Loyola invited to MVC per an AP story

[valpo64]

Are you serious???    Comparing Valpo to Loyola?     Get real!!

[crusadermoe]

I hated to start this whole Loyola thread when the news broke.    Now the RPI rank is rubbing a surprise dose of salt in the wounds.

Loyola RPI rank is #60 today.    (Green Bay is #31).   

This brings up my old frustration that I noted in my first post.   When the MVC visited the VU campus, they could not have failed to note that EVERY ONE OF the numerous NEW VU BUILDINGS since 1999 was built on a scale far over-sized for its current rate of usage and our student population. 

Was an "if you build it they will come" rationale employed?    The MVC could not have missed that point.   There is some consolation, though.   We can be proud that we very well may lead the nation in building square footage, fireplaces, and couch space for capita FTE student.   What has been the enrollment consequence of a new 30,000 square foot library a gazillion square foot union, an expensive weather building, and a big stone German House built to house 12-15 students.   German and meteorology are doubtful draws of enrollment increases.     Meanwhile the union never included a single fitness element inside that massive building.  Yet, plenty of places to recline on a couch and read poetry.           

[okinawatyphoon]

I hated to start this whole Loyola thread when the news broke.    Now the RPI rank is rubbing a surprise dose of salt in the wounds.

Loyola RPI rank is #60 today.    (Green Bay is #31).   

This brings up my old frustration that I noted in my first post.   When the MVC visited the VU campus, they could not have failed to note that EVERY ONE OF the numerous NEW VU BUILDINGS since 1999 was built on a scale far over-sized for its current rate of usage and our student population. 

Was an "if you build it they will come" rationale employed?    The MVC could not have missed that point.   There is some consolation, though.   We can be proud that we very well may lead the nation in building square footage, fireplaces, and couch space for capita FTE student.   What has been the enrollment consequence of a new 30,000 square foot library a gazillion square foot union, an expensive weather building, and a big stone German House built to house 12-15 students.   German and meteorology are doubtful draws of enrollment increases.     Meanwhile the union never included a single fitness element inside that massive building.  Yet, plenty of places to recline on a couch and read poetry.           

Not to change this to (yet another) facilities discussion, but how do you know that our facilities are "far over-sized" for our current student population? When those buildings were built, we were at about 3800 students.....now we are at 4500-4600 and still increasing. Our library, union, and meteorology facilities were woefully small and outdated, and as a recent grad I can say that while the new union and new library feel big, they certainly don't feel empty or under-utilized....on the contrary they felt very well-utilized. When I gave tours to families and prospective students, they were amazed at our facilities and I have no doubt that it helped convince some students to come here.

As far as the German building is concerned, I have a feeling that was built from a targeted donation (someone correct me if I'm wrong). In order for Valpo to flourish, it needs to build on niche programs to distinguish itself from peer institutions. German and meteorology are niche programs that have proven to be successful draws for students (meteorology the bigger draw of the two). Case in point: The meteorology program drew me to Valpo (even though I didn't stick with the program). If a program can draw me, a high school student from Japan with a 4.16 GPA and second in my class to Valpo, then I'm sure it's drawn others. Have the benefits outweighed the costs? I would argue yes.

[VULB#62]

Tough to do sour grapes here. 

That 10-2 record shows a 25 pt loss to Michigan State @MSU and a 13 loss to Tulane @ Gentile.  With the exception of a 13 and 10 point wins over D-II's Rockhurst and McKendrie respectively to open the season,  all other games were against D-I opponents and include a pretty big 62-44 beat-down of Texas Tech.  Their OOC record looks at face value to appear more credible overall than ours (i.e., no Goshens, IU-SBs) and they did beat a BCS school (TT).  I'll leave the real comparisons to the RPI guys on our board.

This with a roster that has 3 seniors, 4 juniors, 6 freshman and 1 sophomore.  Tallest player is 6'9 (F) and then they go 6'7 (J), 3 @ 6'6 (all F), and the rest 6'5 or shorter. 

FWIW - in 6 home games at palatial Gentile Arena they have averaged 1193 fans per game over 6 contests and had their 2nd biggest crown against Tulane (1378).  Rockhurst outdrew Tulane by 192 fans. 

More FWIW -- They did draw 5449 at an away win  @ UIC (77-67).

[vu72]

I hated to start this whole Loyola thread when the news broke.    Now the RPI rank is rubbing a surprise dose of salt in the wounds.

