He has half a**ed many sports in a lot of places, basketball is middle of pack now, lack of facilities. New conference prematurely. President Heckler gone.
Valpo needs to move away from Labarbera ASAP
I was about to make a thread saying he needs to be fired. Then I saw this. Agree!
Probably lots of changes coming with a new president. Wouldn't be at all surprised if head of athletics is one of them.
I can understand Men's Tennis, in spite of their success, as the MVC does not support the sport. But Men's Soccer? Why not Men's S&D, which is also not supported by the MVC, and has no history of success? Just dumb...
Good thing none of us are being overdramatic here. The national average for D1 programs per school is 19. Irregardless of which programs received the bad news, this is a strategic move that was needed to be made. We are a small school that very nearly resembles D2 in student body (and therefore budget), they average 16 D2 programs per school guys. Take a breath, suns about to come up.
Note: Median undergraduate enrollment supporting that 19/school average is nearly 10,000 students. Logic is the driver gentlemen, get on board.
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Recruiting%20Fact%20Sheet%20WEB.pdf (https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Recruiting%20Fact%20Sheet%20WEB.pdf)
I don't think S&D cuts enough scholarships therefore doesn't save enough money. Same with CC. This way we can continue to be bad in those sports and BS our way to the required numbers even as more budget cuts come.
FieldGoodie05 nobody is questioning Valpo has had too many sports. However Tennis and Soccer were the long withstanding programs.
It is like any business, finances must permit expansion or you will fail. Valpo athletic department over grew their funding means. They also joined a larger conference with further travel. The team's have not been the most competitive in the MVC, that either falls on coaching, or person who hires the coaches i.e. AD.
So in recapping Mark L has:
-misinterpreted University's capability of expanding sports teams
-incorrectly budgeted resulting in losing sports teams
-moved to a conference financially and competitively they weren't ready for
-has made some head scratching hires.
These are core principals of an AD's job and Mark has failed the University. It is time for him to go.
I suppose we will lose Karen Avery now as Mike will need to move to get another job. We've got one great tennis facility for just one team.
Good post FieldGoodie
Some perspective:
Other MVC private schools -
Evansville: no football program
Drake: no baseball program
Bradley: no football program
Loyola: no football OR baseball program
The vast majority of people on this board, including me, have no real idea of the financial and other pressures facing most private schools today. For every Notre Dame and Villanova there are 25 schools grappling with rapidly rising costs and fewer students in the recruiting pool.
I suspect there will be many private schools, including some very fine ones, that will go down in the next decade. VU is taking steps to ensure they are not one of them.
I have worked with Mark LaBarbera for several years now on various athletic endeavors and I feel he has done an excellent job at this university. In addition, he is a fine man and an outstanding representative for our school.
Paul
Quote from: 78crusader on November 21, 2019, 09:44:21 AM
Some perspective:
Other MVC private schools -
Evansville: no football program
Drake: no baseball program
Bradley: no football program
Loyola: no football OR baseball program
The vast majority of people on this board, including me, have no real idea of the financial and other pressures facing most private schools today. For every Notre Dame and Villanova there are 25 schools grappling with rapidly rising costs and fewer students in the recruiting pool.
I suspect there will be many private schools, including some very fine ones, that will go down in the next decade. VU is taking steps to ensure they are not one of them.
I have worked with Mark LaBarbera for several years now on various athletic endeavors and I feel he has done an excellent job at this university. In addition, he is a fine man and an outstanding representative for our school.
Paul
Thanks for your contribution Paul, I appreciate the perspective. We are all Valpo enthusiasts so I am sure it's difficult to take contraction news like this with a grain of salt. You did a fine job and thanks for posting.
I understand the need here I just don't understand Men's Soccer. It is a MVC sponsored sport. Seems to fly in the face of what we are trying to do here.
If Men's Tennis is out, honestly how long before Men's Swimming and Bowling follow.
I never do this on here, but this one is a huge pet peeve of mine, as a lot of folks use the word. There is no such word as irregardless. The -ir becomes redundant, when paired with regardless. You are basically saying regardless regardless...
Discontinuing those sports as well sure makes sense to me. I think that some of us need to step back and take a cold-shower. Some of these posts are totally out of line and are just ridiculous. Just for the record, I haven't heard much about Gonzaga's success in tennis or soccer lately. The same goes for Murray State
I guess this is all part of a changing dynamic in College Administration as well as College Sports. Things change or, more appropriately, things need to change.
We have had very little success in Men's Soccer. We have been around .500 in win/loss seasons under Mike and have never been to the NCAA tournament (I think).
As for Mark's work, remember that under his leadership we brought back Men's and Women's Golf and also added Women's Bowling. So in that sense, he has added three and lost two. Net gain.
Quote from: valpotx on November 21, 2019, 12:45:40 PM
I never do this on here, but this one is a huge pet peeve of mine, as a lot of folks use the word. There is no such word as irregardless. The -ir becomes redundant, when paired with regardless. You are basically saying regardless regardless...
Any idea where this creeped into our vocabulary? I enjoy reading a good deal and most authors continue to use that word openly. I do see your point.
No idea, but it is heavily overused in Texas lol. I grew up hearing that all of the time.
Quote from: valpotx on November 21, 2019, 07:51:15 PMNo idea, but it is heavily overused in Texas lol. I grew up hearing that all of the time.
You might could be right.
