MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Newsdreams on January 29, 2015, 02:43:28 PM
-
MU BB posted this about 15 mins. ago
VP & Director of Athletics will join Coach Wojo tonight for the radio show on ESPN Milwaukee from 6-7 p.m. at Ward's House of Prime. Scholl will discuss a major University announcement being made this afternoon.
-
MU BB posted this about 15 mins. ago
VP & Director of Athletics will join Coach Wojo tonight for the radio show on ESPN Milwaukee from 6-7 p.m. at Ward's House of Prime. Scholl will discuss a major University announcement being made this afternoon.
I don't know what it is about, but I do see that Lovell is delivering his presidential address at 3:00 today.
-
I don't know what it is about, but I do see that Lovell is delivering his presidential address at 3:00 today.
Yes just saw that. Anyone think it might be arena or practice facility related?
-
MU BB posted this about 15 mins. ago
VP & Director of Athletics will join Coach Wojo tonight for the radio show on ESPN Milwaukee from 6-7 p.m. at Ward's House of Prime. Scholl will discuss a major University announcement being made this afternoon.
Guessing it's this- http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/marquette-and-bucks-to-partner-in-sports-medicine-b99435481z1-290219921.html
-
Yes just saw that. Anyone think it might be arena or practice facility related?
Could be. Perhaps a big gift of some sort?
-
Turns out this is a bigger deal than I thought-
http://www.nba.com/bucks/release/milwaukee-bucks-collaborate-marquette-university-world-class-multi-purpose-sports-medicine
"Today, the owners of the Milwaukee Bucks have announced their intention to collaborate with Marquette University on a sports medicine and health and wellness initiative. Together, they are in the early stages of planning to construct a new, world-class, multi-purpose sports medicine and research facility to support the program.
Issues surrounding athlete health and performance are receiving increased attention throughout the NBA, other professional sports leagues and universities nationwide. Given the importance of these issues, the ownership of the Milwaukee Bucks and Marquette University are partnering to make significant investments in the health and well-being of their players and students, respectively. The partnership intends to build a world-class facility in downtown Milwaukee that supports elite-level sports science and medicine, health and wellness, as well as academic research initiatives.
Milwaukee Bucks co-owner Wes Edens stated, “When our group purchased the team, we made a promise to make an impact on and off the court. We are committed to upholding this promise. The development of this world-class facility will not only benefit Bucks players and Marquette students, but as a cutting edge leader in the sports medicine space, it will benefit the entire region and make Wisconsin an even greater attraction worldwide. We are excited to take this first step and partner with Marquette on this endeavor.”
The development is expected to be built on land Marquette University recently acquired in the 800 block of West Michigan Street."
-
Baseless speculation time... wonder if this facility will be built in addition to a fieldhouse/practice space for the Olympic sports teams.
-
Lovell is killin' it.
-
Turns out this is a bigger deal than I thought-
http://www.nba.com/bucks/release/milwaukee-bucks-collaborate-marquette-university-world-class-multi-purpose-sports-medicine
"Today, the owners of the Milwaukee Bucks have announced their intention to collaborate with Marquette University on a sports medicine and health and wellness initiative. Together, they are in the early stages of planning to construct a new, world-class, multi-purpose sports medicine and research facility to support the program.
Issues surrounding athlete health and performance are receiving increased attention throughout the NBA, other professional sports leagues and universities nationwide. Given the importance of these issues, the ownership of the Milwaukee Bucks and Marquette University are partnering to make significant investments in the health and well-being of their players and students, respectively. The partnership intends to build a world-class facility in downtown Milwaukee that supports elite-level sports science and medicine, health and wellness, as well as academic research initiatives.
Milwaukee Bucks co-owner Wes Edens stated, “When our group purchased the team, we made a promise to make an impact on and off the court. We are committed to upholding this promise. The development of this world-class facility will not only benefit Bucks players and Marquette students, but as a cutting edge leader in the sports medicine space, it will benefit the entire region and make Wisconsin an even greater attraction worldwide. We are excited to take this first step and partner with Marquette on this endeavor.”
The development is expected to be built on land Marquette University recently acquired in the 800 block of West Michigan Street."
President Lovell talked about something like this at the New York City Meet & Greet in the fall. At the time it sounded liked he wanted a dual purpose facility that did something like this announced and a recreation facility/field house for the students.
-
Lovell must be reading Scoop and the poll about a new medical school. Baby steps....
-
I'm starting to see what the big stink was about with this guy!
-
Baseless speculation time... wonder if this facility will be built in addition to a fieldhouse/practice space for the Olympic sports teams.
Yes!
http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2015/01/29/marquette-will-partner-with-milwaukee-bucks-on.html
-
President Lovell talked about something like this at the New York City Meet & Greet in the fall. At the time it sounded liked he wanted a dual purpose facility that did something like this announced and a recreation facility/field house for the students.
I was just looking for my comments about this back in December but couldn't locate. This fits exactly what Lovell told our group back then without providing any details. I'm certain this was in the works during Q4.
-
Great news. Having said that, I am curious where a new student rec center fits within the capital budget. This is well overdue IMO.
-
Yes!
http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2015/01/29/marquette-will-partner-with-milwaukee-bucks-on.html
NICE. Most logical use for that land... too far from the rest of campus for classrooms or housing.
Well done, Dr. Lovell.
-
This thing has been in the works for awhile. It's going to be an absolute slam dunk for the university and basketball program.
Lovell making waves!
-
Murf will be upset the "Slicksters" are at it again.
-
Great news. Having said that, I am curious where a new student rec center fits within the capital budget. This is well overdue IMO.
I'm not trying to be a dick, but realistically, what is the student rec center missing?
Maybe they could just refresh/remodel it? It's only been around since the 70's. MU can't really afford to be replacing facilities every 40 years.
-
I'm not trying to be a dick, but realistically, what is the student rec center missing?
Maybe they could just refresh/remodel it? It's only been around since the 70's. MU can't really afford to be replacing facilities every 40 years.
I would guess it's not missing much of anything. But it's a collegiate arms race. Other schools have shiny new facilities. Got to match them, or fall behind.
-
Tremendous for the hoops program, for the Olympic sports programs, and for the entire academic reputation of the school.