Loyola RPI rank is #60 today.    (Green Bay is #31).   

This brings up my old frustration that I noted in my first post.   When the MVC visited the VU campus, they could not have failed to note that EVERY ONE OF the numerous NEW VU BUILDINGS since 1999 was built on a scale far over-sized for its current rate of usage and our student population. 

Was an "if you build it they will come" rationale employed?    The MVC could not have missed that point.   There is some consolation, though.   We can be proud that we very well may lead the nation in building square footage, fireplaces, and couch space for capita FTE student.   What has been the enrollment consequence of a new 30,000 square foot library a gazillion square foot union, an expensive weather building, and a big stone German House built to house 12-15 students.   German and meteorology are doubtful draws of enrollment increases.     Meanwhile the union never included a single fitness element inside that massive building.  Yet, plenty of places to recline on a couch and read poetry.           

Why would they put a fitness center in the union when they had recently completed a stand-alone fitness center?  As pointed out, the average student, in today's world, is looking carefully at things like unions and libraries. The powers understood that to stay competitive these facilities needed to be top notch.

[78crusader]

We on this board have reached a milestone of sorts ... someone complaining that the VU facilities are TOO LARGE.

Paul

[HC]

These facility conversations 

[historyman]

These facility conversations 

That is no way to facilitate the conversation!   

[crusaderjoe]

Crusadermoe makes a point.

VU has a 3,000 seat chapel, which by chapel standards go I would imagine is enormous by a capacity standpoint.  No one here cares.

In the Union, there are Ballrooms that can assist events as large as 1,000 participants (if you go by the renderings online).  As far as Ballrooms go I would also imagine that 1K is enormous by a capacity standpoint.  No one here cares.

But yet, when we talk about a hypothesized 7 – 8,000 seat arena, the "Division 3ers" on this board are immediately ready to slit their collective wrists.  It's too large.  We'll never fill it. Too much of an investment for athletics.  Same old crapola.

Good for VU that they have large academic and religious facilities at their disposal.  I just don't understand why we can't extend the same rationale into athletics and athletic building.  Historically we have never done so.  The current state of affairs at the ARC is a testament to this line of thinking.  I am sure the MVC could have taken notice of that, at least.

Happy New Year.

[classof2014]

The ARC shouldn't be expanded just renovated, 5000 is small but it fits the community we're in. We need a lower bowl of all chairbacks, and something that resembles more of an arena and less of a high-school gym.

[a3uge]

Crusadermoe makes a point.

VU has a 3,000 seat chapel, which by chapel standards go I would imagine is enormous by a capacity standpoint.  No one here cares.

In the Union, there are Ballrooms that can assist events as large as 1,000 participants (if you go by the renderings online).  As far as Ballrooms go I would also imagine that 1K is enormous by a capacity standpoint.  No one here cares.

But yet, when we talk about a hypothesized 7 – 8,000 seat arena, the "Division 3ers" on this board are immediately ready to slit their collective wrists.  It's too large.  We'll never fill it. Too much of an investment for athletics.  Same old crapola.

Good for VU that they have large academic and religious facilities at their disposal.  I just don't understand why we can't extend the same rationale into athletics and athletic building.  Historically we have never done so.  The current state of affairs at the ARC is a testament to this line of thinking.  I am sure the MVC could have taken notice of that, at least.

Happy New Year.

Because our big money donors aren't sports fans, and building a 7,000-8,000 seat arena would cost at least $50,000,000. Building an arena that big for a single tenant without tax money simply isn't realistic. It's not going to happen.

The biggest issue with the ARC is that it's a multipurpose facility, and not merely a stadium. Half of the ARC is the oldest building on campus, which houses all of campus recreation, as well as athletic practices, locker rooms, etc. There's essentially two gymnasiums inside the ARC footprint.

True, the new union didn't include a fitness center, rock climbing wall, racquet ball courts, etc, but following the master plan of a new rec center was a much better strategic move. The union centralized all of campus dining. Calling it oversized is silly. There's really only one lounge in the building not meant for dining (the one with the fish/piano). The ballroom can hold up to 1,000 but the room is typically divided and booked in sections. There's also not a large theater on campus, so having a room that expands to seat hundreds of people is important for events like Jazz Fest. It was much more important for the university to centralize dining and create a large gathering area before creating nicer racquetball courts and a rock climbing wall.