Quote from: Valpofan2021 on November 22, 2019, 04:07:46 AM
As the AD, LaBarbera should have showed a bit more compassion for the current soccer players, and future ones as well. It makes no sense that Valpo chose to announce the discontinuation of its men's soccer program just after the NLI signing period. During the NLI signing period, programs allocate scholarship funds to incoming signees, after sorting through their current roster's financial commitments. If LaBarbera used his job-specific knowledge, he should have advised the "decision-makers" that the best time to inform the current men's squad would have been a few weeks ago before the NLI signing period began. This would have given student-athletes interested in transferring more access to scholarship funds. Good luck to those kids trying to find scholarship opportunities for this coming spring semester in just a few short weeks before the end of the fall semester. Also, informing the team a few weeks ago, would have prevented current high school seniors from signing NLIs with Valpo last week, only to learn that these contracts are null and void due to the men's soccer program being discontinued. Signing an NCAA D1 NLI after years of dedication to your sport and in the classroom is a significant achievement. Can you imagine what these kids are going through now due to LaBerbera's ill-timed announcement? It seems like LaBarbera was asleep at the wheel.
Last game was Nov 13th
FieldGoodie can defend Labarbera until he is blue in the face but a few things are actual facts
1. We lost sports programs
2. We lost them without notice uprooting approximately 50-75 people
3. His records across the board have gotten worse.
Failure Is Failure.
Quote from: Valpofan2021 on November 22, 2019, 05:40:43 AM
It doesn't matter if the last game was November 13th. At other schools, like the University of New Mexico Men's Soccer, the players and staff knew a year in advance that the program was being discontinued which allowed for all interested parties to plan accordingly. The Valpo AD and President were negligent in providing this same courtesy to the current Valpo Men's Soccer staff and student-athletes.
I would agree with you on that point regarding advance notice. By ending the programs abruptly it sends the wrong message to current and future coaches. But my dissatisfaction ends there.
So I am not disagreeing with the choice of programs, rather, the way in which it was done publicly (quickly and without warning). No one knows for sure what severance package was presented and how all that is going down. Personally, my discomfort for the way it was done is all that makes me think twice here. I still believe in a balanced budget above all else. Only the gov't can run deficits and get away with it.
P.S. Based on the posts of the "jumpers" on this forum, I don't think any of them made this point and that is why I have posted in disagreement. It's not that I disagree with their emotional tie to VU (I applaud that). What concerns me is that this becomes a runaway freight train on a myriad of topics and if a core of ppl don't post to help bring down the emotional highs I think this forum goes off its rails. If I have offended the "jumpers" over the years, I am sorry . . . but I will continue to bring my own brand of logic to points (whether ppl agree or not).
When programs get cancelled, there is always going to be several that get victimized. The approach in how the soccer and tennis programs were cancelled lack tact for sure. However, even if it were done more tactfully, folks will be pissed.
Personally I would rather see a few sports program that are successful at Valpo than several where funding and bandwidth become diluted and the results suck - which is the current situation at Valpo. Having programs just for the sake of having it without an ambition of being great or even successful makes so sense. True, some involved with those programs are going to feel the hit, but having program that consistently lose is embarrassing.
As for MLB, who knows his fate with the new president. Nothing to do with performance, but he has been around for awhile, and sometimes change is a painful but good thing. He does represent the university well.
Did we really just sign a new batch of freshmen a week before killing the program. If so that is beyond cruel.
Quote from: IndyValpo on November 22, 2019, 08:55:20 AM
Did we really just sign a new batch of freshmen a week before killing the program. If so that is beyond cruel.
Maybe I overlooked it, but where was the announcement for new signees? Thought this team was heavily underclassmen team. Were there any newcomers? Just jumped on our website and a quick glance didn't show the announcement.
Quote from: valpotx on November 21, 2019, 12:45:40 PM
I never do this on here, but this one is a huge pet peeve of mine, as a lot of folks use the word. There is no such word as irregardless. The -ir becomes redundant, when paired with regardless. You are basically saying regardless regardless...
Regardless regardless of it being a pet peeve that you apologized for I appreciate your notion to correct the grammar.
No quid pro quo
As a former staff member, I will tell all of you that the sports mix of Valpo athletics has been a topic of conversation at the board level for some time. It is sad and unfortunate when any team gets cut at any institution, and I will be honest that some of my best memories of working in athletics was my interactions with the young men of the men's soccer and tennis programs. That being said, anyone who puts this directly on Mark is uninformed and unwilling to see the big picture of higher education, Valpo, and how the entire system works.
*First, Valpo athletics is not a business. If it was, it would have been shuttered decades ago since it hemorrhages money. (only about 20 of 350 D1 schools make a profit FYI) It is an educational program.
*Second, higher education is in trouble across the country. The economy has been good which means fewer people go to school. Also, there are and will continue to be fewer 18 year-olds in the US. Enrollment everywhere will be down due to a lack of people actually being born.
*Third, the decision to cut any sport does not come from the AD or the athletics department. The board is the ultimate decider, and I know for a fact that a lot of thought was put into this choice.
*Finally, not every AD is perfect all the time. Like any human being, we all make management decisions that may turn out to be bad ones - but they happen. To say that Mark is a terrible AD or to even say that he has destroyed Valpo athletics is completely false. He twice elevated the department to two superior conferences, improved facilities the best he could with the minimal donor and university support that athletics has, increased the support staff that helps run athletics, and has expanded the coaching staffs to be more in line with the support other institutions have. If anything he has fought tirelessly to improve a department that the University seemingly just tolerates despite the incredible students that represent Valpo in the most positive of lights.
For years I have seen the complaints about what Valpo athletics isn't doing and how terrible it is. Just know that everyone who works in athletics is doing what they can with what they have. The University community as a whole (including alums, booster, etc. ) need to take some ownership rather than point the finger at the guy standing at the front.