Absolutely incredible.
-
I'm not trying to be a dick, but realistically, what is the student rec center missing?
Maybe they could just refresh/remodel it? It's only been around since the 70's. MU can't really afford to be replacing facilities every 40 years.
It's missing a track and an indoor practice area that lacrosse & soccer can use during the still Milwaukee cold months.
-
I think we should immediately set up a high jump pit out on the vacant land so Wally can set the record. Like this afternoon.
;D
-
Gotta figure the dental school will also be involved. Cuttin' edge, world class stuff goin' on, aina?
-
I'm not trying to be a dick, but realistically, what is the student rec center missing?
Maybe they could just refresh/remodel it? It's only been around since the 70's. MU can't really afford to be replacing facilities every 40 years.
So much, I waited half an hour just to play a pick up game one time.
-
I'm not trying to be a dick, but realistically, what is the student rec center missing?
Maybe they could just refresh/remodel it? It's only been around since the 70's. MU can't really afford to be replacing facilities every 40 years.
It's a recruiting tool much like the academic and residential facilities. At the least, a serious renovation is needed.
-
It's missing a track and an indoor practice area that lacrosse & soccer can use during the still Milwaukee cold months.
That's a fieldhouse, not a rec center.
So, yes, I'm in favor of a new fieldhouse (especially using a partnership with the Bucks).
I'm not necessarily in favor of a new Rec Center for the general student population. The one that exists might need a remodel, but in general, it seems fine to me.
-
So much, I waited half an hour just to play a pick up game one time.
I understand, but should MU really spend millions on a new facility so kids don't have to wait to play pick-up ball?
-
Will the new facility know how to properly use Hyperbaric Chambers? Will they be teaching the Packers, Pistons, Suns, et al, training staffs to use them properly....or any head coaches out there that also serve as experts in that area?
-
There has gotta be some tanning beds put in there, no?
There certainly are some head coaches who serve as experts in this area.
-
I'm not trying to be a dick, but realistically, what is the student rec center missing?
Maybe they could just refresh/remodel it? It's only been around since the 70's. MU can't really afford to be replacing facilities every 40 years.
Mostly? Space. It's was super overcrowded when I was a student. I can only imagine it has gotten worse with increased class sizes.
-
So much, I waited half an hour just to play a pick up game one time.
Learn to play racquetball, Chitown. I bet those courts aren't nearly in as much demand as they were in the '70's. ;D
-
Journal/Sentinel article for more on Lovell's speech:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/mu-to-join-with-bucks-in-creating-sports-medicine-center-b99435574z1-290245861.html
-
Will the new facility know how to properly use Hyperbaric Chambers? Will they be teaching the Packers, Pistons, Suns, et al, training staffs to use them properly....or any head coaches out there that also serve as experts in that area?
We still got that piece o' chit? Thought it went at the garage sale with the those special XXXXLong ties and the lifetime membership to Tans R Us.
-
Turns out this is a bigger deal than I thought-
http://www.nba.com/bucks/release/milwaukee-bucks-collaborate-marquette-university-world-class-multi-purpose-sports-medicine
"Today, the owners of the Milwaukee Bucks have announced their intention to collaborate with Marquette University on a sports medicine and health and wellness initiative. Together, they are in the early stages of planning to construct a new, world-class, multi-purpose sports medicine and research facility to support the program.
Issues surrounding athlete health and performance are receiving increased attention throughout the NBA, other professional sports leagues and universities nationwide. Given the importance of these issues, the ownership of the Milwaukee Bucks and Marquette University are partnering to make significant investments in the health and well-being of their players and students, respectively. The partnership intends to build a world-class facility in downtown Milwaukee that supports elite-level sports science and medicine, health and wellness, as well as academic research initiatives.
Milwaukee Bucks co-owner Wes Edens stated, “When our group purchased the team, we made a promise to make an impact on and off the court. We are committed to upholding this promise. The development of this world-class facility will not only benefit Bucks players and Marquette students, but as a cutting edge leader in the sports medicine space, it will benefit the entire region and make Wisconsin an even greater attraction worldwide. We are excited to take this first step and partner with Marquette on this endeavor.”
The development is expected to be built on land Marquette University recently acquired in the 800 block of West Michigan Street."
The hyperbaric chamber will return to Marquette!
This is sweet though.
-
Mostly? Space. It's was super overcrowded when I was a student. I can only imagine it has gotten worse with increased class sizes.
Hmmm...
I wonder if they would be better off remodeling the Straz tower space to be bigger (is there still a pool down there? Does anybody use it, maybe turn that into more court space?
Campus isn't THAT big, but it's nice to have decent REC options on opposite ends of campus.
-
This is a big deal on many many levels. Well done MU.
-
So is this also going to be the Bucks new training facility as well or will that remain at the Cousins Center? Not sure if the the new Bucks owners were thinking about also moving the practice facility closer to downtown.
-
So is this also going to be the Bucks new training facility as well or will that remain at the Cousins Center? Not sure if the the new Bucks owners were thinking about also moving the practice facility closer to downtown.
I believe they're definitely interested in leaving the Cousins Center. Want to get downtown.
-
Learn to play racquetball, Chitown. I bet those courts aren't nearly in as much demand as they were in the '70's. ;D
I'm not sure if this changed but when I was there they had gotten rid of the racquetball courts. They filled them with more machines because there were too many students to fit in the weight room
-
Wow, doubling their research budget over the next 5 years? That's pretty incredible. DPS is getting police powers too, which should be interesting.
-
This seems like a particularly exciting time period to be associated with Marquette. The new law school building went up in 2010, which is absolutely gorgeous. The updating of the Al seems like a big deal for the basketball program. The addition of the lacrosse team is interesting. Soccer has experienced quite a bit of success in the recent years. The basketball team has a promising outlook. The new research with the freshwater sciences should bring some attention to the university. This announcement is huge for the academic prestige and all of our outdoor sports programs. The new arena for the Bucks should help the basketball program. DPS getting police power should make the neighborhood even more secure. The endowment has grown by nearly $80 million since last year, now at $531 million total (I believe). The new president seems to be absolutely killing it (although I am aware that a lot of this has nothing to do with Lovell).
