Jump to content
KTG119

Howe to Northwestern

Recommended Posts

Although, Northwestern has NEVER played in the NCAA basketball tournament, they actually draw pretty well to their basketball games. They averaged about 7k fans last year (though it is probably accurate to say a good portion of those are fans in the Chicago area for the visiting Big Ten teams).

 

Making an improvement to the facility does make sense. It is likely not just a gym court renovation but likely will entail a lot. Some facilities practically have a complete rebuild when they do a renovation on an old facility. (I have no clue what the renovation calls for...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if NU is public or private, but at most public universities this type of renovation is funded by private donors.

 

Yes, it is possible that the donations could be made to academics instead, but if the funds were donated to renovate the arena, they can't be used for anything else.

All this reinforces in my mind the absurdity of big time athletics being run by colleges.  I know their history and school pride and all that, but it just does not make sense to me to link the two.  All the issues with NCAA rule violations, academic scandals and overpaid coaches go away if there was a way to separate the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this reinforces in my mind the absurdity of big time athletics being run by colleges.  I know their history and school pride and all that, but it just does not make sense to me to link the two.  All the issues with NCAA rule violations, academic scandals and overpaid coaches go away if there was a way to separate the two.

 

Don't disagree with the sentiment, but I want to call out the comment about overpaid coaches. The coaches aren't overpaid. They get paid what the university can justify, and usually, the head coach of a major sport (e.g. football, basketball) at a "big sports school" is the individual who drives the most revenue to the school of anyone on the entire university payroll. Coach comp for big revenue sports is highly market-based. There are guys who get paid a lot and don't deliver, but that's true of any position in the school.

Edited by wrestlingnerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this reinforces in my mind the absurdity of big time athletics being run by colleges.  I know their history and school pride and all that, but it just does not make sense to me to link the two.  All the issues with NCAA rule violations, academic scandals and overpaid coaches go away if there was a way to separate the two.

and the "absurdity" of how YOU spend some of your dollars I am sure could be better spent on curing cancer or MS etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and the "absurdity" of how YOU spend some of your dollars I am sure could be better spent on curing cancer or MS etc.

 

Fair enough a lot of my money is spent in absurd ways, but colleges have a specific mission to educate people and big time athletics is unrelated, if not in direct conflict with their core mission.

My mission is to raise my kids, support my family while enjoying life, spending lots of money in direct conflict to these goals is absurd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't disagree with the sentiment, but I want to call out the comment about overpaid coaches. The coaches aren't overpaid. They get paid what the university can justify, and usually, the head coach of a major sport (e.g. football, basketball) at a "big sports school" is the individual who drives the most revenue to the school of anyone on the entire university payroll. Coach comp for big revenue sports is highly market-based. There are guys who get paid a lot and don't deliver, but that's true of any position in the school.

 

Again I feel that market based sports teams that drive massive amount of revenue don't belong in academics.

Why shouldn't colleges get into making big-budget movies paying Hollywood superstars their market based worth?

They could certainly drive lots of revenue to the school

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I feel that market based sports teams that drive massive amount of revenue don't belong in academics.

Why shouldn't colleges get into making big-budget movies paying Hollywood superstars their market based worth?

They could certainly drive lots of revenue to the school

 

I didn't want to get into a discussion about that, just wanted to comment on coaching comp. As I mentioned, I don't disagree with the sentiment of your post. Big-time sports in academia is a thorny topic with a lot of good points on both sides.

 

My only point is that coaches are generally not overpaid. You don't have to like what they do for academia, but objectively, they generate real, tangible, measurable economic benefit to their employers and their comp is based on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I feel that market based sports teams that drive massive amount of revenue don't belong in academics.

Why shouldn't colleges get into making big-budget movies paying Hollywood superstars their market based worth?

They could certainly drive lots of revenue to the school

could you tell me which/how many "academic" dollars are spent on athletics. Athletics bring HUGE academic donations to institutions. Maybe they should make movies that would bring in big dollars.

Now if you are talking small budget schools I think you may have a good argument.... but most of those charge students a fee that goes to athletics.... see Cleveland St. and wrestling. Those same students already pay for academics. Do you propose eliminating all athletics and send those funds ( the athletic fees) to the academic side?

I think if the big time athletic programs went away so would a BUNCH of dollars given to those schools.

Many NAIA schools are finding out that having athletics is actually a money maker for those schools. Therefore aiding the academic programs.

My college dropped their wrestling program years ago........ hmmm oh yeah the same time I quit donating to them. I would be surprised if I were the only one doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

could you tell me which/how many "academic" dollars are spent on athletics. Athletics bring HUGE academic donations to institutions. Maybe they should make movies that would bring in big dollars.