I really appreciate your comments "ks". You are so right in that often times we react too quickly and then say things without having any knowledge of what has really happened and how decisions are made. How quickly we forget the things you mentioned i.e. upgrading twice to "higher" conference affiliation, improved facilities among other accomplishments. I agree that MLaB has done an overall fine job and while I know that we all make mistakes, his job performance as a whole is very good. The tough decisions often times are what determines future successes. I look forward to bigger and better things, especially with our basketball program and facility upgrades. I must say the sooner the better. Keep up the good work MLaB and thanks again for your post "ks".
How long has MLB been in the AD role?
That is a very long time, maybe a change and a fresh mind is required to overcome the excuses anime this out.
Quote from: usc4valpo on November 23, 2019, 09:02:03 AM
That is a very long time, maybe a change and a fresh mind is required to overcome the excuses anime this out.
I hear Lynn Swann and Pat Hayden are available... ::)
Look, all of us want to see VU athletics be successful, yet our current athletic director seems to have been doing a solid job given the limited resources available. That doesn't mean every decision is perfect, much less every outcome. I'm willing to defer to him because I don't know that anyone could have done better.
Quote from: usc4valpo on November 23, 2019, 09:02:03 AM
That is a very long time, maybe a change and a fresh mind is required to overcome the excuses anime this out.
Please list your grievances.
Overall, we are way below the norm overall in athletics in the MVC. footballl is in an embarrassing situation and swimming should not even be a varsity sport.
Valpo doesn't play MVC football.
I understand 24 but the program has not met expectations for awhile.
Quote from: usc4valpo on November 23, 2019, 02:36:57 PMI understand 24 but the program has not met expectations for awhile.
There are many reasons for keeping/dropping programs for universities. Valpo did not do anything out of the ordinary in dropping the two sports in the grand scheme of things.
Frankly, the reaction I've seen has been overly emotional which is somewhat understandable and unlearned in some/many cases which is not.
ksValpo01, I understand where you are coming from....HOWEVER,
you are missing one thing. Valpo advanced two conferences due to the Drew's, academics of the university, and the location.
Not because of facilities, not because we have sponsor 21 19 sports, and especially not because of MLB.
Any AD could have navigated those steps with the Drew's, academics and location of Valpo.
Oklahomanick is dead on, without the Drew's we'd still be in the summit league.
For those who think it is emotional talk to many of athletes during Labarbera tenure and they will tell you he hasn't been the best.
Super, I mean super nice guy, represents University great, but eventually consistency and positive results are expected.
Quote from: valpofb16 on November 25, 2019, 12:49:40 PM
Oklahomanick is dead on, without the Drew's we'd still be in the summit league.
For those who think it is emotional talk to many of athletes during Labarbera tenure and they will tell you he hasn't been the best.
Super, I mean super nice guy, represents University great, but eventually consistency and positive results are expected.
Life isn't lived in a vacuum, you cannot isolate one from the other. I will have to defer to some athletes or fans that have interacted with our AD but from a far, I just don't see the complaints landing. When I was at VU 2001-2005 we were in a crap league and now we are 2 iterations better. I'd ask those of you concerned to give us actual examples of inferiority that we can reasonably attribute to LaBarbera. Real world verified examples as to his blunders. (You all did a wonderful job with examples of LeCrones follies)
What are the marks against LaBarbera? Help those of us on the fence to see from your view point please.
All I can think of is obviously Osteen and women's hoop coach.
I think MLB has done a good job, but he has been in the post for 15 years and perhaps a fresh attitude is needed. Valpo sports and consistently at the bottom half on the MVC and Pioneer, with several dead last.
A change in AD won't matter if they are not given the resources needed to be competitive in the MVC and PFL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: covufan on November 25, 2019, 09:26:38 PM
A change in AD won't matter if they are not given the resources needed to be competitive in the MVC and PFL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Precisely my point, this appears to be a lack of resources and even a fresh new start only solves the minor aches and pains. I personally don't believe in change for the sake of change, at times that is what happens in our corporate world where you see 3 to 5 year sprints and a corporation that is gutted afterwards.
I am guilty of emotions more than some but to help change the minds of those of us not seeing it . . . what has to change that does not entail sizable financial investments? Having a change czar solves nothing unless you have the means to make those changes take hold.
So why is Valpo so strapped for athletic cash compared to Drake, Bradley and Evansville? I get Drake as I am sure they make a killing with the Drake relays, what about Bradley and Evansville?
Quote from: usc4valpo on November 26, 2019, 09:42:30 AM
So why is Valpo so strapped for athletic cash compared to Drake, Bradley and Evansville? I get Drake as I am sure they make a killing with the Drake relays, what about Bradley and Evansville?
This is not to truly answer your question, but the aforementioned have been in the MVC getting Wichita State / Creighton / UNI money for how much longer than us? Ok, Butler helped us out
but pre-2010 in the Mid-Con days . . . . with that travel and lack of revenue had to be a substantial revenue disparity.
Valpo athletic funding issues are related to several things.
1. Most schools spend more on athletics than they make and cut budgets elsewhere to make up for the lost revenue so most everyone is "strapped for cash" in that regard but choose to be more willing to run bigger deficits
2(this is the biggest one). Valpo's history with sports, especially Division 1 is fraught and not well-established with most major donors being more interested in Academics (fine with me) or Chapel Life (probably not as necessary although I am a big fan of the institute). So both institutional, board , and donor support is not there. There also seems to be little interest in city/university partnership for athletics.