-
Will the new facility know how to properly use Hyperbaric Chambers? Will they be teaching the Packers, Pistons, Suns, et al, training staffs to use them properly....or any head coaches out there that also serve as experts in that area?
Probably Crean or the Buzzster.
-
This seems like a particularly exciting time period to be associated with Marquette. The new law school building went up in 2010, which is absolutely gorgeous. The updating of the Al seems like a big deal for the basketball program. The addition of the lacrosse team is interesting. Soccer has experienced quite a bit of success in the recent years. The basketball team has a promising outlook. The new research with the freshwater sciences should bring some attention to the university. This announcement is huge for the academic prestige and all of our outdoor sports programs. The new arena for the Bucks should help the basketball program. DPS getting police power should make the neighborhood even more secure. The endowment has grown by nearly $80 million since last year, now at $531 million total (I believe). The new president seems to be absolutely killing it (although I am aware that a lot of this has nothing to do with Lovell).
All very good news. Should help to boost MU's national standing (and US News ranking). I've been tremendously impressed with Lovell.
-
Still waitin' for Dr. Lovell and powers that be in Bloomington to have a joint presser announcin' the Thomas Crean Memorial Soccer Complex, aina?
-
Anyone have any idea when groundbreaking/opening of the facility are expected?
-
Really impressive stuff
-
Still waitin' for Dr. Lovell and powers that be in Bloomington to have a joint presser announcin' the Thomas Crean Memorial Soccer Complex, aina?
Outstanding!
-
I'm not trying to be a dick, but realistically, what is the student rec center missing?
Maybe they could just refresh/remodel it? It's only been around since the 70's. MU can't really afford to be replacing facilities every 40 years.
Our Rec Facilities are so far behind other schools. Having just done the college tours last year with my daughter, the facilities out there are impressive. Kids really get into that. MU is light years behind. What is ours, 40 years old?
-
Hmmmmmm. I guess things continue to change since I was a student. When I selected MU, I hadn't seen their rec center. Hell, I didn't even know if they had one. Wasn't high on my list of concerns.
-
Anyone have any idea when groundbreaking/opening of the facility are expected?
Nothing mentioned to date. Still in the planning process.
-
Our Rec Facilities are so far behind other schools. Having just done the college tours last year with my daughter, the facilities out there are impressive. Kids really get into that. MU is light years behind. What is ours, 40 years old?
I walk by MSOE's Kern Center every day on the way to work. It's a nice-looking facility with lots of well-spaced, new machines.
I can definitely see how that would be a check in the positives column.
-
U of I is the same way. They have something ridiculous like 8 different usable facilities or something like that.
-
U of I is the same way. They have something ridiculous like 8 different usable facilities or something like that.
Yes, but those schools also offer Physical Education classes, Phys Ed Majors, etc. MU does not.
We cannot be all things to all people.
It was only a few days ago that people were complaining here at Scoop about the tuition. Shiny new buildings, more courses, more instructors and better ones, all mean higher tuition.
People need to make up their minds on what we want to be. (not picking on you, could have replied to most in this thread with same response)
-
Yes, but those schools also offer Physical Education classes, Phys Ed Majors, etc. MU does not.
We cannot be all things to all people.
It was only a few days ago that people were complaining here at Scoop about the tuition. Shiny new buildings, more courses, more instructors and better ones, all mean higher tuition.
People need to make up their minds on what we want to be. (not picking on you, could have replied to most in this thread with same response)
In the short term. But if planned properly, shiny new buildings could also mean expanded enrollment which would mean cheaper tuition.
-
In the short term. But if planned properly, shiny new buildings could also mean expanded enrollment which would mean cheaper tuition.
Can you give an actual example of where that has happened?
Also, I don't think Marquette has any plans to expand in terms of enrollment. I think that overall, they are pretty happy with the size that they are. They could have increased their enrollment in the last decade or so if they wanted. Instead, their strategy has been to stay the same size, but be more selective.
-
This is an outstanding development for the school as a whole. It is fantastic for the various sports teams and it gives the general student and faculty population a winter field recreation outlet that will make a big difference in their lives. Bottom line is this will allow us to keep enhancing our academic profile.
This goes in the category of very essential in my book, not just a fancy new toy. Very good bang for the buck.
-
Yes, but those schools also offer Physical Education classes, Phys Ed Majors, etc. MU does not.
We cannot be all things to all people.
It was only a few days ago that people were complaining here at Scoop about the tuition. Shiny new buildings, more courses, more instructors and better ones, all mean higher tuition.
People need to make up their minds on what we want to be. (not picking on you, could have replied to most in this thread with same response)
I've been very fortunate in terms of my scholarship and the fact my parents and grandparent's saved up college money for me since I was born. Yea tuition increases suck as a whole but I'm all for lovell and his expansion and upgrading
-
Will the new facility know how to properly use Hyperbaric Chambers? Will they be teaching the Packers, Pistons, Suns, et al, training staffs to use them properly....or any head coaches out there that also serve as experts in that area?
;D ;D ;D
-
I know that a lot of scoopers spend time in the Hyperbolic chamber every day.
-
In the short term. But if planned properly, shiny new buildings could also mean expanded enrollment which would mean cheaper tuition.
HA! Not gonna happen. The biggest cost that any college or university has is personnel, and that goes up directly with enrollment. (Unless you plan on stuffing more kids in a classroom, which isn't going to help enrollment any.)
-
This new facility will also be able to be used by students according this article by Anonymous Eagle.
http://www.anonymouseagle.com/2015/1/30/7950227/marquette-athletic-performance-facility-fieldhouse-lovell
"In addition to the intercollegiate athletics aspect of the building, AD Scholl confirmed in his radio appearance that the building will also be available for general student use as part of the recreational sports department. While it's a great boon for Marquette's teams to practice indoors during inclement weather, it's also fantastic that the rest of the student population will be able to use the building for flag football and the like during the winter months as well."
So does this mean that the Old Gym can come down and free up space for something else?
-
So does this mean that the Old Gym can come down and free up space for something else?
ROTC is rather entrenched in the Old Gym.
-
ROTC is rather entrenched in the Old Gym.
And it's not that much space between Clybourn and the nursing building anyway.
