CUSA Expansion targets: Temple, Tech, TCU

[Dawg06]

Athletics Contributions/Donations 2007-08
$2,064,622 - Louisiana Tech
$1,931,025 - Mississippi State

Athletics Contributions/Donations 2008-09
$2,728,546 - Louisiana Tech
$?,???,??? - Mississippi State

[Tbone1]

Athletics Contributions/Donations 2007-08
$2,064,622 - Louisiana Tech
$1,931,025 - Mississippi State

Athletics Contributions/Donations 2008-09
$2,728,546 - Louisiana Tech
$?,???,??? - Mississippi State

I don't understand the intricate variables that go into these figures so they are irrelevant to me.
How do I apply this knowledge?
What do those figures really mean?
Somebody help me understand this.

[LookingForResults]

I don't understand the intricate variables that go into these figures so they are irrelevant to me.
How do I apply this knowledge?
What do those figures really mean?
Somebody help me understand this.

Good luck. It's like Churchill's description of Russia - "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma."

[Tbone1]

Good luck. It's like Churchill's description of Russia - "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma."

Exactly.
I'd just like to understand it so I can see where folks are going with that discussion.

Right now I don't see the significance of it in regard to which School is more attractive to a conference.

[DogsWin]

Velton Knight (aka EagerEagle) is already spin-doctoring on the CUSA board...
http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=437006

[Dawg06]

GoGold:

To add to what Dawg06 said about student fees - we have a fee at Tech, but it is relatively small. And the reason it's small, is because that's all the Louisiana Board of Regents would allow the school to put in front of the students in a vote. It easily passed. Our students care a great deal and always have.

In fact, the fee could have been many times greater, and it still would have passed. The reason we were capped at a low amount by the Regents is because the smaller dollar figure barely passed a student vote at UL-Lafayette. So because the Cajun athletic department could never hope to get more from their student body, Tech had to settle for the same fee amount on our ballot.

In the year prior to both votes, it was clear what ULL had in mind for a student fee and what Tech had in mind for a student fee were in different ballparks.

The Get More Referendum of 2004 for the self-assessed athletics fee passed with 70% of the vote.

The Change For Change Referendum of 2007 for new tennis facility, track, bowling alley, and swimming and diving facility passed with 85% of the vote.

Louisiana Tech had a full-time undergraduate enrollment of 6,484 when these pictures were taken Fall 2009. I would guess 2/3 of that population was cheering in Tech's student section for that game. There are not many schools that can say that.

Tech students care.

[Dawg06]

I don't understand the intricate variables that go into these figures so they are irrelevant to me.
How do I apply this knowledge?
What do those figures really mean?
Somebody help me understand this.

It was a response to GoGold's question about Tech's financial support. EagerEagle has brainwashed USM and C-USA fans into thinking that Tech only survives off of government handouts and Tech students and alumni don't support the university. Those figures show that Tech has more financial support from alumni donations (LTAC) than Mississippi State. It also shows Tech's support is growing significantly right now.

[StrayDawg]

I don't understand the intricate variables that go into these figures so they are irrelevant to me.
How do I apply this knowledge?
What do those figures really mean?
Somebody help me understand this.

Tbone,

I don't really understand it either, but I can give you my opinion.

Government funds are not guaranteed (as we have seen with the budget cuts this year) and if the athletic budget relies too heavily on taxpayer dollars, then it isn't really self-sufficient. And, if it can't sustain itself, then we are at risk of having our athletic budget cut in half during bad economic times. I'm sure that no conference wants that kind of risk. But, as others have explained in this thread, the money comes from legitimate sources and the athletic department isn't heavily dependent on taxpayer dollars.

Of course, we are in the middle of the worst recession since the 1930s, and the budget is still growing, which should be a good sign for everyone who is paying attention to Tech athletics.

EagerEagle is a childish idiot who will always try to say negative things about us, regardless of the progress we make. We need to keep LTAC growing, and keep selling season tickets. But, we also need to keep pushing academic improvements and we need to WIN games....especially the USM game, so EagerEagle will shut his pie hole for a day or two.

[The Historian]

That's really funny. Velton, you definitely need to see a psychiatrist. You can see a shrink for free at Earl K. Long Hospital in Baton Rouge to make good use of your hard earned taxpayer money.

He's claiming all of our increases over the past six or seven years have been through general fund transfers. I guess I must have missed the entire Dooley era, LTAC, the deal with Learfield, and everything else we've done to grow the budget since 2004. He also questions the existence of a student fee.

Hey Velton - here's the story from The Tech Talk. Dawg06 has already posted the results.

http://www.latech.edu/techtalk/archi...urrent/fee.php

[RougeDawg]

Velton Knight (aka EagerEagle) is already spin-doctoring on the CUSA board...
http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=437006

Eager Eagle may be one of the most disturbed forum regulars in Internet history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia). I'm not sure if he was attacked by a Bulldog when he was little or failed out of Tech, but the dude is spooky. Like Silence of the Lambs spooky.

[RealityCheck]

The cap on Louisiana university transfers to athletics is 3% of budget. If there is a university budget cut, 3% of that cut would have to be cut from the transfer to athletics...$30K for every $1M.

Velton refuses to admit that student fee money is collected along with and exactly like tuition money is. That makes student fee money no different from any other state money transferred to athletics other than the fact that student fees are almost always voted on and self-imposed by students. And since the Louisisna State Board of Regents rules link state support to student fees directly by a dollar-for-dollar reduction, they are exactly the same for Louisiana universities. You can't make an apples-to-apples comparison of any Louisiana university to any university that charges student fees for athletics without doing the calculations exactly as shown by Dawg06 in post #83.

For 2008-2009, 40.2% of Tech's revenues were from state money while USM's budgeted state money/student fee percentage was 32.5%. Tech's percentage should hold steady or drop for 2009-2010 due to strong revenue increases in several other areas, while USM's budgeted percentage goes up to 34.5%...student fee increase to offset other overall revenue decreases.

[CChandler]

Even USM fans have disowned that clown.

[BulldawgMom]

Athletics Contributions/Donations 2007-08
$2,064,622 - Louisiana Tech
$1,931,025 - Mississippi State

Athletics Contributions/Donations 2008-09
$2,728,546 - Louisiana Tech
$?,???,??? - Mississippi State

Where did you get these figures?


State’s 2009-10 athletic department budget is $35.9 million. Throw in Bulldog Foundation supplements, and it’s about $40 million. It does have $4 million budgeted in 2009-10 in revenue from student fees, but the large majority of its revenues are self-generated.

http://blogs.clarionledger.com/msu/2...lin-take-over/

http://www.mstateathletics.com/fls/1...B_OEM_ID=16800 (Bulldog Foundation)

[Tbone1]

Velton Knight (aka EagerEagle) is already spin-doctoring on the CUSA board...
http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=437006

That guy is a moron.

[qng001]

That guy is a moron.

Is he even a USM alumn/fan? Or just a Tech hater?