3. Our resources have been spread too thin which is what the cutting of teams is supposed to address.
1 and 3 are not the major issues. 2.really is and its partially because the donors and board don't care about athletics or even student life in general outside of the chapel it seems. The largest donation the university has ever had went to the chapel, my guess is at other schools that is not the case. If the cutting of these two teams doesn't shake loose some donor money towards athletics I just don't know what will, short of hanging on until a new generation of Alums are in the big money seat. I know everyone thinks the Drews have already "done a lot" for Valpo Basketball but they could probably pretty easily kickstart the funding for the ARC renovation and the longer they go without financially giving back the more some of the rumors I've heard about the sons at least ring true. Hell, change the name to the Drew and commission a statue of the iconic hug after "The Shot" and put it outside if it gets them to donate more.
Final note. In his recent Union Street Podcast Oren mentioned rumors about money to upgrade Baseball Facilities which probably means it's more than just rumors if he's comfortable enough addressing them on the pod and/or if he's hearing about them to that extent.
I've heard the anticipation is that they expect to be done with the Endowment campaign a year early )this Spring, which makes me wonder if they have some big donations taking shape since that would mean raising a little less than 30 million in the next four months and the only thing i've heard about regarding bigger asks relate to athletics
Great analysis Crusader05, particularly on your third item. We are definitely spread too thin in athletics and overall as a university. I think there are opportunities to cut programs and majors and I think we will be better in the long run.
agreed, cut the law school.
Quote from: covufan on November 25, 2019, 09:26:38 PM
A change in AD won't matter if they are not given the resources needed to be competitive in the MVC and PFL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And you know this for a fact..no chance a fresh approach makes a difference? Under this theory why do we replace coaches?
Quote from: IndyValpo on November 28, 2019, 02:35:06 PM
Quote from: covufan on November 25, 2019, 09:26:38 PM
A change in AD won't matter if they are not given the resources needed to be competitive in the MVC and PFL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And you know this for a fact..no chance a fresh approach makes a difference? Under this theory why do we replace coaches?
If you are lost in the woods and you start to run . . . . you're still lost. Identify, plan and adjust. I'm allergic to the word "change" without hearing ideas for how and where. Come on guys, I know you have some good ideas. Share more than just saying "change" please.
Cut sports of minimal participation and energy. Don't have varsity sports that are just there without a reasonable mission for success. We also need to determine the Return on investment for the football program.
AD has said in the past the football program results in amongst the largest groupings of alumni donations. If this is or remains the case, it's not going anywhere.
Sports in themselves are not simply about wins and losses in terms of value to the school.
24, I agree on the donation part, but goals certainly need to be set in place for football success. Right now football is there just to say it is there. The record in the past 15 years has been very poor, and students and alums are apathetic toward the program. Attention needs to be placed to make football better. All the Valpo alums I work with believe football needs to be dropped. Yes, it may be more than wins and losses, but going 2-9 and 1-11 should certainly not be the standard
Two areas to consider from this discussion:
1. Strategy. Good strategy requires not only considering what new ventures to consider, but also making hard decisions about where not to invest and where to divest or discontinue. Good organizations do not invest heavily in everything - they make hard decisions that do not please everyone. Universities tend to try to please everyone. I do not have the numbers on the football program, not do I have cost figures for the men's soccer and tennis programs, but hard decisions need to be made to avoid being mediocre at everything (or, indeed, sustaining the primary enterprise).
2. The 'Great Person' theory. In various comments, it seems that people think that everything would be better if we had the mythical 'great person'. Someone who inspires everyone to always perform at their highest level. Someone who will magically get people to donate millions. Such people do not exist (or are extremely rare and hard to identify). While I think leaders matter, many people tend to grossly underestimate the constraining forces from the organization, the economy, etc. If you rationally believe that you can get someone who can realistically move the athletic department towards better results, then maybe consider succession but really think about the effectiveness of the current AD. But, if you believe that you need to get someone else because you can find the mythical 'great person', then you are more likely to hire someone who is either very ineffective or makes everything worse. The 'big bet' or 'all in' approach to leadership is far more likely to lead to the organization dying than flourishing.
Quote from: usc4valpo on November 29, 2019, 07:47:25 AM
24, I agree on the donation part, but goals certainly need to be set in place for football success. Right now football is there just to say it is there. The record in the past 15 years has been very poor, and students and alums are apathetic toward the program. Attention needs to be placed to make football better. All the Valpo alums I work with believe football needs to be dropped. Yes, it may be more than wins and losses, but going 2-9 and 1-11 should certainly not be the standard
See below for the response I gave to usc4valpo on November 15, 2012, 12:33:15 PM. NOTHING HAS CHANGED! I agree with usc4valpo that goals need to be set and coach Fox needs to work toward meeting them,
given the right resources by the administration. If Fox can't get it done (I am very encouraged by coach's attitude) then we need to access both the amount of resources given to the program and the coaching staff. We are not dropping football, just talk to anyone that has done it at this level and they will tell you it is a nightmare. It took UE at least 10 years to recover and many would tell you that it still hasn't completely come back.
QuoteIt appears that the "get rid of football" movement has gained a little more popularity on the board, but those in support of that action really have not thought this through. Having been on an auxiliary board at the University of Evansville I can tell you that many people there wish the decision to drop football would have never taken place in 1997. This decision had a much larger ripple effect then anticipated, fundraising was severely hampered and many disgruntled football alumni and current players spoke ill of the way things were handled by the administration. Even student admissions was affected by a perception that the school was having money problems and was in decline. Just last month an "Athletic Leadership Team" consisting of Aces football alums, athletic department staff and faculty worked to make a report alongside experts from Carr Sports Associates, a consulting firm run by former University of Houston Athletic Director Bill Carr to the university trustees asking for a decision concerning bringing football back to UE. They were turned down because of the estimated 10 million dollar price tag associated with restarting the program. The wound still festers. If anyone on this board thinks that shutting down the program would be a simple solution contained solely in the athletic department they are being extremely naive.