-
I didn't think the Old Gym was used for any of that stuff anyway, so I'm not sure it would matter. I would see this more directly affecting the Rec Plex, since it's right next door.
It's kinda too bad we couldn't have a do-over with the Al and really integrate the two facilities, and then tie-in the Bucks training facility and offices somehow too.
-
Our Rec Facilities are so far behind other schools. Having just done the college tours last year with my daughter, the facilities out there are impressive. Kids really get into that. MU is light years behind. What is ours, 40 years old?
#1 40 yrs old is NOTHING for a major capital investment like a Rec Center. If MU starts replacing facilities that are 40yrs old, Tuition is going to to be 200K per year. To put it in perspective, Cudahy was built in the early 90's I think, so we better get ready to tear that sucker down, in 2030 right? Not a sustainable plan.
#2 With this said, I understand that facilities are part of the schools recruiting and image, so yes, it's probably time for a remodel of the current facility.
#3 Maybe the new fieldhouse facility could house tennis courts? In which case the current rec center could expand/create more basketball courts (where tennis currently is) and expand the other fitness facilities (ellipticals, treadmills, weights etc.)
#4 I haven't been to the Rec Plex in Straz Tower in 10 years, but I would guess that they could remodel/refresh that facility as well.
All of these are better options than simply building a new Rec Center.
-
Out of curiosity, do student also use workout clubs in the Milwaukee area that aren't part of the University? (Snap Fitness, Gold's Gym, etc.) If so, could part of the thought be that Marquette doesn't feel that it needs to do too much more in this area with the local resources available?
-
Lovell must be reading Scoop and the poll about a new medical school. Baby steps....
hahahahaha!!
-
Out of curiosity, do student also use workout clubs in the Milwaukee area that aren't part of the University? (Snap Fitness, Gold's Gym, etc.) If so, could part of the thought be that Marquette doesn't feel that it needs to do too much more in this area with the local resources available?
That's an interesting idea... maybe a SNAP fitness style facility over by Campus Town?
The maintenance and upkeep of such a facility must be minimal. MU already owns the storefronts, so maybe they could put their own 24hr basic fitness facility into one of those buildings?
-
That's an interesting idea... maybe a SNAP fitness style facility over by Campus Town?
The maintenance and upkeep of such a facility must be minimal. MU already owns the storefronts, so maybe they could put their own 24hr basic fitness facility into one of those buildings?
From what I gather, lack of access to fitness equipment (treadmills, weight machines, etc.) isn't the issue as much as space for intramural sports and other activities that require large amounts of square footage. Putting some ellipticals and free weights into one of the empty storefronts isn't going to meet the most pressing needs.
-
From what I gather, lack of access to fitness equipment (treadmills, weight machines, etc.) isn't the issue as much as space for intramural sports and other activities that require large amounts of square footage. Putting some ellipticals and free weights into one of the empty storefronts isn't going to meet the most pressing needs.
Ah ha, okay, well, then the new fieldhouse/training facility should solve those problems.
BTW, I'm in favor of this facility and recognize the value, I'm simply point out that MU doesn't need to replace the REC CENTER as well (as was suggested). There are other solutions to improve those facilities instead of simply replacing them (hooray, shiny! NEW!).
-
Ah ha, okay, well, then the new fieldhouse/training facility should solve those problems.
BTW, I'm in favor of this facility and recognize the value, I'm simply point out that MU doesn't need to replace the REC CENTER as well (as was suggested). There are other solutions to improve those facilities instead of simply replacing them (hooray, shiny! NEW!).
Agree with you there. There is a lot of boxy space at Helfaer that they could renovate. It's a flat-topped building. Could they possibly add a story onto it?
-
Agree with you there. There is a lot of boxy space at Helfaer that they could renovate. It's a flat-topped building. Could they possibly add a story onto it?
Well, if they can put tennis in the new facility, it would give them a TON of space at Helfaer, and they could put additional court space in that would improve the facility.
Court related sports and intramurals (basketball, volleyball, floor hockey, etc. etc.) could all stay in that facility, and if they want to host some "field" related sports in the new facility, that seems to make sense.
I'm actually a little surprised they didn't consider a domed facility down in the valley. I know a lot of high schools have used such facilities and rent them out during off hours as well. (softball, baseball, golf, etc.).
-
Anyone have any idea when groundbreaking/opening of the facility are expected?
In answer to my own question, 6 months for design and another 18-24 for construction. Puts the "doors open" date somewhere between February-July 2017.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/mu-to-join-with-bucks-in-creating-sports-medicine-center-b99435574z1-290245861.html
-
In the short term. But if planned properly, shiny new buildings could also mean expanded enrollment which would mean cheaper tuition.
Unlikely, because the powers that be will also scream about teacher to student ratios and all that BS. So more students, more support hires and more professors to keep their magical ratio in tact.
-
I've been very fortunate in terms of my scholarship and the fact my parents and grandparent's saved up college money for me since I was born. Yea tuition increases suck as a whole but I'm all for lovell and his expansion and upgrading
So am I....but I don't want to hear the bitching about the increased tuition, etc, that comes with it then.
Too many people talk out of both sides of their mouth. Lovell is trying to improve our overall image, as well as the value proposition. MU costs a lot of money, so you need to show the peeps there is a reason to spend that kind of money.
IMO, too many MU folks want us to be a great school and defy the laws of economics. Now, don't get me wrong, I think the cost of education is insane, and a big chunk of that has to do with student loans and grant programs that are given out like candy which just allows colleges to keep jamming up costs (paying for profs, etc, etc) because money is flowing so cheaply.
That will come to an end, no different than Quanitative Easing....there is always a pauper to be paid at the end of the line.
-
So am I....but I don't want to hear the bitching about the increased tuition, etc, that comes with it then.
Too many people talk out of both sides of their mouth. Lovell is trying to improve our overall image, as well as the value proposition. MU costs a lot of money, so you need to show the peeps there is a reason to spend that kind of money.
IMO, too many MU folks want us to be a great school and defy the laws of economics. Now, don't get me wrong, I think the cost of education is insane, and a big chunk of that has to do with student loans and grant programs that are given out like candy which just allows colleges to keep jamming up costs (paying for profs, etc, etc) because money is flowing so cheaply.
