Fund Raising for Athletics

[vu72]

Some have lamented the fact that the current fund raising drive hold no promise for athletics per se.  I looked at the Forever Valpo site and found a couple of things that might be or possibly should be encouraging as follows:

First, of the $250 million goals, $1 million has been raised and completed as it is designated for the new track.

Second, under Scholarship to Support Students of Promise, $850,000 is targeted toward "Named Division 1 Athletic Scholarship".

Third, under "Annual Giving Priorities" $25,000,000 is the target to support both The Valpo fund and The Crusader Fund.

So without specifics, this includes $26,850,000 out of $250,000,000 which could have a positive impact on athletics.  I understand, this is NOT a dedicated fund toward ARC improvements but, it is a step in a positive direction for a university with a woefully inadequate endowment as compared to our primary competition.

[crusadermoe]

That $25 million is probably over 5 years. and wraps in all the "annual giving" to Valpo.

Wonder if anyone knows the Crusader Fund goal for the year?  Multiply that times five.  That would give you the share of $25 million going to athletics.

[Vinny]

I have accepted the fact that I probably won't see any significant upgrades to a Valpo athletic facility in my lifetime. We're just too small and the University views athletics as more of a nuisance than a marketing tool. It's sad, but I've come to grips with it.

[vufan75]

I have accepted the fact that I probably won't see any significant upgrades to a Valpo athletic facility in my lifetime. We're just too small and the University views athletics as more of a nuisance than a marketing tool. It's sad, but I've come to grips with it.

I feel like you Vinny. I had hope for something significant being done in my lifetime, but that hope fades as the years click by. I wish I had the financial means to change that but....

Somewhere I thought I'd read (maybe ML's monthly Crusader report) that the Crusader Fund was generating something like $400,000 to $500,000 annually. It is used to enhance player experiences, etc. And fill gaps the athletics budget does not reach perhaps.

[VU2014]

Just take a look at Butler over the last 8-10 years. Their enrollment applications to their school are in correlation with the success of their basketball program. One of my good friends went to Butler while they were on the Tourney runs with Brad Stevens coaching their program and he mentioned that alumni donations shot through the roof to the school when their athletics programs were having success.


I'm sure its the same way here. I'm sure there is some psychology involve with an alumni being more willing and excited to donate and give when they are full of pride from their schools success. The University hit me up for a donation after the NIT tourney run and I donate then. Obviously putting academics first will be always rightfully the top priority, but putting a healthy investment in our athletics programs (especially our Men's Basketball Program/facilities) boosts the moral/pride of the alumni, student body and adds some cache nationally.


I agree with Vinny and vufan75, that we won't see a major renovation of the ARC anytime in the near future. I'm a fairly recent graduate so I have faith we'll get a renovation or new ARC in my lifetime.

[wh]

Just take a look at Butler over the last 8-10 years. Their enrollment applications to their school are in correlation with the success of their basketball program. One of my good friends went to Butler while they were on the Tourney runs with Brad Stevens coaching their program and he mentioned that alumni donations shot through the roof to the school when their athletics programs were having success.

I'm sure its the same way here. I'm sure there is some psychology involve with an alumni being more willing and excited to donate and give when they are full of pride from their schools success. The University hit me up for a donation after the NIT tourney run and I donate then. Obviously putting academics first will be always rightfully the top priority, but putting a healthy investment in our athletics programs (especially our Men's Basketball Program/facilities) boosts the moral/pride of the alumni, student body and adds some cache nationally.


I agree with Vinny and vufan75, that we won't see a major renovation of the ARC anytime in the near future. I'm a fairly recent graduate so I have faith we'll get a renovation or new ARC in my lifetime.

Valpo and Butler have different student recruiting strategies. Valpo is chasing international students to fill its coffers (6.7% of total enrollment); Butler is not (0.4%). Having a successful basketball program is a meaningless attraction to an 18-year-old from China or Saudi Arabia. That could change, however, if Trump moves to bar students from countries that support terror:

http://qz.com/849612/china-sends-330000-students-to-the-us-each-year-and-trump-could-change-that/ 

[VULB#62]

Just for grins, along the lines of things we won't see in our lifetime, here is the 5200 seat SECU arena at D-I "super power" Towson State opened in 2013.

https://www.google.com/search?q=secu+arena+images&biw=1534&bih=996&tbm=isch&imgil=_an-j6gce03RdM%253A%253B0brut_Uhlp5dsM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.towson.edu%25252Fsecuarena%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=_an-j6gce03RdM%253A%252C0brut_Uhlp5dsM%252C_&usg=__XWly-jfERKZFz9fIz6Zj_gjsc_Y%3D&ved=0ahUKEwi5xL_J1PHQAhUQ9GMKHZ-xABgQyjcIMw&ei=VCtQWLnKNZDojwOf44LAAQ#imgrc=kv1YU0Mn_1B32M%3A

[Kyle321n]

Damn. That would look good over by the new union and the Christopher Center.