Now if you are talking small budget schools I think you may have a good argument.... but most of those charge students a fee that goes to athletics.... see Cleveland St. and wrestling. Those same students already pay for academics. Do you propose eliminating all athletics and send those funds ( the athletic fees) to the academic side?

I think if the big time athletic programs went away so would a BUNCH of dollars given to those schools.

Many NAIA schools are finding out that having athletics is actually a money maker for those schools. Therefore aiding the academic programs.

My college dropped their wrestling program years ago........ hmmm oh yeah the same time I quit donating to them. I would be surprised if I were the only one doing that.

There have been a lot of debate about this but there is little agreement on the subject. Which sports do lead to donations. Most schools spend more on their sports which may indicate it is actually a drain. It is only recently that athletic departments began giving back money to the general funds and this is the result of television money.

 

When you look at endowments or at alumni giving, they are typically higher at schools that don't emphasize athletics.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colleges_and_universities_in_the_United_States_by_endowment#Endowments_per_Student

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

could you tell me which/how many "academic" dollars are spent on athletics. Athletics bring HUGE academic donations to institutions. Maybe they should make movies that would bring in big dollars.

Now if you are talking small budget schools I think you may have a good argument.... but most of those charge students a fee that goes to athletics.... see Cleveland St. and wrestling. Those same students already pay for academics. Do you propose eliminating all athletics and send those funds ( the athletic fees) to the academic side?

I think if the big time athletic programs went away so would a BUNCH of dollars given to those schools.

Many NAIA schools are finding out that having athletics is actually a money maker for those schools. Therefore aiding the academic programs.

My college dropped their wrestling program years ago........ hmmm oh yeah the same time I quit donating to them. I would be surprised if I were the only one doing that.

At the big time schools, isn't most of the money given because of the athletic teams, earmark for athletics?  I don't know.  I would guess a large part of it is.

 

I think the NAIA is a good model.  They provide athletics to students because it is something the students want and are willing to pay tuition (typically) to go to a school that has the sport/activity.

 

 

BTW, when my college dropped wrestling I also stopped giving.  I was annoyed at what they did and it was a very convenient time to make a point as our finances were rather stretched at the time, don't think that has really hurt fundraising at all though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the big time schools, isn't most of the money given because of the athletic teams, earmark for athletics?  I don't know.  I would guess a large part of it is.

 

I think the NAIA is a good model.  They provide athletics to students because it is something the students want and are willing to pay tuition (typically) to go to a school that has the sport/activity.

 

 

BTW, when my college dropped wrestling I also stopped giving.  I was annoyed at what they did and it was a very convenient time to make a point as our finances were rather stretched at the time, don't think that has really hurt fundraising at all though

Jim

uh...you quit giving...... I doubt you were alone.

From the time I quit giving to now my school would have received over 100,000$, from me alone, at the rate I was giving at the time. Just 9 other equal donors would have been much more than 1,000,000$ during that time span.

Maybe my school was unique but at that time athletics was paid for by ATHLETIC fees and donations. Not a dime came from tuition dollars.

Pin....... I think you are mixing apples and peaches (oranges are now off limits on wrestling sites lol ). The Harvard's have some extremely wealthy grads. Stands to reason they will have much more in donations. Not to mention they have been raising $$$$ for a LOOOOOONG time.

and as I said athletic fees and donations paid for athletics when I was a college athlete. Schools that are spending more have shown with simple addition they are making $$$ through tuition on the extra students ( above varsity rosters ) having teams brings  to the school. This isn't something I am saying THEY (schools) are saying it. That is why wrestling is being added at the NAIA level. You aren't going to have this effect at large schools. NAIA  MAY be wrestling's future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim

uh...you quit giving...... I doubt you were alone.

From the time I quit giving to now my school would have received over 100,000$, from me alone, at the rate I was giving at the time. Just 9 other equal donors would have been much more than 1,000,000$ during that time span.

Maybe my school was unique but at that time athletics was paid for by ATHLETIC fees and donations. Not a dime came from tuition dollars.

Pin....... I think you are mixing apples and peaches (oranges are now off limits on wrestling sites lol ). The Harvard's have some extremely wealthy grads. Stands to reason they will have much more in donations. Not to mention they have been raising $$$$ for a LOOOOOONG time.

and as I said athletic fees and donations paid for athletics when I was a college athlete. Schools that are spending more have shown with simple addition they are making $$$ through tuition on the extra students ( above varsity rosters ) having teams brings  to the school. This isn't something I am saying THEY (schools) are saying it. That is why wrestling is being added at the NAIA level. You aren't going to have this effect at large schools. NAIA  MAY be wrestling's future.