The next logical step for student life is a recreation center, not a new arena. Arenas are expensive due to their design. The university spending $50 million on something that doesn't address larger needs like student locker rooms and more indoor REC sport options is not feasible. The athletics department obviously would greatly benefit from a new rec center because it may include things like a pool bigger than the Super 8's. The new center would allow the existing ARC to be used as an actual arena. Renovations would be much cheaper than an actual new arena. Simply removing the track would be a massive improvement. A proper concourse could be built with the opened space and chair back seating could be added to the bench side. Permanent bleachers could be added under the home basket. Club/Suite style seating and a media box could be added behind existing chairbacks. These cheaper improvements aren't possible right now due to the multi-use nature of the building.

Also, as any student that studied in the library can tell you: it's still too small. It was virtually impossible to find a table if you came to late, and you had to perform a 3 hour stakeout to get a private room.

[vu72]

I was just at Northwestern to watch a basketball game.  Their facility is a joke.  Not as nice as the ARC.  The ARC can be renovated to be expanded to, say, 6000 seats with more chairbacks and a bowl feel.  The renovations need to include new and expanded lockers, coaches offices etc.  It isn't just the arena.

This is where Northwestern plays:

Welsh-Ryan Arena is an 8,117-seat multi-purpose arena in Evanston, Illinois, United States. The arena opened in 1952 as McGaw Memorial Hall. It is home to the Northwestern University Wildcats basketball, volleyball and wrestling teams. Wikipedia

There are chairbacks on one side most of the way up but the other side and end areas are all old bleachers.  No semblance of a bowl here and there is a track going around on the inside. Small scoreboard, bad sight lines and crummy bathrooms and concessions.  Other then these facts the place is just great.  This is the BIG guys.

[crusadermoe]

Ok......it honestly is great to hear from Okinawa that the campus facilities are helping draw the students.  I'm also glad to hear from another that the library is well populated.   It definitely is a signature building.     

And yes, I think a rec plex is the way to go rather than calling for a larger-capacity hoops arena.   Go look at Butler's new student rec complex sometime.   I just think the Union design went too big in the non-rec areas and gobbled up money that might have been saved to address the rec issues.   Ballrooms are good to have, but they put a big room in the library for major gatherings too.  Lots of gathering, lots of sleeping by a fire.   Not as much knocking off the freshman 15 and getting fit and alert.

[a3uge]

Ok......it honestly is great to hear from Okinawa that the campus facilities are helping draw the students.  I'm also glad to hear from another that the library is well populated.   It definitely is a signature building.     

And yes, I think a rec plex is the way to go rather than calling for a larger-capacity hoops arena.   Go look at Butler's new student rec complex sometime.   I just think the Union design went too big in the non-rec areas and gobbled up money that might have been saved to address the rec issues.   Ballrooms are good to have, but they put a big room in the library for major gatherings too.  Lots of gathering, lots of sleeping by a fire.   Not as much knocking off the freshman 15 and getting fit and alert.

But the university wanted to centralize athletic facilities, which is why they converted the old book store into a fitness center instead of the old dining hall. In the end, if a field house ends up getting built, it'll be better to have the rock wall, racquetball courts, open fields, etc all in one area instead of scattered around campus. And the meeting room in the library is good for some things, but terrible for others. The presence of adjacent classrooms make it a poor use for anything noisy (concerts like Jazz Fest, the various dance clubs, self defense training). The ballrooms were good for dinners, since dining services was right downstairs. I was there during the transition from the old and new union, and it was amazing how many events were held in the ballrooms instead of the smaller library area, a crammed classroom, or the makeshift old union hall. Anything athletic takes up a considerable amount of area.

And again, there's really only one lounge area in the new union, and it's not all that large. It's not like they'd be able to cheaply build a pool on the 2nd floor, or fit a court in the area where the piano is. They probably could have made the billiards/table tennis area a bit larger, but that area was never very packed. I wouldn't really consider that as a way to lose the freshman 15, considering I definitely used it a bunch and still gained at least 15 pounds.

[crusaderjoe]

Rec center?  Fieldhouse?  ARC renovations?  I'm all for it. I'm just wondering why we are still having this discussion after three major capital campaigns and the MVC has already come and gone. 