[VULB#62]

Betcha VU could renovate the ARC and come pretty close by just adding the Strategic Plan's ARC addition to the North Wall and save a few $$$$.

[vu72]

Just take a look at Butler over the last 8-10 years. Their enrollment applications to their school are in correlation with the success of their basketball program. One of my good friends went to Butler while they were on the Tourney runs with Brad Stevens coaching their program and he mentioned that alumni donations shot through the roof to the school when their athletics programs were having success.

Valpo and Butler have different student recruiting strategies. Valpo is chasing international students to fill its coffers (6.7% of total enrollment); Butler is not (0.4%). Having a successful basketball program is a meaningless attraction to an 18-year-old from China or Saudi Arabia. That could change, however, if Trump moves to bar students from countries that support terror:

An interesting question about athletics success and student applications and alumni support.  For whatever the athletic success at Butler has had on applications, it appears that it is attracting more young ladies then anything else!  Right now Butler is 60% women!

Which approach to new students (global and nationwide versus mostly local) is best is something that could be a significant debate all by itself.  Valpo has always attracted student from across the nation and now from many foreign countries while Butler has most of its students from Indiana and surrounding areas. 

As for athletic success affecting donations, that may be true yet Butler's endowment is roughly $20 million less than Valpo's.

[talksalot]

So...how's that arena doing for packing them in the SECU Arena for Towson... they are 4-2 at home
(SECU:  State Employees Credit Union)

11/15/16 Stony Brook:  25-point win, 1,322 attendance
11/26/16 Robert Morris:  1 point loss, 1,211 attendance
11/30/16 Goucher College 62 point win, 1,004 attendance
12/3/16  Old Dominion 2 point loss, 1,871 attendance
12/7/16 Loyola (MD) 17 point win, 1,214 attendance
12/10/16 Fairleigh Dickinson 3 point win, 1,312 attendance

average 1,322...

2015-16 average 1,915
2014-15 average 2,102

Location: Auburn Drive, Towson, MD 21252
Capacity: 5,200
Club Seats: 340
Private Suites: 4
Courtside Seats: 96

Features:
Center hung video display and score board
LED ad ribbon board
Digital scorer's table
Concession stands
2 ATMs
Wi-Fi accessible
Team and officials locker rooms
Press room
Hospitality room (1,500 sq. ft.)
Multipurpose room (680 sq. ft.)

[VULB#62]

Yep, all dressed up but nowhere to go.  Even ODU was under 2,000.  Transplant that facility to Union Street this very afternoon and I'd guess that the lowest figure you'd see for VU home games would be a little over 2000 (vs. a D-II or NAIA visitor) and most attendance figures would be 3X Towson State's and 5,000+ for key games.  Thinking over what I just wrote, as the architect, I'd kick the attendance up to an even six grand.   

[oklahomamick]

Investing in our athletic faculties will help in recruiting athletes.    

I've personally seen at Oklahoma University the football team get beat out of recruiting to the likes of Baylor and Okie st. 

Those recruits chose Baylor and Okie St. because of the facilities instead of the TRADITION of the Oklahoma football program.  OU did not reinvest in their facilities. 

How is Detroit going to recruit after this year?  They have sub-par facilities and they won't be able to say, yeah but at least we win...

Do we tell recruits that we don't have great facilities but there's a good chance to play in the NCAA? 

The point I'm trying to make that recruits don't always want to go with the program with tradition.  Facilities are an important factor in recruiting.  If we have a bad year in the win and loss column, it will be very difficult to recruit to Valpo. 

[NativeCheesehead]

I echo above sentiments. But the point has been made again and again. Until we consistently sell out the ARC significant improvements won't happen. And yes, part of that is no one of note will come play us. But a reminder, a top 25 (at the time) team played here this year, and we were 1,000 short. That's really disheartening. Marketing issue? Marketing budget issue? Lack of vision? All? None?

[oklahomamick]

I echo above sentiments. But the point has been made again and again. Until we consistently sell out the ARC significant improvements won't happen. And yes, part of that is no one of note will come play us. But a reminder, a top 25 (at the time) team played here this year, and we were 1,000 short. That's really disheartening. Marketing issue? Marketing budget issue? Lack of vision? All? None?

We don't need to increase the ARC.  Need to upgrade the facilities (without taking the character out of it)  We are a small community with small alumni.  Alumni that are spread throughout the country unlike the commuter state schools whose alumni are in their backyard. 

