In my 20 years with one of the country's most progressive non-profits I learned (and we were taught) to not downplay donor designation, regardless of what the hired guns/higher ups wanted the donor to do.
Of course, the institution wants cash (to do what the heck they want with it).
The other side of that is when there is a donor designation, the targeted recipient must know so they can take ownership and thank the donor personally, etc.
Wonder how many who receive donor designations receive the same amount of less budget the next budget year.
The Do Right Rule should always overrule what the hired gun developlment department's philosophy.
PS-If the institution wants certain projects funded then they need to say so to donors. That, I think, has gone on with our latest athletic buildings.
Last edited by Dawgpix; 04-14-2022 at 01:28 PM.
Louisiana Tech University
Flagship of the University of Louisiana System
That is CORRECT. Any thoughts of "moving up" to a new conference just went out the window for LA Tech, with that stupid vote. LA Tech now has both ULM and ULL in a BETTER football conference than LA Tech, with Tech having no options to be invited to a better conference, even long term. With Tech's small athletic budget, nobody is going to invite Tech to anything.
It's amazing to me that so many people at LA Tech have NO FORESIGHT about this kind of stuff. LA Tech was already in a rat race against ULM and ULL for state money and resources, athletic recruiting, new students and statewide popularity. And now, LA Tech's students just gave ULM and ULL the upper hand for the foreseeable future. Perhaps decades. There's no question that the Sunbelt will be a better football conference than the new CUSA 4.0. But damn, did LA Tech really have to just lay down and capitulate??
It’s who we are.
Meanwhile, if you are doing Reserved Tailgating at JAS, they just went up 67% on the minimum amount to reserve a space and they have moved all of us into one row that supposedly has more room, but we are not seeing that. It was an interesting Zoom Call meeting held last Wednesday with the Assistant AD's in charge of that and the "feedback" was not at all what they expected.
Here’s an idea…instead of doing more of what progressively killed tailgating during the Guice/Mclelland/Holtz years, let’s go back to what was working and proven to actually grow the game day experience.
This is what happens when mindless academia are running things.
I read a lot of student comments on social media about the proposal. Most of the negative comments (98% of them) centered around the proportion of the fee that would go to athletics as compared to mental health, spirit groups, and sports clubs. They were astounded millions would go to athletics compared to the small amount to mental heath, in particular. And criticism on why any of it was going to Greek groups. Looks like providing what was taken as an "inequitable" breakdown of the areas to be funded was a mistake.
Fee proposals in the past were some of the best kept secrets on campus. Those with a vested interest voted yes. Others were completely unaware of the referendums. Social media has changed that.
Last edited by roughedge; 04-19-2022 at 08:59 AM.
Work out and eat meat, (many) problems solved
Our answer here can't be that we need more fee secrecy though. Would it have been better to sell this as athletics only, and if it doesn't pass all aspects of the university, including academics, will cease to have relevance?
It's for subscribers only, but this made Matt Brown's newsletter as part of a trend.
https://www.extrapointsmb.com/colleg...n-study-money/