As I have said before, I am not suggesting that VU should spend $50M on a new 8K arena. Nor am I knocking the Chapel for being too big or the Union for being too cavernous.  However, many here chastised (and continue to do so currently) the MVC for taking Loyola as some sort of anomaly.  Yet, Loyola rolled out this:  http://www.loyolaramblers.com/facilities/loyc-norville.html .

The point is that it would appear that at VU it is certainly appropriate to "go big" (see the Chapel, see the Ballroom, see the Library, see the Union, see the increase in student enrollment, etc.), but just not with athletics. Or at least that's my impression anyway.  And perhaps, figuratively speaking, maybe that's why 7K is too large for an arena, but a 1K ballroom isn't.   

Again, Happy New Year.

[ValpoFan]

Fwiw, I heard president Heckler recently talking about the chapel addition and the planned new science building being the last buildings to be erected in the foreseeable future. He mentioned that the new campaign includes no new buildings and will focus on growing the university endowment funds.
He wisely said that the university facilities have grown a lot in the recent past and he wants to see the endowments grow accordingly to make sure that the university can keep up with the operation and maintenance costs of these new buildings.
That being said, if someone wants to donate $50M to build a rec center or arena, I'm sure president Heckler will be willing to listen 

[VULB#62]

With respect all the new stuff, I'm with those who advocate fixing and modernizing the "OLD"  (i.e., overcrowded, out-of-date  ARC) --- and fulfilling a commitment to a more complete campus experience for existing students and student athletes. 

Unfortunately, this string has gotten hi-jacked to a degree with discussions of an arena and a rec center. That's totally off base.  The 30 year plan discusses a Field House and modernization of the ARC (as we have so many times in the past).  (1) In order to modernize the ARC, a field house needs to be built.  (2) That field house would logically incorporate amenities for all students that would include recreational sports and intra-murals not just facilities for varsity athletics.  (3) Its construction would be necessary to, subsequently,  allow for sorely needed modernization and upgrades to the ARC.  This has been rehashed so many times, but somehow, each time it re-emerges people bring in unsupported speculation in the face of what has already been confirmed (or at least discussed) by the administration.   

[a3uge]

With respect all the new stuff, I'm with those who advocate fixing and modernizing the "OLD"  (i.e., overcrowded, out-of-date  ARC) --- and fulfilling a commitment to a more complete campus experience for existing students and student athletes. 

Unfortunately, this string has gotten hi-jacked to a degree with discussions of an arena and a rec center. That's totally off base.  The 30 year plan discusses a Field House and modernization of the ARC (as we have so many times in the past).  (1) In order to modernize the ARC, a field house needs to be built.  (2) That field house would logically incorporate amenities for all students that would include recreational sports and intra-murals not just facilities for varsity athletics.  (3) Its construction would be necessary to, subsequently,  allow for sorely needed modernization and upgrades to the ARC.  This has been rehashed so many times, but somehow, each time it re-emerges people bring in unsupported speculation in the face of what has already been confirmed (or at least discussed) by the administration.   

I think the difference is that in the past, there wasn't really a "master plan" - or there was, and it essentially changed every year, or the administration would blatantly ignore it. I get the skepticism and mistrust of the administration to support D1 athletics, and the disappointment of getting passed over by the MVC for a historically terrible Loyola team due to Valpo's substandard athletic facilities. But I think the fact that since the master plan came out, they've pretty much stuck to it tells us they're serious about fulfilling it. Even something minor like building a pathway from the Porter Hospital parking garage shows they intend to stick with the plan.

And I think this administration has been much better about improving athletics, and no longer have to worry about making improvements to the ARC worrying that it's just in vain. In 2011 a new video board went up with a new sound system. The basketball team has gotten 2 new uniform sets in the past 5 years, and the entire athletics department was rebranded. The track was finally completed, Brown Field got new turf with a new scoreboard, a new football locker room was just built, and a new tennis building is going in soon. This may all be small potatoes, but it's still a step forward. I'm not sure what got done from the ARC addition in the 80's to 2011, but it seems like they've clearly ramped up in the past 5 years. So I'm cautiously optimistic that facilities will improve in the next 10 years.