The current response by the soccer alums, some on this board, are but a trickle compared to the tsunami that would happen if football were cut.
When I refer to the cutting programs, be clear that I am not just referring to football. You want to be cautious of diluting programs.
However, regarding football, students and alums are not attending games and the product for the past 15 years has been well below par. Keeping status quo with chronic apathy is a state of insanity.
Quote from: usc4valpo on November 30, 2019, 07:44:54 AMWhen I refer to the cutting programs, be clear that I am not just referring to football. You want to be cautious of diluting programs. However, regarding football, students and alums are not attending games and the product for the past 15 years has been well below par. Keeping status quo with chronic apathy is a state of insanity.
Insanity would be cutting the program which provides the largest segment or amongst the largest segment of donations to the school and may fund a good portion of the athletic program with the money game(s).
Quote from: JD24 on November 30, 2019, 10:05:06 AM
Quote from: usc4valpo on November 30, 2019, 07:44:54 AMWhen I refer to the cutting programs, be clear that I am not just referring to football. You want to be cautious of diluting programs. However, regarding football, students and alums are not attending games and the product for the past 15 years has been well below par. Keeping status quo with chronic apathy is a state of insanity.
Insanity would be cutting the program which provides the largest segment or amongst the largest segment of donations to the school and may fund a good portion of the athletic program with the money game(s).
What data, not guesses, do you have to support the position that the football program is strongly associated with the amount and frequency of donations to the university?
After listening to 24, it may be true that non-scholarship football is the cash cow for Valparaiso, and the reason it exists
Quote from: vu84v2 on November 30, 2019, 02:04:38 PMQuote from: JD24 on November 30, 2019, 10:05:06 AMQuote from: usc4valpo on November 30, 2019, 07:44:54 AMWhen I refer to the cutting programs, be clear that I am not just referring to football. You want to be cautious of diluting programs. However, regarding football, students and alums are not attending games and the product for the past 15 years has been well below par. Keeping status quo with chronic apathy is a state of insanity.
Insanity would be cutting the program which provides the largest segment or amongst the largest segment of donations to the school and may fund a good portion of the athletic program with the money game(s).
What data, not guesses, do you have to support the position that the football program is strongly associated with the amount and frequency of donations to the university?
Comment from MLB some years ago. Could have changed of course but unlikely.
If Valparaiso is making revenue on football based on various factors (enrollment, donations, games against NDSU, etc.) to make it profitable, then I can understand why football is provided given the apathy and consistent poor performance - in the Sagarin, Valpo is now 256 of 256. Unless you are profitable, having football without success metrics and commitment is insane.
also, to reply to FWAlum, is it correct to assume that what happened at Evansville will happen at Valparaiso? 2 different schools, 2 different locations, 2 different missions
I'm not a Valpo alum, but I am a big fan/follower of small college football. When a work opportunity brought me to NWI several years ago, I started following VU FB. Something I've often wondered is...
WHERE IS THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF THE VALPO FOOTBALL ALUMNI?!
100 years of VU football would suggest that there MUST BE some football alums who have done well enough to get behind the program. Seems like other schools with similar alumni bases, enrollment size, etc. have athletic facilities, or scoreboards, or pressboxes, or SOMETHING bearing the name of an alumni family or alumni-owned business or alumni-managed foundation.
Any speculation as to why this hasn't been the case at Valpo?
They have funded things like a new locker room and updated weight room and offices as well as I believe other more performance based things. I believe that outside of basketball Football has the best facilities and support in that way and much of that is due to donors.
If that's the case O5, then that's good hear, except...
If those smallish (but important!) upgrades are the results of football alumni donations, it would be interesting to see what athletic dept. funds, if any, are being spent on beyond basic operating expenses (travel, officials, salaries, etc.).
Are there ANY athletic dept. funds being budgeted annually to improve ANY component of the program?
Quote from: NWIGuy on December 02, 2019, 12:35:13 PM
If that's the case O5, then that's good hear, except...
If those smallish (but important!) upgrades are the results of football alumni donations, it would be interesting to see what athletic dept. funds, if any, are being spent on beyond basic operating expenses (travel, officials, salaries, etc.).
Are there ANY athletic dept. funds being budgeted annually to improve ANY component of the program?
[/b]
Clearly adding a full time weight training coach dedicated to just the football team is a significant commitment. No other program, to my knowledge, has such a dedicated coach who isn't shared with other sports.
Adding a full-time dedicated S & C coach to staff was HUGE!! BIG step in the right direction. But here's a question...
Was that position funded SEPARATELY and IN ADDITION TO the rest of the football coaching staff? OR... Did Fox decide to allocate his coaching salary budget in such a way that the S & C position is funded, but some younger position coaches are making significantly less than they were in the past?
If the budget "pool" was increased to include a S & C position, then that is, indeed, a significant contribution from the athletic dept.
This football "profit" debate has been around for a while. The athletics department per se takes a pretty good loss on football.
The reason to keep football is for enrollment in the University as a whole. Football allows you draw a few dozen more male students who want to play football as a secondary reason to choose Valpo. The football interest combines with an academic reason. No one chooses Valpo (or any other non-scholarship school) solely to play football. But they might choose NOT to go to Valpo if football isn't available to them.