I understand its difficult to get teams to come to the ARC.  If we were in Valley, Wichita St (top 25 for several years) and N. Iowa (top 25 several years, not this year) would come to the ARC.   

[vu84v2]

Wow!  Lots of interesting and intelligent thoughts on this thread...

A policy that causes a dramatic decrease in international students at Valparaiso would reduce the likelihood of money being available for major construction projects (basketball stadium or otherwise). There is substantial competition among American universities for the better students from the U.S., thus universities (especially private ones) have to offer scholarships to "win" students. State schools are restricted by their state for tuition for in-state students and many are required to take all in-state students that meet minimum requirements. However, most of the international students referenced here and in the attached articles pay full tuition (and more, in some cases). If you seriously cut back the number of international students allowed, more money logically has to go towards tuition to stay competitive and keep enrollment levels stable.

If the numbers regarding international students between Butler and Valparaiso are true, this is clearly a strong advantage for Valparaiso. A strong university must have a robust group of international students, which can certainly happen with 6% of the student body. Less than 1% would clearly be a weakness.

Building on other comments above, does anyone really think that significantly more people would come to games at Valpo if they had a new arena? What is the business plan that would justify this capital expenditure?

[vu84v2]

I echo above sentiments. But the point has been made again and again. Until we consistently sell out the ARC significant improvements won't happen. And yes, part of that is no one of note will come play us. But a reminder, a top 25 (at the time) team played here this year, and we were 1,000 short. That's really disheartening. Marketing issue? Marketing budget issue? Lack of vision? All? None?

We don't need to increase the ARC.  Need to upgrade the facilities (without taking the character out of it)  We are a small community with small alumni.  Alumni that are spread throughout the country unlike the commuter state schools whose alumni are in their backyard. 

I understand its difficult to get teams to come to the ARC.  If we were in Valley, Wichita St (top 25 for several years) and N. Iowa (top 25 several years, not this year) would come to the ARC.   

I am an alum and am over 6' tall. Not all alumni are small...

[agibson]

But a reminder, a top 25 (at the time) team played here this year, and we were 1,000 short. That's really disheartening. Marketing issue? Marketing budget issue? Lack of vision? All? None?

It was a Tuesday.

There was some kind of a giveaway, "Free t-shirt to the first 1,000 fans" or something. But, I don't know if there was any significant billboard or media campaign unique to the game, "Nationally Ranked Foe Coming To Valparaiso" or similar. Anybody?

[crusadermoe]

Not to be redundant, but you folks are right that you have to sell out the ARC, especially for Rhode Island. We've been talking about this for 20 years and have had a number of competitive teams reach the NCAA.  People still don't come reliably enough. Except for a commendable group of 100 or so, students are apathetic.

But from my spot many miles away, the NIT during classes weeks seemed to draw well. Were any of those sell outs?  Close to it?

[bbtds]

Not to be redundant, but you folks are right that you have to sell out the ARC, especially for Rhode Island. We've been talking about this for 20 years and have had a number of competitive teams reach the NCAA.  People still don't come reliably enough. Except for a commendable group of 100 or so, students are apathetic.

But from my spot many miles away, the NIT during classes weeks seemed to draw well. Were any of those sell outs?  Close to it?

When the teams and fans from the National Lutheran Basketball Tournament joined the crowd in the ARC after their chapel service it became completely full (or nearly full) against Florida State. That was a flukey situation but it was a truly Lutheran bonding moment that I, as a Valpo fan and Lutheran, will never forget.

[vu84v2]

The ARC was packed for Saint Mary's and the environment was fantastic. Unlike the Florida State game (which was on a Saturday), the Saint Mary's game was on a weeknight.

[vu72]

Not to be redundant, but you folks are right that you have to sell out the ARC, especially for Rhode Island. We've been talking about this for 20 years and have had a number of competitive teams reach the NCAA.  People still don't come reliably enough. Except for a commendable group of 100 or so, students are apathetic.

But from my spot many miles away, the NIT during classes weeks seemed to draw well. Were any of those sell outs?  Close to it?

[/b]

Actually. there were a few "near sellouts" last year and one record setting crowd.

The last three conference games last year, against WSU, Oakland and Detroit, drew very well.  WSU was a near sellout at 4987 (ARC has a stated capacity of 5000), Oakland was at 4863 and Detroit was at 4151.  St. Mary's was the record at 5444 and Florida State was again, near capacity at 4991.

If you've never been to the ARC when packed, you've really missed something.  It can be really rockin!!!

[wh]

If you've never been to the ARC when packed, you've really missed something.  It can be really rockin!!!