Correct. It only works if wrestling keeps spending down to a bare minimum. The problem is the arms race (which I thought this thread was about). There are very few D1 schools that would be worse off by cutting the sport. Wrestling at most D1 schools is a net loss. Student fees just means you're taxing students that don't participate (and likely don't have an interest in wrestling).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at endowments or at alumni giving, they are typically higher at schools that don't emphasize athletics.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colleges_and_universities_in_the_United_States_by_endowment#Endowments_per_Student

True. However, causation may not be what it seems. With niche sports such as wrestling, crew, lacrosse, etc. excepted, generally, the elite academic schools suck at sports. It's not hard to figure out why the best academic schools have the biggest endowments: they graduate a disproportionate amount of the most successful and therefore rich or influential people in America. A star CEO or asset manager will always outearn a star pro athlete, as well as a legion of rabid college sports fans, by a large margin. When you graduate dozens of them each year, your endowment's future is bright indeed.

 

Also of note, the elite academic schools have elite grad schools, which attracts the best students most likely to become highly successful and influential, giving these schools a huge edge in fundraising.

 

So is it that they are elite academic schools or that sports aren't emphasized that makes these schools' endowments so large? We live in a world that values intellect over brawn, so clearly, the top academic schools are always gong to produce the largest donors. If the question is whether sports drive donation over other factors, then it's a little unfair to include the Harvards and Princetons of the world in that analysis because they're operating on a totally different level of graduate success.

 

I'd be interested in what the data says if you take out the Ivy+ schools.

 

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with either side, by the way. I'm just making a relevant comment.

Edited by wrestlingnerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right WrestlingNerd.

 

That's why there is such a debate. The question often becomes more about the person making under $100k a year. Do they donate to their school because of the athletic success? They may. They may not. It is hard to really determine because school giving rates vary so much from one school to the other.

 

One of the big problems is looking at success in athletics. Yes, it is generally accepted that athletic success will lead to an increase in donations and that a large percentage of those go to athletics (especially when coming from the lower income donors) but since athletic success is often tied to athletic spending, some schools are actually worse of by being in the arms race which yeilded more donations in the first place.

 

At the end of the day it is still all inconclusive.

 

The only thing we can do to help wrestling is keep giving and let it be known that the gives are a result of the wrestling program while at the same time trying to keep wrestling programs from being in the arms race. The less money wrestling programs spend the better it is for the sport as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim,

I don't think I have ever seen a breakdown on academics vs athletic donations I am sure some exist. I do know when you go to probably EVERY college campus you see several buildings named after donors. Those buildings may become wastelands, over time, with the internet becoming more and more where people get their educations. college campus may be a dinosaur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$110M renovation on a college arena just seems wrong.  Maybe they recoup the costs with increased attendance, but man that would pay for a lot of research grants, Professors, academic scholarships, etc.

 

While I understand your sentiment read the articles below.

 

Here is the article about the renovation http://www.nusports.com/news/2016/6/13/WRA_Renovation.aspx

The article mentions the 3.75 billion fundraising initiative for the We Will Campaign. They put a ton of money into things other than athletics.

 

Here is the site for the "We Will, The Campaign For Northwestern http://wewill.northwestern.edu/s/1479/282-giving/school-unit-campaign.aspx?sid=1479&gid=282&pgid=7853

 

You should see the new Kellogg School of Management they are building. It should be done this year. The Welsh Ryan Renovation is half of what the new Kellogg School is.

Edited by Fred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I understand your sentiment read the articles below.

 

Here is the article about the renovation http://www.nusports.com/news/2016/6/13/WRA_Renovation.aspx

The article mentions the 3.75 billion fundraising initiative for the We Will Campaign. They put a ton of money into things other than athletics.

 

Here is the site for the "We Will, The Campaign For Northwestern http://wewill.northwestern.edu/s/1479/282-giving/school-unit-campaign.aspx?sid=1479&gid=282&pgid=7853

 

You should see the new Kellogg School of Management they are building. It should be done this year. The Welsh Ryan Renovation is half of what the new Kellogg School is.

Yes I get it, but spend  $110 million here and $110 million there and pretty sure you are talkin about a lot of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if I am wrong, but Howe spent three years ('09, '10, '11) at Wisconsin, one year training for the 2012 Olympics at Michigan, and four years ('13, '14, '15, '16) at Oklahoma, right?

 

That does not strike me as someone that moves around too much.

Not like Sammy Henson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...