Every university struggles to get a high enough male to female ratio now. Football helps with that balance. I am just re-cycling old arguments for the benefit of some who may have missed them over the years.
Quote from: crusadermoe on December 02, 2019, 04:51:09 PM
The reason to keep football is for enrollment in the University as a whole...
Every university struggles to get a high enough male to female ratio now. Football helps with that balance. I am just re-cycling old arguments for the benefit of some who may have missed them over the years.
Jacksonville apparently missed your argument. They dropped football today.
Quote from: Lurking Dog on December 03, 2019, 09:54:06 AM
Quote from: crusadermoe on December 02, 2019, 04:51:09 PM
The reason to keep football is for enrollment in the University as a whole...
Every university struggles to get a high enough male to female ratio now. Football helps with that balance. I am just re-cycling old arguments for the benefit of some who may have missed them over the years.
Jacksonville apparently missed your argument. They dropped football today.
And they are already 64% female. The second worst home attendance in the PFL. Very small undergrad enrollment (2292) Interestingly enough, they are offering a full ride scholarship to any undergrad football player who stays in school. Doesn't make much sense to me.
I realize I'm late to the party but football at small schools (especially non-scholarship football) = male enrollment. No football means you become much more female. At a Christian school during a time period where Christian masculinity and male leadership is sorely lacking in the world, I don't think Valpo can really achieve its mission without having a football team. As a Lutheran university you need to churn out men looking to make an impact in the worlds they live in.
Quote from: VUOR63 on December 03, 2019, 02:58:33 PM
I realize I'm late to the party but football at small schools (especially non-scholarship football) = male enrollment. No football means you become much more female. At a Christian school during a time period where Christian masculinity and male leadership is sorely lacking in the world, I don't think Valpo can really achieve its mission without having a football team. As a Lutheran university you need to churn out men looking to make an impact in the worlds they live in.
This is complete nonsense. If Valpo has 80 football players, then they represent approximately 5% of the total undergraduate male population and maybe 2.5% of the total undergraduate population. If football makes sense financially, fine - keep it. But don't keep it if it is a major cost because (arrgghh!!!) some people think it is somehow the difference-making vehicle for male leadership.
And since you brought up the university mission and developing leaders, it is clear that Valpo's mission is to develop leaders
regardless of gender. If you feel that men are inherently better leaders than women (or vice versa), you are not fit for any leadership position.
OK, let's put some numbers here. The average cost of attendance (including tuition, room & board, fees, etc.) is $56,900. According to the same page,https://www.valpo.edu/student-financial-services/tuition-fees/ (https://www.valpo.edu/student-financial-services/tuition-fees/) the average aid award is "in the range of $30,000." So, if there are 80 players paying a net $26,900, this results in $2.3M of revenue to VU per yer.
I'm fairly certain that the expenses related to football are much less than $2.3M, so it ends up being a net positive for the University.
Naturally, this is a back of the envelope calculation - the expenses related to food go down if there are 80 less students on meal plan, and perhaps a few less professors are needed. Yet the revenue implications seem pretty strong, especially if one considers that there are typically 30+ freshmen players, some of which depart from the roster yet remain enrolled. I'm sure the AD has considered these kinds of direct financial implications in much more detail.
Beyond this, there is quite a bit of goodwill that the football team may generate. How many future students (regardless of gender) visited campus with their parents for homecoming or a football game, and ended up attending later even as non-athletes? Is it helpful to have alumni events during the football team's visit to an opponent? I have no idea how to value these, yet they are important considerations as well.
valpo95 - Definitely some good points and your conclusion may well be correct. However, you also need to estimate the cost of replacing those 80 football players/students with 80 other students. Let's say that you had to give $5,000 more (per student per year) in scholarships to other students to replace those 80 football players. That would be an annual cost of $400,000. If the cost of the football program is greater than the expected cost to replace the football players with other students, then it is financially more sound to eliminate the football program.
Don't misread what I am saying. While I believe that the financial sustainability of the university is the greatest priority and question the value of the football program, I do recognize that there is some goodwill from the football program - though I would argue that it is not nearly as great as some may believe. I also think your revenue figures (total tuition from football players is low), which would strengthen your argument.
Quote from: valpo95 on December 03, 2019, 07:53:19 PMOK, let's put some numbers here. The average cost of attendance (including tuition, room & board, fees, etc.) is $56,900. According to the same page,https://www.valpo.edu/student-financial-services/tuition-fees/ the average aid award is "in the range of $30,000." So, if there are 80 players paying a net $26,900, this results in $2.3M of revenue to VU per yer.
I'm fairly certain that the expenses related to football are much less than $2.3M, so it ends up being a net positive for the University.
Add to that the 13,000 folks who attended home games. If 75% were paying, at $10 a head, the is another 98,000 plus hot dog revenue ;D -- Also, we probably get between 100 and 200,000 for body bag games. I posted somewhere else where we will get over 200,000 for playing NDSU in a couple of years.
Interesting perspectives here. I will say this - if you keep football, then commit and not be satisfied that the team is ranked dead last (256 of 256) in the sagarin poll.
Also, cost for grounds and insurance are a huge expense.
Quote from: vu84v2 on December 03, 2019, 08:46:37 PM
valpo95 - Definitely some good points and your conclusion may well be correct. However, you also need to estimate the cost of replacing those 80 football players/students with 80 other students. Let's say that you had to give $5,000 more (per student per year) in scholarships to other students to replace those 80 football players. That would be an annual cost of $400,000. If the cost of the football program is greater than the expected cost to replace the football players with other students, then it is financially more sound to eliminate the football program.
Yes, clearly there are more complicated considerations, and one would think that these sorts of analyses have been done. Yet VU is facing declining enrollments, and the pressures for private colleges and universities are difficult and likely to increase over the next decade.
The other thing to consider (which I didn't know during my days at VU) is that the "scholarship" / aid awards are not really funded awards in most cases. They are discounts off of the sticker price of attendance - they are available to every student that applies. This is not unique to Valpo: Many peer institutions follow a high-tuition/high-discount model. (One theory is that a high price is a signal of quality, and there are some students who do in fact pay the full price). In one notable example of a school going to a low-tuition/low-discount model, Concordia St. Paul cut their tuition from 29,700 in 2012 to 19,700 in 2013 and correspondingly cut the "scholarships" they offered by a similar amount. http://www.csp.edu/wp-content/uploads/CSP-Fact-Sheet.pdf (http://www.csp.edu/wp-content/uploads/CSP-Fact-Sheet.pdf)
I'd also add that there are funded scholarships (such as for basketball) that are true awards, which are not part of the discount model described above.
So, if eighty less football players are there, that doesn't automatically mean that eighty more students get that average aid award.
The other thing for those who are considering attending VU is to not get caught up in the sticker price, yet compare the net price after the award decision is offered.
Sadly, the whole discounting/sticker game is an appeal to the vanity of students/parents.
But it is a psychological reality. A few years ago, JC Penney tried to square up their pricing for a while and just got hammered on their sales. It went something like this. At JCP during that test period, you would buy a $3 pair of socks for $3.00
I'm not ashamed to say that I shop at Kohls. At Kohls, you see the same pair of socks, but it has a sticker price of $12.00. Then you can walk off with a receipt saying, "YOU JUST SAVED $9.00 !!! or 75% :)
Valpo sponsored 21 sports up until they cut MSO and MTN. I should know. The NCAA counts them as 21.
As for the Drew's, please note that they had no part in the move to the MVC. Continuing to point out the sweet 16 run from 1998 means nothing to anyone. Its a great piece of nostalgia, but the University missed a huge opportunity when they treated it like a one-off. See Gonzaga for further information, since they started becoming big in the same year.
Finally, facilities, University leadership and the support of rich donors would have an impact on one's ability to run a successful athletics program. If you don't have permission from the top administrators of the university to cultivate big money makers as athletics donors, you're dead in the water.
Quote from: vu72 on December 04, 2019, 08:30:04 AMhe is another 98,000 plus hot dog revenue
the Football Concessions are run by the VU Guild. They distribute the funds to Vu students and student organizations.
Quote from: ksValpo01 on December 05, 2019, 01:41:16 PM
Valpo sponsored 21 sports up until they cut MSO and MTN. I should know. The NCAA counts them as 21.
As for the Drew's, please note that they had no part in the move to the MVC. Continuing to point out the sweet 16 run from 1998 means nothing to anyone. Its a great piece of nostalgia, but the University missed a huge opportunity when they treated it like a one-off. See Gonzaga for further information, since they started becoming big in the same year.
Finally, facilities, University leadership and the support of rich donors would have an impact on one's ability to run a successful athletics program. If you don't have permission from the top administrators of the university to cultivate big money makers as athletics donors, you're dead in the water.
Men's basketball received a $2 million contribution to endow recruiting. It isn't like there aren't any big money donors involved in sports.
That $2M was certainly generous but a one time donation. The basketball program requires financial commitments like that annually. The basketball program has done more for Valpo than what Valpo has done for the basketball program.
Quote from: usc4valpo on December 05, 2019, 06:32:07 PM
That $2M was certainly generous but a one time donation. The basketball program requires financial commitments like that annually. The basketball program has done more for Valpo than what Valpo has done for the basketball program.
Annually? For effect or is there more about the budget some of us don't know?
I am saying basketball is the Valpo flagship sport and needs to be treated and funded appropriately similar to the top half of the MVC.
Let's remember that the $2M donation was endowed. Without the actual numbers that the university uses or the terms of the donation, you can make the assumption that it pays about 5% of the principal (equal to a fairly conservative expected rate of return) to the athletic department/basketball program each year. Thus, it operationally functions the same as if someone was donating $100K per year in perpetuity for recruiting. Then (and I have no way of knowing whether this is true), it is possible that the university uses some or all of that $100K to offset annual funds that it needs to provide to the athletic department. I would suggest that you not panic at that thought, because it is also possible that the donor requires that the money increase the overall athletic department and basketball program budget in the terms of the donation.
Quote from: usc4valpo on December 05, 2019, 09:26:05 PM
I am saying basketball is the Valpo flagship sport and needs to be treated and funded appropriately similar to the top half of the MVC.
I do not disagree with that statement, but if you assume that revenues will remain constant what programs or activities would you target for reduced spending? Companies and good organizations (like Valpo) do not run deficits like the federal government.
ok, so what programs at Valpo are stagnant with little value or no growth potential to the university? What programs are not net positive? Start with that.
Assuming we are losing money on football (perhaps a bad assumption), after all the factors are calculated, and the student/alumni apathy is consistently low, and the performance is poor, and you do not make significant changes to improve it, then why keep the program?
Quote from: usc4valpo on December 06, 2019, 09:12:19 AM
ok, so what programs at Valpo are stagnant with little value or no growth potential to the university? What programs are not net positive? Start with that.
Assuming we are losing money on football (perhaps a bad assumption), after all the factors are calculated, and the student/alumni apathy is consistently low, and the performance is poor, and you do not make significant changes to improve it, then why keep the program?
I presume you are talking athletics and if so there are almost all operating at a loss as only Football, Basketball and Volleyball are "revenue" sports. The problem is that Title 9 won't let you eliminate women's sports.
If, on the other hand you are talking about academic programs, that is under constant review. In the General Valpo discussion area I posted a radio interview with President Heckler. It is worth the time to hear it. The biggest financial bogie for Valpo has been the Law School and this is its last year.
I think you can eliminate Wonen's sports even with Title IX, as long as you eliminate men's sports, which Valpo has done.
And yes, I am talking about all programs at Valpo, not just athletics. You dont want to run your operations too diluted.
Does anyone else feel in awe at the fact that our tiny 3,000 student University is playing in a Top 10 basketball conference? Sometimes we don't look back at the journey the program has taken since many of us were walking around the campus. Sometimes I lose track of the fact that our biggest conference hurdles to clear 15-years ago were ORU, WIU and SUU.
I plan on attending the game this weekend where we are hosting CMU. This game and that of our Non-Conference schedule has remained sort of the same over those years but my excitement is now in the conference games we are slated to play. I cannot say that was the case for much of my time watching the program.
For me anyways, I am appreciative of what Mark LaBarbera has done for our program and look forward to the growth we can display in the near future.
Agree strongly. Two conference changes have upgraded our stature. With ESPN crawls across the screen, we are now identified in the public mind. it also helps to locate us in the national mind with Iowa/Illinois/Missouri/Indiana and some good brands like Loyola, Drake, Bradley, and Evansville.
That is much better than Southern Utah, Youngstown, Oral Roberts, Centenary, UMKC, Oakland (California?) Detroit/RoboCop of yesteryears. We forget how far we have climbed! This message board was once satured with pleas to leave the Mid-Continent(Summit) to join a new conference I was one of the loudest.
We also compete in a conference tourney that is well branded and attended. Arch Madness!! (icold, cavernous, and dangerous Detroit anyone?)
MLB, given limited resources and lack of empathy from the Valpo board, has done a decent job. However, if you want to grow, you usually have to change how activities are carried out. Sometimes different ideas and strategies are good.
Quote from: usc4valpo on December 07, 2019, 08:11:01 AMMLB, given limited resources and lack of empathy from the Valpo board, has done a decent job. However, if you want to grow, you usually have to change how activities are carried out. Sometimes different ideas and strategies are good.
Yeah, Mark's a good guy and has done a good job.
Agreed - he is a good guy and has done a good Job, although being a "good guy" and a doing a good job as of today may not be the solution for the future. This is a difficult situation. MLB was in a tough situation reducing sports but my feeling is that it has to be done.
I think Valpo should continue reducing athletic programs and academic programs that do not contribute to mission success. Yes it is painful but these are decisions that well-paid employees have to make.
Like it or not, running a university has many similarities to running a corporation, especially in 2019.
To put everything in perspective, I decided to look back at where Valpo basketball was ten years ago. The Horizon League in the 2009-2010 season consisted of Butler, Cleveland State, Detroit, Green Bay, Loyola, Milwaukee, UIC, Valparaiso, Wright State, Youngstown State. In the decade since then, three teams have progressed significantly: Butler, Loyola, and Valparaiso. If we contrast these programs, we would have to agree Butler made the biggest leap forward to the Big East and had the most success on the court and in national exposure. Loyola received a great deal of national exposure with its tournament run to the Final Four and the celebrity of Sister Jean, plus they have done an excellent job updating their facilities. Valparaiso has joined Loyola at the higher tier MVC, but is yet to see the success or national exposure (and financial rewards) experienced by Butler and Loyola.
Consequently, we can be pleased Valparaiso is one of the three programs to rise from the Horizon League; however, we must acknowledge thus far Valpo has not stepped up in its on court performance or in its profile as a team in an upper-tier conference. I don't place all the blame on LaBarbera because he is limited by what appears to be a lack of support; nevertheless, he is the public figure representing Valpo Athletics. The VU administration (from Heckler to the Athletics Department) can be credited with the step up, but it must also be criticized for lacking a display of knowledge or action in more sophisticated publicity, promotion, and physical appearance of facilities.
It almost seems as if Valpo advanced to the MVC when given the opportunity, as fans hoped they would, but the administration was unprepared for everything that accompanies such an upward move. Unfortunately, it must be noted as well that Valpo's move to the MVC coincidentally coincided with the closing of the Law School and other recent economic concerns for universities like Valpo, resulting in conditions that likely hamper fuller support for athletics and leading to consequences such as the end of men's tennis and soccer.
Quote from: valpopal on December 07, 2019, 12:09:28 PMUnfortunately, it must be noted as well that Valpo's move to the MVC coincidentally coincided with the closing of the Law School and other recent economic concerns for universities like Valpo, resulting in conditions that likely hamper fuller support for athletics and leading to consequences such as the end of men's tennis and soccer.
Finally, at the end of a long post, you acknowledge the reality.
I agree that Mark LaBarbera has done a fine job with limited resources. A lot of new money has gone into our "major" athletic programs to upgrade facilities, etc. including I believe around $500,00 for TV facilities and equipment to meet MVC standards. Perhaps the Administration got caught off guard when we made the move to the MVC and then the Law School thing. However remember that you have to make the move to the MVC when the opportunity arises. If we hadn't, we might not have had the chance to make that move until who knows when. I commend Mark L and the Administration for making the move when we did even though it may take a little longer to meet all of the upgrading needed. It is evident that they are working toward meeting those goals and hopefully then will come sooner rather than later.
64 - good response, but Valpo needs to expedite the transformance to becoming a true committed MVC member.