding all the money. I don't care where it came from, I care that it is being spent. It doesn't matter where it came from because there should, by all rights be more than $100MM in pure unadulterated profit garnered by the football program alone sitting in a bank account somewhere. If we can spend money on basketball, we can spend money on football.
As for your second point? I didn't say $12MM. I said approximately $14MM. Let's add up your rebuttal numbers: 4 + 4 + 2 + 5 = 15.
Let's pretend for a moment that your numbers are right (they aren't) and compare them to mine. Is the point concerning profits of $10+MM every year for more than a decade made any less poignant because (according to you) the University allowed the spending of (gasp) $15MM over the course of a decade?
How did USCe get Spurrier there? Rainbows and puppies? Did the Spur-dog finally decide that S.Car had enough football mediocrity, hitch up his britches, go to Columbia and turn that mess around out of the kindness of his heart?
Or did the S.Car administration make a commitment to him at the time of his hiring to do the facilities upgrades necessary to compete for the coveted recruits that have helped them climb the ladder of the SEC?
I'm still trying to figure out why you're railing against that dadgum evil football program for sucking all the money out of the University, when it's pretty well established that UK spends in the bottom third of SEC programs for football and is the top spender (by far) in basketball. Why the double standard? Or are you just saving your rant about college basketball for basketball season?
What are the other upgrades for basketball that you reference?
Also, dismissing the source of the funds is beyond silly.
In reality, the basketball program hasn't taken a dime from the "facilities" part of the ukaa budget. Why? Because Calipari has raised the funds on his own.
It absolutely does make a difference where the funds come from.
Calipari "earned" the funds for basketball facilities. That money was then spent on basketball facility upgrades.
UK Football earned, as a conservative estimate, $100MM more than was spent on football in the last decade. Where has that money gone and why is spending it on facilities an impossibility?
The source of funds is only pertinent if one program has funds that the other program does not. Even with Calipari's fund-raising, UK Football has earned more (in the last decade) than was given to UK Basketball by donors for facilities.
The source of money does not matter. Does not matter. There are hundreds of millions of dollars in profit earned by UK Football in the last decade. That money is not being spent on football, and that begs the question of where it has gone.
UK Basketball facilities upgrades are fine by me. The willingness to spend available funds on one sport (or hell, numerous sports) while bemoaning the lack of money for football facilities despite the demonstrable profit of the football program is what bothers me.
If the football money earned in the last decade (and beyond) has been spent elsewhere, where has it gone? We are just now contemplating facilities upgrades in secondary sports and those upgrades are being done by donation, apparently. The few football facilities upgrades that have been done have been done by donation as well as Athletics funds.
There is a huge dollar amount publicly unaccounted for. It was earned by the football program in the form of season ticket sales, donations, and conference affiliation (bowls and television). We are not adverse to spending money on a variety of things, but seem to be very reticent to spend any money on football.
Didnt Barney say that donations to UK athletics can not be designated for a particular sport. It seem this is only for football not basketball.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports