Athletic Director

Post info or Comments: UMaine Athletics

Re: Athletic Director

Postby RForester » Fri Jun 08, 2018 4:44 pm

dunbar wrote:I still believe that Maine should replace Women’s Hockry with Women’s Lacrosse and then add some scholarships to soccer, field hockey, and softball. It’s unfortunate that the WIH program finally has reached a competitive pedestal, but I always question the financial stability of that program.

Maine also needs to raise the athletic/activity fee for all students. That’s an untapped income base that many successful FCS football programs rely on for funding.

For example, see Madison, James.


Yeah...don't single out women's hockey...Softball, women's basketball and field hockey have higher total operating expenses per fiscal year than women's hockey at Umaine.
RForester
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:18 pm

Athletic Budgets link below for all NCAA institutions

Postby basketball_guy » Sat Jun 09, 2018 12:57 am

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

USA Today released its annual database of NCAA athletic department spending on Thursday, examining the cost of athletics for Division I programs in 2015-16. Several local Division I schools, excluding Boston College and Providence, were among the 230 schools listed.

The overarching takeaway from USA Today’s work is that schools are spending more on athletes, even as other expenditures rise, since a rule change in 2015 allowed D-I programs to cover Cost of Attendance – making up the difference between a full athletic scholarship and the total cost to attend the University.

UMass, for example, said in 2015 it would pay all athletes on full scholarship an additional $1,600 per year to cover the COA.

Schools paid 8.8 percent more toward athletics-related financial aid in 2015-16 than they did the year prior, according to USA Today. Division I programs also combined to spend $1.3 billion toward capital projects – stadium renovations, facility enhancements, etc. – last year, per the report, and “Power Five” schools accounted for roughly two-thirds of that spending.
basketball_guy
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Athletic Director

Postby thebam » Sat Jun 09, 2018 8:59 am

RForester wrote:Yeah...don't single out women's hockey...Softball, women's basketball and field hockey have higher total operating expenses per fiscal year than women's hockey at Umaine.


Softball ? more expensive than hockey? Maybe the travel budget puts them over the top, but that seemed odd to me. So, a couple of things. How would fundraising , the old way, help this? For example, Baseball used to ( pre Kreech) have a golf tournament, etc that paid for it's spring trip. What if friends groups came back and could raise a $hit ton of money to offset some of those type of expenses. Basketball, especially the women right now, is a revenue generating sport, so not really comparable to sports that don't generate money.
User avatar
thebam
 
Posts: 4441
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 10:42 pm
Location: Edmond, OK

Re: Athletic Director

Postby basketball_guy » Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:17 am

This is UMAINES ATHLETIC BUDGET FOR THE PAST 12 YEARS.

Maine

CONFERENCE: Am East

SCHOOL FINANCES
REVENUES
YEAR TICKET SALES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHTS / LICENSING STUDENT FEES SCHOOL FUNDS OTHER TOTAL REVENUES
2016 $993,050 $1,495,228 $2,033,184 $0 $14,282,296 $2,158,918 $20,962,676
2015 $1,284,451 $1,760,000 $2,062,742 $0 $13,401,424 $1,659,299 $20,167,916
2014 $1,244,173 $1,530,612 $2,020,957 $0 $12,829,475 $1,865,719 $19,490,936
2013 $1,177,030 $1,295,632 $1,877,582 $0 $12,790,924 $1,782,374 $18,923,542
2012 $1,349,685 $1,617,010 $1,937,070 $0 $12,015,539 $1,926,424 $18,845,728
2011 $1,344,794 $1,446,805 $1,904,081 $0 $12,096,275 $1,651,664 $18,443,619
2010 $1,300,935 $1,435,952 $1,723,001 $0 $9,760,424 $2,099,608 $16,319,920
2009 $1,506,905 $1,641,552 $1,776,818 $0 $9,548,688 $1,836,803 $16,310,766
2008 $1,761,886 $1,664,950 $1,460,126 $0 $8,585,487 $1,811,410 $15,283,859
2007 $1,547,737 $1,660,647 $1,508,121 $0 $8,039,425 $1,864,633 $14,620,563
2006 $1,750,353 $1,370,557 $1,522,842 $0 $7,310,340 $2,384,863 $14,338,955
2005 $1,776,197 $1,182,688 $1,463,692 $0 $6,945,656 $2,034,272 $13,402,505
basketball_guy
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Athletic Director

Postby RForester » Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:56 am

thebam wrote:
RForester wrote:Yeah...don't single out women's hockey...Softball, women's basketball and field hockey have higher total operating expenses per fiscal year than women's hockey at Umaine.


Softball ? more expensive than hockey? Maybe the travel budget puts them over the top, but that seemed odd to me. So, a couple of things. How would fundraising , the old way, help this? For example, Baseball used to ( pre Kreech) have a golf tournament, etc that paid for it's spring trip. What if friends groups came back and could raise a $hit ton of money to offset some of those type of expenses. Basketball, especially the women right now, is a revenue generating sport, so not really comparable to sports that don't generate money.


A budget is a budget, doesn't matter what % each team puts towards different facets of it. Friends groups need to never come back -- they're compliance nightmares.
RForester
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:18 pm

Re: Athletic Director

Postby ExpoEddie » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:10 am

Consideration for USM holding D1 programs needs to be reviewed. The revenue is capped by population in Bangor. However, D1 sports in Greater Portland would have more competition from pro, D3 & high schools.
ExpoEddie
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 1:20 pm

Re: Athletic Director

Postby thebam » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:32 am

RForester wrote:
RForester wrote:.


A budget is a budget, doesn't matter what % each team puts towards different facets of it. Friends groups need to never come back -- they're compliance nightmares.


How so?
User avatar
thebam
 
Posts: 4441
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 10:42 pm
Location: Edmond, OK

Re: Athletic Director

Postby CoachA » Mon Jun 11, 2018 2:50 pm

Boosters very rarely know the NCAA rules for their sport....and the NCAA Book for that is about 2 inches thick. Yes, you can try to educate them but they want engagement and connection with the athletes and lots of scenarios for that are not legal. There's lots at stake there.... program violations probations, coaches jobs, and certainly not least of all, an athlete can lose their eligibility due to a boosters interference. Often times in the major sports when boosters give substantial amounts of money to a program they expect special treatment and entitlement which result in program violations. Coaches have enough to worry about without being concerned that people outside the program are committing violations. There are certainly great boosters who are involved for all the right reasons but it's difficult to monitor that.
CoachA
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:14 am

Re: Athletic Director

Postby thebam » Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:27 am

CoachA wrote:Boosters very rarely know the NCAA rules for their sport....and the NCAA Book for that is about 2 inches thick. Yes, you can try to educate them but they want engagement and connection with the athletes and lots of scenarios for that are not legal. There's lots at stake there.... program violations probations, coaches jobs, and certainly not least of all, an athlete can lose their eligibility due to a boosters interference. Often times in the major sports when boosters give substantial amounts of money to a program they expect special treatment and entitlement which result in program violations. Coaches have enough to worry about without being concerned that people outside the program are committing violations. There are certainly great boosters who are involved for all the right reasons but it's difficult to monitor that.

while I understand all of this, has this ever been an issue at Maine outside of hockey 1 time? This isn't big time D-1 athletics. While these might be issues for billionaires donating to Texas and Oklahoma St. and Bama, surely the donors to Maine are much lower scale and aren't looking for the same kind of stroke those donors are? Or am I way off? I donate to baseball every year. Don't ask or care about anything except that they have a team and give effort. I am sure a lot of this is over my head, I am just trying to wrap my head around this all as we try and come up with ideas to help fund programs better and not cut them.
User avatar
thebam
 
Posts: 4441
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 10:42 pm
Location: Edmond, OK

Re: Athletic Director

Postby RForester » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:25 am

thebam wrote:
CoachA wrote:Boosters very rarely know the NCAA rules for their sport....and the NCAA Book for that is about 2 inches thick. Yes, you can try to educate them but they want engagement and connection with the athletes and lots of scenarios for that are not legal. There's lots at stake there.... program violations probations, coaches jobs, and certainly not least of all, an athlete can lose their eligibility due to a boosters interference. Often times in the major sports when boosters give substantial amounts of money to a program they expect special treatment and entitlement which result in program violations. Coaches have enough to worry about without being concerned that people outside the program are committing violations. There are certainly great boosters who are involved for all the right reasons but it's difficult to monitor that.

while I understand all of this, has this ever been an issue at Maine outside of hockey 1 time? This isn't big time D-1 athletics. While these might be issues for billionaires donating to Texas and Oklahoma St. and Bama, surely the donors to Maine are much lower scale and aren't looking for the same kind of stroke those donors are? Or am I way off? I donate to baseball every year. Don't ask or care about anything except that they have a team and give effort. I am sure a lot of this is over my head, I am just trying to wrap my head around this all as we try and come up with ideas to help fund programs better and not cut them.


Unfortunately most donors aren't cut from the same cloth as you bam...the way i see it, most former Friends groups members are upset that their access is cut off without their fancy Friend of ___ titles. They can still earmark donations but their access changed and thus comes out the entitlement. Look back at the bdn piece in March.

"He said because of Creech, they haven’t been able to assist any UMaine athletic program for two years, so they are sitting on $40,000 waiting to disburse it to programs in need."

they raised $40,000 on the backs of Black Bears but are literally refusing to donate it because they can't host a damn banquet anymore? they can still donate it to whichever program they choose ("Donors can support the Alfond Fund through gifts to a specific team or for a specific need, such as scholarships") but god forbid their butts ain't kissed anymore.
RForester
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:18 pm

PreviousNext

Return to UMaine D1 Athletics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: pre3time and 77 guests