FIRE LOTTICH IMMEDIATELY!!

[usc4valpo]

I am perplexed 2014. I like your strategy; however, I think it is important that Valpo has an open perspective in hiring a new coach and not restrict themselves to Valpo "family" connections.

62 - I get where you are coming from, but many times players do not know what's best.

[valpofb16]

It's more important for Valpos next coach to be adept at fundraising and alumni networking.

If the University does not fire Lottich because the 345k of remaining salary, there are dark times ahead

Valpo needs as many grads with great experiences at Valpo as possible right now. Recent grads are not donating due to the following :

1. A rebrand, don't let the inmates run the asylum

2. Dropping sports teams with generations of alumni

3. High transfer rate, small retention from bachelor to grad

4. Money not being used towards Athletic's

5. Subpar athletic performance

6. Dropping of majors and enrollment.

7. Large student debt

Unless these problems are looked at from a macro level, doesn't matter who we bring in/recruit. They will be living in dorms for 4 years and playing in empty gyms....if they stay

[vu72]

Wow!  This is the longest string of posts I can remember!  The board had gotten so sleepy that a next game post was started just before tip off!  I was joking with a few friends about fan disappointment with Matt's coaching saying..."The fans aren't yet ready to head toward Matt's house with torches and pitch forks but they are out in the garage rummaging around trying to locate their pitch forks!"  I now sense a run on torch fuel at Home Depot.

[vu84v2]

valpofb16: The most important capability for a new coach will be to generate a system in which Valpo wins...which in turn will generate enthusiasm with students, alumni, etc. Sure, I would like the coach to be adept at fundraising and alumni networking, but that is secondary to putting a quality team on the court.

While I agree with some of your seven points (e.g., 1), I ask the following questions:

-What majors were dropped that had demand and/or a large alumni base? It does not make sense to keep fields that few want to study - especially when you need to invest to add majors that have high demand. Heck, Valpo had Home Economics in its own building when I attended...but a number of years later it made no sense to continue the major.
-Valpo's first-year retention rate is 80% (college factual). While I agree that needs to be improved, is that indicative of dismal performance? I think we can agree that Valpo needs to delve into why that is happening and make adjustments.
-Point 4: What funding should be redirected towards athletics?

[justducky]

they are out in the garage rummaging around trying to locate their pitch forks!

My quick trip to the garage reveals that I still have one 3 tine, one 4 tine and even an old 5 tine model. Should I bring all of them?

[usc4valpo]

I am curious - right now, how much money would Valpo eat if they dismissed Lottich?
A partial season?
2 years?

[valpofb16]

Vu84 very thoughtful resources. Imo just winning at Valpo is all a piece of it. Chicken or the egg. These student athletes need a competitive division 1 environment. Valpo does not have the student body nor community support to pack the ARC, unless many of aforementioned problems are  fixed. The student body is in half from 10 years ago, more so if you include grad school.


1. Majors dropped - I agree if no one is attending for a certain Major that's a fair argument, however if you are a proud Econ Major (hypothetical) and the university drops Econ, is that another barrier for donations?


2. First year retention rate at 80% is abysmal for a private institution like Valparaiso. So is a 93% acceptance rate. So is a 70% 4 year grad rate. We agree there are major problems that need fixed.


3. Funding should be directed in full on sales/self preservation mode. Whatever sells the University to and retains future students.


Until these issues are fixed. You will have an impossible job of sustainably winning at Valpo in any sport. You are offering a subpar product. If there are no funds to provide and improve product, it's time to start cutting operating costs.

[valpo64]

Let's remember that the basketball program exists as a result of the School's existence...not the other way around.  Don't forget priorities.

[Valpo89]

The school hired a new VP of enrollment, a VU grad from 2004 coming from Loyola. She said she took the job due to the challenge.
Well, she's got a big challenge.

[usc4valpo]

64 - also be aware that the basketball program has provided national recognition to Valparaiso University for which the university has taken for granted. With that statement, we might as well move to D3.

[Just Sayin]

Let's remember that the basketball program exists as a result of the School's existence...not the other way around.  Don't forget priorities.

Another variation of "you didn't build that."

[vu84v2]

There is an interesting comparison here associated with the "great person theory of executive leadership" (i.e., if we get the right leader, that alone creates a strong likelihood of change leading to success). Assuming Valpo brings in a new basketball coach (which they need to do), the great person theory fits since the coach has enormous latitude to bring in the right assistant coaches, implement an effective system, find and develop the right players for that system, etc. For the new VP of admissions, she has far less latitude - she needs to gain the buy-in and active engagement from most or all of the faculty, since they need to be very active in the process of selling prospective and current students on the value of the university. Her ability to do that - not an easy task - is going to make or break her performance in the role.