Don't forget the extended high that lasts for hours after the game is over. It feels something like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQFCF9KESic

[VULB#62]

Not to be redundant, but you folks are right that you have to sell out the ARC, especially for Rhode Island. We've been talking about this for 20 years and have had a number of competitive teams reach the NCAA.  People still don't come reliably enough. Except for a commendable group of 100 or so, students are apathetic.

But from my spot many miles away, the NIT during classes weeks seemed to draw well. Were any of those sell outs?  Close to it?

[/b]

Actually. there were a few "near sellouts" last year and one record setting crowd.

The last three conference games last year, against WSU, Oakland and Detroit, drew very well.  WSU was a near sellout at 4987 (ARC has a stated capacity of 5000), Oakland was at 4863 and Detroit was at 4151.  St. Mary's was the record at 5444 and Florida State was again, near capacity at 4991.

If you've never been to the ARC when packed, you've really missed something.  It can be really rockin!!!

I realize that the holy grail is 100% sellouts.  A mini version of Cameron @ Duke (9,314) would be the target, I guess.  But most arenas are built with the goal of providing seating for that "special game" and to comfortably seat crowds averaging, say 50-75%, for most games to pay the mortgage.  An upgraded (all comfortable chairbacks on the first level) and expanded (to 6,000 capacity) ARC arena would meet that criterion and still not negate the close, intense atmosphere that the ARC generates.  It would be more comfortable and attractive and more customer service oriented -- i.e., game day incentives for occasional fans to attend:  (1)  better access to concessions and (2) more and  better options than to sit on wood bleacher seats.

The easiest way to meet all objectives would be, of course, to build a new mid-sized arena with ample, close-by parking.  That's not gonna happen until the third millennium.  But more and better near-by parking to support the renovated ARC would certainly help all sports, not just basketball,  housed in the ARC -- I would think that the winter/snowy walk from a quarter to half a mile away is not a great incentive for a family looking for a nice Saturday night's entertainment. I'm not saying pave over the campus, but associated studies should also examine getting more nearby parking into any decision to upgrade the ARC.

[bigmosmithfan1]

A few thoughts from the peanut gallery on this topic:

- On a high level, I really hope the university doesn't subscribe to the notion of "we aren't doing anything until we always sell out the seats we have." That sounds like a handy slogan, but it is incredibly short-sighted (and also discounting of a bunch of full-houses and near-full houses over the past several years despite few "name" opponents coming to the building). You build for the program you want to be in the future and for how you want the fan base to grow. And that leads to my next point...

- Making the fan experience better enables you to sell more tickets and draw more fans. Someone mentioned those 1,000 empty seats at a lot of games. There's a reason those are hard to sell -- they are largely terrible seats. Sitting in the bleachers on the south side is unpleasant even down low (no leg room, people stepping over you all game, very uncomfortable for anyone who has had back, knee or hip issues, etc.). Near the top of the mezz. you add poor sightlines and some obstructed views to that sundae. I know plenty of local folks who love to go to games as long as they are able to score a chairback seat, but rarely attend otherwise.

- Waiting until the ARC becomes a clear albatross in recruiting will be way too late. Programs that are committed to remaining successful stay ahead of the game in facilities. The administration talked a lot about the Gonzaga/Butler model during the coaching transition. Well, neither of those programs sat on their laurels when it came to facilities, either (nor have UNI, Davidson, or any other top mid-major program. Even St. Mary's is expanding their bandbox gym).

- If the MVC is looking again soon, there is absolutely no reason for Valpo to not take advantage of that and make that move. But first they have to be invited, and if VU doesn't at least have a tangible plan in place for improving their facilities (renderings, fundraising, etc.), the opportunity will be missed. If a beat writer from Terre Haute thinks your facility looks like a high school, time to act.

- In an ideal world, you build a new arena from the ground up. In the real world, you can probably renovate the ARC for less and get everything you need. Chairbacks all around (ok, maybe the student section stays bleachers, since they stand the whole game anyway). This allows you to re-set the seating angles to eliminate bad views (i.e. seats can roll out over the track). Knock out north wall (the building was designed to do that). Add another mezz and maybe a few suites or private club for premium options/revenue. Build new entry pavilion behind that with expanded restrooms/concessions. You could probably even fit a new practice court and dressing rooms underneath. Maybe add some additional concourses behind each endzone to improve access and add other amenities. Get permanent capacity around 6,000. Boom. Set for the next 25 years.

-Oh, and adding seats, amenities and the revenue that come along with them not only helps VU if the MVC/A-10/Future Conference Opportunity ever comes calling, but it helps to attract better non-conference opponents, because it will make it easier Valpo to have the money to pay to bring them in.