[historyman]

And I think this administration has been much better about improving athletics, and no longer have to worry about making improvements to the ARC worrying that it's just in vain. In 2011 a new video board went up with a new sound system. The basketball team has gotten 2 new uniform sets in the past 5 years, and the entire athletics department was rebranded. The track was finally completed, Brown Field got new turf with a new scoreboard, a new football locker room was just built, and a new tennis building is going in soon. This may all be small potatoes, but it's still a step forward. I'm not sure what got done from the ARC addition in the 80's to 2011, but it seems like they've clearly ramped up in the past 5 years. So I'm cautiously optimistic that facilities will improve in the next 10 years.

I have to say I still have some doubts as to when these athletic facilities will get done. Will it be way too late? Just because the plans are made doesn't mean that the money will be allocated for these athletic projects. What happens when President Heckler has retired around 2025 the ARC remodel hasn't been done yet and the people stuck in Neils Science Center are way overdue for a new building. Where will the money go?

[VULB#62]

So I'm cautiously optimistic that facilities will improve in the next 10 years.

I've got to concur.   I believe they will build a multiple use field house in the near future followed by a renovation of the ARC.  Why do I believe this?

The FB program's next big financial drive for 2015 will be to renovate the FB locker room in the ARC (not move it to the theater in Kroencke). That tells me that there is a plan that we are not privy to, but one that follows the concepts of the 30 year plan.  A permanent upgrade to FB locker space in the ARC indicates that another facility will have to be built to accommodate the present overcrowding of locker and training/sports medicine space -- i.e., a new field house.  It would be ludicrous to dump tons of money into the new FB locker room now only to demolish it later.

[78crusader]

It is my understanding the Board decided within the last 12 to 18 months to embark on a campaign to increase the endowment from approximately $200 million to $400 million by 2021.  That is of course an increase of $200 million over a time period of about 7 years.  That is similar in scope to the campaign that was begun around 2004, ultimately raising approximately $239 million, before it was concluded in 2009. 

The money to build the new dorm came, I think, from a bond issue of around $45 million.  The dorm cost around $28 million so there is some money left over for the next capital project.  We already know the sorority complex is starting this spring and a new science building is soon to follow.  I had heard the science project was supposed to start this year but there was some feeling that sufficient funds had not been raised.  I'm guessing this project will not begin until 2016.

Even though the endowment campaign would seem to leave little for further capital improvements, it is my feeling that President Heckler has a goal to get the fieldhouse built and the ARC renovated.  I believe these things will happen, although I don't look for the first shovel to be turned on the fieldhouse until 2017 at the earliest, and probably not till 2018.

Of course, I could be wrong about all of this since I thought there was no way Mich St was going to beat Baylor this afternoon.

Paul

[covufan]

It is my understanding the Board decided within the last 12 to 18 months to embark on a campaign to increase the endowment from approximately $200 million to $400 million by 2021.  That is of course an increase of $200 million over a time period of about 7 years.  That is similar in scope to the campaign that was begun around 2004, ultimately raising approximately $239 million, before it was concluded in 2009. 

The money to build the new dorm came, I think, from a bond issue of around $45 million.  The dorm cost around $28 million so there is some money left over for the next capital project.  We already know the sorority complex is starting this spring and a new science building is soon to follow.  I had heard the science project was supposed to start this year but there was some feeling that sufficient funds had not been raised.  I'm guessing this project will not begin until 2016.

Even though the endowment campaign would seem to leave little for further capital improvements, it is my feeling that President Heckler has a goal to get the fieldhouse built and the ARC renovated.  I believe these things will happen, although I don't look for the first shovel to be turned on the fieldhouse until 2017 at the earliest, and probably not till 2018.

Of course, I could be wrong about all of this since I thought there was no way Mich St was going to beat Baylor this afternoon.

Paul

Wouldn't a doubling (from 200 to 400) be in the normal range for most endowment funds in seven years?  This would be just above 10% annual return, unless someone dips into the fund to pay for big ticket expansion items. 

[bbtds]

Even though the endowment campaign would seem to leave little for further capital improvements, it is my feeling that President Heckler has a goal to get the fieldhouse built and the ARC renovated.  I believe these things will happen, although I don't look for the first shovel to be turned on the fieldhouse until 2017 at the earliest, and probably not till 2018.

Remember this post in 4 years. If the construction doesn't begin on a new fieldhouse by the beginning of 2019 I think we will see which direction this university has decided to head. Those of us who have been talking about the ARC facilities for 10-15 years if not more will remember when they unveiled the Schrage Basketball Wing and then nothing else happened. Placate and then run for cover.