[David81]

I'm in no way dismissing the importance of athletics in being part of the experience of being at a university and of being an alum. But I'm going to respectfully suggest again that folks may have an inflated view of the role of intercollegiate athletics in the life of this particular university.

Hey, VU was doing fine before Bryce Drew hit The Shot. Although some of us have debated the merits of the US News rankings in other threads here, bottom line is that when US News began ranking all colleges and universities in the late 80s, VU debuted as one of the top-ranked regional universities in the Midwest. At the new ARC, Tom Smith was about to give way to Homer Drew, but the W-L records wouldn't change for years.

Personally, I would prefer that VU commit to a MBB program rebuild and support athletics as part of a well-rounded college experience. But those decisions are unlikely to dictate the University's fate. Indeed, it's possible to thrive after downsizing a sports program. To illustrate, by the time I arrived at NYU's law school in 1982, the University had previously eliminated its DI basketball and football programs, despite much success earlier in the century. Thanks to very strong leadership (including its new President, John Brademas, formerly a leading Member of Congress from Indiana), it raised gobs of money and entered into a truly golden era of its history that largely continues. In terms of sports, it started up a D3 men's varsity BB program in the mid-80s but never reinstated football.

So...I think it's important to keep this all in perspective. There's a strong case to be made for building a successful DI sports program -- across the board -- at VU. But I think it has to be a positive case for what it brings to the University, rather than sounding speculative alarms about what will happen if such a commitment is not forthcoming.

Note, I edited my comment to remove the inclusion of valpofb16's last post to this discussion. My response was more generally directed.

[AlaskaCrusader19]

I'm in no way dismissing the importance of athletics in being part of the experience of being at a university and of being an alum. But I'm going to respectfully suggest again that folks may have an inflated view of the role of intercollegiate athletics in the life of this particular university.

Hey, VU was doing fine before Bryce Drew hit The Shot. Although some of us have debated the merits of the US News rankings in other threads here, bottom line is that when US News began ranking all colleges and universities in the late 80s, VU debuted as one of the top-ranked regional universities in the Midwest. At the new ARC, Tom Smith was about to give way to Homer Drew, but the W-L records wouldn't change for years.

Personally, I would prefer that VU commit to a MBB program rebuild and support athletics as part of a well-rounded college experience. But those decisions are unlikely to dictate the University's fate. Indeed, it's possible to thrive after downsizing a sports program. To illustrate, by the time I arrived at NYU's law school in 1982, the University had previously eliminated its DI basketball and football programs, despite much success earlier in the century. Thanks to very strong leadership (including its new President, John Brademas, formerly a leading Member of Congress from Indiana), it raised gobs of money and entered into a truly golden era of its history that largely continues. In terms of sports, it started up a D3 men's varsity BB program in the mid-80s but never reinstated football.

So...I think it's important to keep this all in perspective. There's a strong case to be made for building a successful DI sports program -- across the board -- at VU. But I think it has to be a positive case for what it brings to the University, rather than sounding speculative alarms about what will happen if such a commitment is not forthcoming.

I'm not sure that NYU is a great comparison to Valparaiso. I know very little about it, but Valparaiso and Manhattan are two very different settings, and that's not to mention the massive differences in the landscape of college athletics from the 1980s to today.

[vu72]

I don't have statistics to back this up but I seem to recall some pointing vastly improved numbers of applications tied to successful runs in basketball.  I just looked at attendance over the last several years and found out that our two flagship sports are being out drawn by our other ticketed sports.  For example, Volleyball last year drew 718 per match. They have not been below 464 in the last five years.  Women's basketball is drawing 272 per game this season and has been in a steady decline from 438 per game four years ago.

Football drew 2147 per game this past season and has been pretty steady with a maximum of 2377 in 2017.  Men's basketball is drawing a whopping 1317 through 8 games this season down from 1758 last year and over 3000 in two of the previous three years.  That's a free fall.

Football has put a fun and somewhat successful product on the field, with steady improvement.  Volleyball is the same, just even more successful.  Attendance then, given my in-depth analysis, seems tied to one thing--winning.

[valpofb16]

Definitely want the school to sustainably find its level before fixing the men's basketball program.

I think there are ways to do so falling on deaf ears. The 2000+ at football games is a great sign!

Still think that is a sleeping giant for the University , just look down the road in Crawfordsville....

If athletics wants to put down on any sport it should be football. 420k to play New Mexico State. Most alums, fans, relatives , and low costs (in terms of home games). Plus all kids are paying tuition.

I get the basketball numbers that will be thrown around. But it's a lot of hubub for 1-3 , four year seniors every year.

University needs butts in seats

[crusadermoe]

Well said 16. At this point in time, VU basketball (direct expense and income) probably takes a pretty big loss. Indirect P/L would also be a loss if the players are occupying dorm room you could sell or class seats you could sell.  I doubt that amounts to much in this enrollment climate at VU. Harder to quantify is the "buzz" and the presence of your name on the ESPN crawl line. If you aren't generating the "buzz" on campus or on TV, that drives recruitment upward, then competing in D-1 is less of a slam dunk.

Posters on this board know how often we have kicked around the revenue effect of football on VU. I think someone even posted detailed costs and revenue figures once. Football always proves itself in how much net tuition revenue comes to the school from 60-80 male students who simply want to play the game without an athletic scholarship. Off the top of my head I don't know the  male-female ratio in colleges nationwide but I am pretty sure it is over 55% female.  (I attended in the wrong decade!)  So even though football generates little direct revenue and takes a direct net loss, it drives a lot of indirect revenue from enrollment.

[valpofb16]

I could kiss you crusadermoe. Finally someone gets it!

[usc4valpo]

I give up. Let's go D3 in all sports, enjoy the dog mascots  and call it a day.

[crusadermoe]

I am not saying that basketball can't high indirect gains. But it better attract students to apply and to an admissions office that can close the deal. I am convinced the impact of basketball is genuine, but it is harder to follow the money and causal links. It's go big or go home.

Football investment from donors or business is a lower risk-reward calculation and a safer bet. Ideally you have donors or a big local business sponsor that makes both sports thrive!  As the investor donor or business, do you buy Tesla stock or buy Procter and Gamble?  Or do you have the money to buy both?

[Bumbo]

Fellow SC Trojan... is today's CLR's vote of confidence for DC Grinch a foreshadowing of another Lottich year ?  I certainly hope not.

[usc4valpo]

Fight on - SC will have less patience for Grinch compared to Valpo with Lottich in his 7th year!

[oklahomamick]

Don't get me started on Grinch. 

[David81]

Personally, I would prefer that VU commit to a MBB program rebuild and support athletics as part of a well-rounded college experience. But those decisions are unlikely to dictate the University's fate. Indeed, it's possible to thrive after downsizing a sports program. To illustrate, by the time I arrived at NYU's law school in 1982, the University had previously eliminated its DI basketball and football programs, despite much success earlier in the century. Thanks to very strong leadership (including its new President, John Brademas, formerly a leading Member of Congress from Indiana), it raised gobs of money and entered into a truly golden era of its history that largely continues. In terms of sports, it started up a D3 men's varsity BB program in the mid-80s but never reinstated football.

So...I think it's important to keep this all in perspective. There's a strong case to be made for building a successful DI sports program -- across the board -- at VU. But I think it has to be a positive case for what it brings to the University, rather than sounding speculative alarms about what will happen if such a commitment is not forthcoming.

I'm not sure that NYU is a great comparison to Valparaiso. I know very little about it, but Valparaiso and Manhattan are two very different settings, and that's not to mention the massive differences in the landscape of college athletics from the 1980s to today.

Agree 100% that they are very different schools in very different locations. Just trying to offer one example of a school that pretty much gave up on intercollegiate sports completely -- disappointing and even angering an alumni base that remembered athletic glory from years gone by -- yet managed to hit a major stride in terms of fundraising and academic achievement. NYU is not alone in that distinction.

My point again is not to recommend that VU follow the same path. I think it would be a mistake, for many reasons that folks are bringing up in this thread and elsewhere. Rather, I'm playing a devil's advocate role with folks who think that the VU's D1 sports program is a linchpin for a successful future for the University overall.

[David81]

Well said 16. At this point in time, VU basketball (direct expense and income) probably takes a pretty big loss. Indirect P/L would also be a loss if the players are occupying dorm room you could sell or class seats you could sell.  I doubt that amounts to much in this enrollment climate at VU. Harder to quantify is the "buzz" and the presence of your name on the ESPN crawl line. If you aren't generating the "buzz" on campus or on TV, that drives recruitment upward, then competing in D-1 is less of a slam dunk.

Posters on this board know how often we have kicked around the revenue effect of football on VU. I think someone even posted detailed costs and revenue figures once. Football always proves itself in how much net tuition revenue comes to the school from 60-80 male students who simply want to play the game without an athletic scholarship. Off the top of my head I don't know the  male-female ratio in colleges nationwide but I am pretty sure it is over 55% female.  (I attended in the wrong decade!)  So even though football generates little direct revenue and takes a direct net loss, it drives a lot of indirect revenue from enrollment.

It's an excellent point overall, but it doesn't necessarily support staying at D1 for football. I'd bet that a lot of the engineering students on the football team would be here anyway even if it was a D3 operation, because of the significant strength of the engineering school.

That said, I don't think it would be clear sailing for VU if it went D3, especially for football, where you've got some of the strongest D3 programs around in schools like North Central, Wabash, and DePauw. Many of these top D3 squads would be atop the Pioneer League standings.

So....no easy fix. My hope is that Coach Fox stays for a while and builds a competitive football program that can contend for the league title on a regular basis.