That will come to an end, no different than Quanitative Easing....there is always a pauper to be paid at the end of the line.
I bitch about tuition all of the time. It's not because I don't understand economics, it's because I DO understand economics.
You can't crank up the tuition machine indefinitely. It's NOT sustainable, especially for a private institution.
Building new facilities is nice, and adds to the value proposition, but if it makes MU unattainable for all but the uber wealthy, then they have missed the mark, especially for a Jesuit university.
With this said, I like what Lovell is doing. I think partnering with key organizations in Milwaukee can only help MU in the long run.
I'm in favor of "new" when it's appropriate/needed. I'm not in favor of "new" just because it looks better on a prospective student tour, or because Oshkosh has a better Rec Center. That kind of thinking will put MU out of business inside of 30 years.
MU is valuable because of the education and reputation. Work on those things first. That's the value proposition.
-
I bitch about tuition all of the time. It's not because I don't understand economics, it's because I DO understand economics.
You can't crank up the tuition machine indefinitely. It's NOT sustainable, especially for a private institution.
Building new facilities is nice, and adds to the value proposition, but if it makes MU unattainable for all but the uber wealthy, then they have missed the mark, especially for a Jesuit university.
With this said, I like what Lovell is doing. I think partnering with key organizations in Milwaukee can only help MU in the long run.
I'm in favor of "new" when it's appropriate/needed. I'm not in favor of "new" just because it looks better on a prospective student tour, or because Oshkosh has a better Rec Center. That kind of thinking will put MU out of business inside of 30 years.
MU is valuable because of the education and reputation. Work on those things first. That's the value proposition.
Selfishly I still want a new rec center though ;D. Heck Bradley has a beautiful rec center I understand other things should come first (The labs in wehr chem anyone) but a new rec would be cool.
-
The biggest driver of tuition cost is federally guaranteed loans. Period. Full stop. Being able to Put up shiny new buildings, which obviously require higher tuition to support is a symptom of the disease. If universities couldn't get, literally, any amount of tuition they wanted to charge from the feds, then they would be forced to prioritize, renovate, and seek the efficiencies from renovating, remodeling, or making do, that Ammo suggests on a regular basis (not disagreeing, they should be doing those things).
Until the well goes dry, there's no *incentive* not to keep building and passing along the costs in the form of tuition.
-
Selfishly I still want a new rec center though ;D. Heck Bradley has a beautiful rec center I understand other things should come first (The labs in wehr chem anyone) but a new rec would be cool.
Totally, I mean, a new gym would be super fun. No doubt.
I just don't know if it's a required spend right now.
-
I bitch about tuition all of the time. It's not because I don't understand economics, it's because I DO understand economics.
You can't crank up the tuition machine indefinitely. It's NOT sustainable, especially for a private institution.
Building new facilities is nice, and adds to the value proposition, but if it makes MU unattainable for all but the uber wealthy, then they have missed the mark, especially for a Jesuit university.
With this said, I like what Lovell is doing. I think partnering with key organizations in Milwaukee can only help MU in the long run.
I'm in favor of "new" when it's appropriate/needed. I'm not in favor of "new" just because it looks better on a prospective student tour, or because Oshkosh has a better Rec Center. That kind of thinking will put MU out of business inside of 30 years.
MU is valuable because of the education and reputation. Work on those things first. That's the value proposition.
Then decide what you want to be. Do you want to be a world class university, a top 100 or top 50 university in this States? It means it is going to cost students a lot of money as a private institution.
That's the reality.
If you want lower tuition, then you have to be ready for the tradeoffs....faculty leaving for better gigs, fewer shiny new toys, higher enrollment (i.e. less selective), etc.
Tradeoffs in life.
-
Interestin' that a few schools like Harvard, Stanford, USC, Northwestern, etc. can be the recipients of donations in one fiscal year, far greater than our entire endowment?
-
Interestin' that a few schools like Harvard, Stanford, USC, Northwestern, etc. can be the recipients of donations in one fiscal year, far greater than our entire endowment?
It seems to me that the starting salary out of Harvard might be ever so slightly higher than Marquette.
-
The biggest driver of tuition cost is federally guaranteed loans. Period. Full stop. Being able to Put up shiny new buildings, which obviously require higher tuition to support is a symptom of the disease. If universities couldn't get, literally, any amount of tuition they wanted to charge from the feds, then they would be forced to prioritize, renovate, and seek the efficiencies from renovating, remodeling, or making do, that Ammo suggests on a regular basis (not disagreeing, they should be doing those things).
Until the well goes dry, there's no *incentive* not to keep building and passing along the costs in the form of tuition.
B I N G O
-
The biggest driver of tuition cost is federally guaranteed loans. Period. Full stop. Being able to Put up shiny new buildings, which obviously require higher tuition to support is a symptom of the disease. If universities couldn't get, literally, any amount of tuition they wanted to charge from the feds, then they would be forced to prioritize, renovate, and seek the efficiencies from renovating, remodeling, or making do, that Ammo suggests on a regular basis (not disagreeing, they should be doing those things).
Until the well goes dry, there's no *incentive* not to keep building and passing along the costs in the form of tuition.
Totally fair.
I mean, I'm not saying that MU should be acting out of fear and hoarding cash because of impending doom. They need to reinvest. Great.
But, they also need to have an eye on the future. You can't have tuition continue at this rate.
Something is going to give. Having a campus full of awesome facilities that nobody can afford isn't a good idea.
-
Then decide what you want to be. Do you want to be a world class university, a top 100 or top 50 university in this States? It means it is going to cost students a lot of money as a private institution.
That's the reality.
If you want lower tuition, then you have to be ready for the tradeoffs....faculty leaving for better gigs, fewer shiny new toys, higher enrollment (i.e. less selective), etc.
Tradeoffs in life.
No, the reality is, MU is "worth it" because of the education you receive. NOT the buildings. NOT the Rec Center. NOT the shiny new dorms.
So, while capital improvements are always going to be a part of MU's ongoing costs, I don't think "build baby build" and passing the costs onto future students is a good way to become a "world class University", and doesn't really fit MU's mission statement.
I never expect MU to be cheap. I just don't want to see them price themselves out of the marketplace.
-
Selfishly I still want a new rec center though ;D. Heck Bradley has a beautiful rec center I understand other things should come first (The labs in wehr chem anyone) but a new rec would be cool.
Any one who wants something because it is cool is not the one on the hook for paying for it.
-
The biggest driver of tuition cost is federally guaranteed loans. Period. Full stop. Being able to Put up shiny new buildings, which obviously require higher tuition to support is a symptom of the disease. If universities couldn't get, literally, any amount of tuition they wanted to charge from the feds, then they would be forced to prioritize, renovate, and seek the efficiencies from renovating, remodeling, or making do, that Ammo suggests on a regular basis (not disagreeing, they should be doing those things).
Until the well goes dry, there's no *incentive* not to keep building and passing along the costs in the form of tuition.
Yep. Both education and healthcare costs have expanded well beyond the rate of inflation because consumers (students/patients) don't see a direct connection between their decision to "buy" the product and the cost of the product. Student loans look like free money to the kid, so he or she won't scrutinize colleges based on cost. Likewise in healthcare, Medicare and other insurance products have long made healthcare look virtually free to insured consumers, leading to overutilization.
I'm not arguing against some form of student loans and health insurance - both are vitally important in our efforts to distribute resources appropriately - but we still need to make a closer connection between the buyer and the cost of services. This is starting to occur in healthcare - more plans with higher deductibles and copayments, movement toward paying providers based on value (cost/benefit), etc. These will lead to patients seeking care when appropriate, and at the "highest value" providers. This in turn will incentivize more providers to get into the high value bucket. A long process, but steps in the right direction. We need to find similar fixes in education.
-
Totally fair.
I mean, I'm not saying that MU should be acting out of fear and hoarding cash because of impending doom. They need to reinvest. Great.
But, they also need to have an eye on the future. You can't have tuition continue at this rate.
Something is going to give. Having a campus full of awesome facilities that nobody can afford isn't a good idea.
Is there any value in saying "okay we've got a gravy train revenue stream right now; let's capitalize on it and build all of the capital investments we need to be a world class university for the next fifty years AFTER the crash occurs and it becomes harder to make the same investments" ?
-
Is there any value in saying "okay we've got a gravy train revenue stream right now; let's capitalize on it and build all of the capital investments we need to be a world class university for the next fifty years AFTER the crash occurs and it becomes harder to make the same investments" ?
Cheap bond rates are fueling a lot of college and university building right now for that very reason.
-
...
But, they also need to have an eye on the future. You can't have tuition continue at this rate.
...
Backward looking evidence suggests that it can and will. Until the feds turn off the spigot of unlimited loan $ tuition can and will continue to increase with no foreseeable upper bound.
-
Is there any value in saying "okay we've got a gravy train revenue stream right now; let's capitalize on it and build all of the capital investments we need to be a world class university for the next fifty years AFTER the crash occurs and it becomes harder to make the same investments" ?
That's entirely possible, and maybe that is the best way to do it.
However, IMHO, it's almost impossible to reduce tuition. Therefore, continuing to crank it up over and over again with the idea that they can magically get it under control in the future is high risk.
"I'll start my diet next week."
-
Backward looking evidence suggests that it can and will. Until the feds turn off the spigot of unlimited loan $ tuition can and will continue to increase with no foreseeable upper bound.
Truthfully, I'm not an economist, so my opinion means very little.
I'm just a pragmatist looking at the growth, costs, and value of an MU education.
-
For the record I do agree with you that tuition is too high already and its continued increases are not sustainable. However, I do also realize that competing on cost is not going to improve the university. As long as the tuition dollars are guaranteed to the university by the feds, and the reality of what 6 figures of debt means is deferred until after it's too late to make a different buying decision, universities compete on everything besides tuition cost.
If that's the case then we are asking MU to behave irrationally within their marketplace.
-
For the record I do agree with you that tuition is too high already and its continued increases are not sustainable. However, I do also realize that competing on cost is not going to improve the university. As long as the tuition dollars are guaranteed to the university by the feds, and the reality of what 6 figures of debt means is deferred until after it's too late to make a different buying decision, universities compete on everything besides tuition cost.
If that's the case then we are asking MU to behave irrationally within their marketplace.
Very true.
True innovators and visionaries are often seen as irrational. :)
But, yes, you are correct. I just hope MU (and other schools) can course correct before the bottom falls out.
Also, I'd like to thank everybody in this thread for not turning this into something about JJJ/playing time/Wojo vs Deane/Derrick.
-
Wow, trying to figure out how this thread went from the announcement of a new field house that will be the home of soccer and Lacrosse, as well as a state of the art research center turned into a discussion of a rec center and higher tuition. This is not a new rec center. Although students will be allowed to use the facility when it is not in use by the athletic teams (this is similar to most universities that have field houses), their tuition will not be used to support it. Now, if your argument is that donors should not fund this initiative because the soccer and Lacrosse teams do not need a facility, that's one thing, or if they should give their money to scholarships for undergrads in general, I can sympathize with your concerns. But that doesn't seem to be the case here.
-
Wow, trying to figure out how this thread went from the announcement of a new field house that will be the home of soccer and Lacrosse, as well as a state of the art research center turned into a discussion of a rec center and higher tuition. This is not a new rec center. Although students will be allowed to use the facility when it is not in use by the athletic teams (this is similar to most universities that have field houses), their tuition will not be used to support it. Now, if your argument is that donors should not fund this initiative because the soccer and Lacrosse teams do not need a facility, that's one thing, or if they should give their money to scholarships for undergrads in general, I can sympathize with your concerns. But that doesn't seem to be the case here.
I'm probably responsible for some of that nonsense/off track.
- The fieldhouse is a good idea, and needed. (good for MU and the Bucks)
- A shiny new rec-center and more and more facilities are likely NOT required at this time, and led to a bigger conversation about capital improvements, and ultimately their cost to MU.
I fully realize that capital improvements aren't the direct cause and effect for tuition, but let's be honest, buildings aren't free, and certainly they aren't helping curb tuition.
-
Yep. Both education and healthcare costs have expanded well beyond the rate of inflation because consumers (students/patients) don't see a direct connection between their decision to "buy" the product and the cost of the product. Student loans look like free money to the kid, so he or she won't scrutinize colleges based on cost. Likewise in healthcare, Medicare and other insurance products have long made healthcare look virtually free to insured consumers, leading to overutilization.
I'm not arguing against some form of student loans and health insurance - both are vitally important in our efforts to distribute resources appropriately - but we still need to make a closer connection between the buyer and the cost of services. This is starting to occur in healthcare - more plans with higher deductibles and copayments, movement toward paying providers based on value (cost/benefit), etc. These will lead to patients seeking care when appropriate, and at the "highest value" providers. This in turn will incentivize more providers to get into the high value bucket. A long process, but steps in the right direction. We need to find similar fixes in education.
1. Good in theory. Horrible in execution (at least currently) because:
a) EMTALA - people will still just go to an ER whenever they feel like it, rather than when appropriate.
b) "Value" is beginning to be established by consumer/patient reports, ie. when a patient is "unhappy" with their care, they fill out a survey that punishes the provider/system. So what happens? Providers are at the mercy of making the patients happy, regardless of what is best for their health.
-
Research facilities are a magnet for grants.
-
Yep. Both education and healthcare costs have expanded well beyond the rate of inflation because consumers (students/patients) don't see a direct connection between their decision to "buy" the product and the cost of the product. Student loans look like free money to the kid, so he or she won't scrutinize colleges based on cost. Likewise in healthcare, Medicare and other insurance products have long made healthcare look virtually free to insured consumers, leading to overutilization.
I'm not arguing against some form of student loans and health insurance - both are vitally important in our efforts to distribute resources appropriately - but we still need to make a closer connection between the buyer and the cost of services. This is starting to occur in healthcare - more plans with higher deductibles and copayments, movement toward paying providers based on value (cost/benefit), etc. These will lead to patients seeking care when appropriate, and at the "highest value" providers. This in turn will incentivize more providers to get into the high value bucket. A long process, but steps in the right direction. We need to find similar fixes in education.
I think you are slightly missing the mark on this statement. The reason that they both have increased at faster than the rate of inflation is because they are "needs." Health is a need, and a college education has also become a need to get a family sustaining job. Because of that you are forced to choose between poverty (because you can't get a good job) or extended poverty with a chance of future escape (college).
When there are needs, the provider can continue to charge ever increasing prices, because there is no viable alternative.
What we have done though is pushed far enough that for college, the extended poverty from loans, is nearing, permanent poverty, at which point costs can't rise anymore.
Similarly we are seeing health care costs taper off, because going to the doctor is bankrupting people.
-
I think you are slightly missing the mark on this statement. The reason that they both have increased at faster than the rate of inflation is because they are "needs."
Food and clothes are needs too, but haven't increased at nearly the rate of education and healthcare. Want to guess why? Because consumers pay directly for them.
-
1. Good in theory. Horrible in execution (at least currently) because:
a) EMTALA - people will still just go to an ER whenever they feel like it, rather than when appropriate.
b) "Value" is beginning to be established by consumer/patient reports, ie. when a patient is "unhappy" with their care, they fill out a survey that punishes the provider/system. So what happens? Providers are at the mercy of making the patients happy, regardless of what is best for their health.
Medicare is on the cusp of establishing value metrics, which will result in payments to the organizations being tiered based on legitimate indicators of quality. Obama mentioned it in his speech the other night. Lots of professional organizations have been compiling data like complication rates, survival rates, etc compared to cost. This article from a few years ago in the New Yorker gives you an idea of what they're working on: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/06/01/the-cost-conundrum
Yes, consumers are doing the same thing, but the "consumer preference" metrics won't affect patients' preferences anywhere near as much as Medicare metrics that will directly impact how much the patient pays. And that's probably a good thing, since most consumer preference indicators for health care show that patients realy can't distinguish good quality and value - instead, they mostly prefer docs that order more tests.
-
Food and clothes are needs too, but haven't increased at nearly the rate of education and healthcare. Want to guess why? Because consumers pay directly for them.
Both of these are world-wide commodities, so it has to compete in a global market. That alone will keep prices down. Also, anyone can decide to make clothes or grow food, with minimal personal investment. Healthcare and education are regulated and require a large initial investment, which allows both to operate as essentially monopolies (not the right word, but conceptually similar).
-
Both of these are world-wide commodities, so it has to compete in a global market. That alone will keep prices down. Also, anyone can decide to make clothes or grow food, with minimal personal investment. Healthcare and education are regulated and require a large initial investment, which allows both to operate as essentially monopolies (not the right word, but conceptually similar).
Healthcare and education are global commodities too.
I work for a healthcare provider that sees a significant percentage of our patients from overseas. There are more than you think.
My daughter grew up in the US, and in the past couple of years has studied in Argentina and Cuba. In a year or so, she'll be heading off to law school in England. Her boyfriend (from India) studies in Minnesota, and plans to go to grad school in England.
Everything is a global marketplace.
You don't think food is regulated by the government? Meet the FDA. Heard of milk and corn subsidies?
-
The primary driver of healthcare costs is rapidly increasing dissociation between the delta increase in life expectancy and the delta increase in cost. The vast majority of life expectancy gains outside of the last 20 years were based on the development of hygiene, vaccines, and antibiotics which resulted in massive decreases in childhood and adolescent mortality at a very low cost. Current advances against the mortality of organ failure and cancer are disturbingly expensive.
America is woefully ignorant of the fact that our massive health expenditures are the primary funders of biotech and pharmaceutical firms that sell the same medicines to other countries to other countries for 10 cents on the dollar because those countries have the power and resolve to get by without them if the company won't drop prices.
It is true that globalization will provide cost pressures but only on elective procedures. The most expensive patients (organ failure, cancer, etc) will not intentionally choose to have their end of life care overseas or frequently even across the country.
-
The primary driver of healthcare costs is rapidly increasing dissociation between the delta increase in life expectancy and the delta increase in cost. The vast majority of life expectancy gains outside of the last 20 years were based on the development of hygiene, vaccines, and antibiotics which resulted in massive decreases in childhood and adolescent mortality at a very low cost. Current advances against the mortality of organ failure and cancer are disturbingly expensive.
A factor - absolutely. The primary driver - no. The main problems are paying for services based on volume instead of results, and patients making decisions while insurers pay the bills.
-
Healthcare and education are global commodities too.
I work for a healthcare provider that sees a significant percentage of our patients from overseas. There are more than you think.
My daughter grew up in the US, and in the past couple of years has studied in Argentina and Cuba. In a year or so, she'll be heading off to law school in England. Her boyfriend (from India) studies in Minnesota, and plans to go to grad school in England.
Everything is a global marketplace.
You don't think food is regulated by the government? Meet the FDA. Heard of milk and corn subsidies?
They are not global marketplaces. If I'm sick I can't just go to a chinese doctor at 1/10th the cost. Similarly, if I want to get a good job, I can't just go to school in Equador to save money. We are required to go to local doctors, the number of which (competition) is limited each year.
Food is most assuredly regulated by the government, but subsidies there are intended to assure there are more crops being produced to lower costs. Government regulations in healthcare and education suppress people from entering the field and suppress competition.
-
The primary driver of healthcare costs is rapidly increasing dissociation between the delta increase in life expectancy and the delta increase in cost. The vast majority of life expectancy gains outside of the last 20 years were based on the development of hygiene, vaccines, and antibiotics which resulted in massive decreases in childhood and adolescent mortality at a very low cost. Current advances against the mortality of organ failure and cancer are disturbingly expensive.
America is woefully ignorant of the fact that our massive health expenditures are the primary funders of biotech and pharmaceutical firms that sell the same medicines to other countries to other countries for 10 cents on the dollar because those countries have the power and resolve to get by without them if the company won't drop prices.
It is true that globalization will provide cost pressures but only on elective procedures. The most expensive patients (organ failure, cancer, etc) will not intentionally choose to have their end of life care overseas or frequently even across the country.
To some extent much of this is true, especially the cost of late-life care. I don't think medicine cost is a large driver though of healthcare costs for the average person. It is, what I'll call predatory medicine.
An example, a friend went to his doctor, because he thought he was having an allergic reaction to a medication (he began self treating with benadryl, but needed a new medicine), the nurses immediately sent him to the emergency room (wouldn't see him there). At the emergency room they ran every test you can imagine, before sending him home with benadryl. Cost for him $24,000, to be told he had what he thought he had and to finally be given a different antibiotic.
Or one that happened to me, went to a doctor (a walk-in), was prescribed an antibiotic. I forgot that I had a bad experience with that one before, so before filling it called the doctor back to ask if I could have the prescription switched. I was told that it wouldn't be a problem, but I had to come back in and would have to pay for another office visit. I was also once charged a $250 office visit to hear that "my tests were fine." I had asked if I could here the test results over the phone, but they insisted I and to come in.
-
They are not global marketplaces. If I'm sick I can't just go to a chinese doctor at 1/10th the cost. Similarly, if I want to get a good job, I can't just go to school in Equador to save money. We are required to go to local doctors, the number of which (competition) is limited each year.
Food is most assuredly regulated by the government, but subsidies there are intended to assure there are more crops being produced to lower costs. Government regulations in healthcare and education suppress people from entering the field and suppress competition.
You may not be able to go to the Chinese doctor for acute episodes of care, but acute episodes of care are the minority in terms of $$$. The vast majority of care (and much of the most expensive care) deals with chronic conditions - cancer, hypertension, etc. There is nothing preventing you from going to China for these...except the disconnect between consumer and payer. If you (instead of an insurer) paid the bill, you might very well go to China to save 90% of the cost of treatment. Which takes us back to my post this afternoon....
-
To some extent much of this is true, especially the cost of late-life care. I don't think medicine cost is a large driver though of healthcare costs for the average person. It is, what I'll call predatory medicine.
An example, a friend went to his doctor, because he thought he was having an allergic reaction to a medication (he began self treating with benadryl, but needed a new medicine), the nurses immediately sent him to the emergency room (wouldn't see him there). At the emergency room they ran every test you can imagine, before sending him home with benadryl. Cost for him $24,000, to be told he had what he thought he had and to finally be given a different antibiotic.
Or one that happened to me, went to a doctor (a walk-in), was prescribed an antibiotic. I forgot that I had a bad experience with that one before, so before filling it called the doctor back to ask if I could have the prescription switched. I was told that it wouldn't be a problem, but I had to come back in and would have to pay for another office visit. I was also once charged a $250 office visit to hear that "my tests were fine." I had asked if I could here the test results over the phone, but they insisted I and to come in.
Sounds like you and your friend went to the low value providers I alluded to earlier. Read the New Yorker article.
-
Sounds like you and your friend went to the low value providers I alluded to earlier. Read the New Yorker article.
Except these occurred at major research University hospitals/clinics. The McAllen model is becoming the norm. There are very few alternatives in major metro areas in many parts of the country.
-
Speaking of arms race...I got a tour of the new Oregon Ducks arena today. Incredible facility
-
A factor - absolutely. The primary driver - no. The main problems are paying for services based on volume instead of results, and patients making decisions while insurers pay the bills.
Paying for results works if you have a uniform distribution of disease, age, compliance, frailty, socioeconomic status, etc, etc. The Mayo Clinic is primarily a consultation (diagnosis) and surgical intervention center. They are able to provide diagnoses and surgeries for a relatively low cost. It is very important to realize that they are providing very little unfunded care to uninsured or underinsured individuals given their location. Further the patients they diagnose and do surgery on do not present to their clinics or their emergency department in extremis. Instead those patients present to their local hospitals where they receive intensive care from the moment they hit the door. They are frequently necessarily placed on respirators, have their kidneys supplemented with dialysis, have their hearts supplemented with medications, and require 1 to 1 or 2 to 1 nursing care.
Patients and their families haven't recently changed their preferences on avoiding death but we have massively extended our ability to facilitate their hope through medical technology. We have reached a point where once we get full control (breathing tube, central line, dialysis catheter) it is extraordinarily difficult for a patient to die.
Kidney failure was a fatal diagnosis until dialysis was invented as a method to keep people alive until their kidneys recovered. Then the technology improved enough to allow people to continue living as long as they stayed on dialysis. Currently Medicare reimburses ~$25,000 per year per dialysis patient for the therapy alone not to mention the patient's medications or recurrent hospitalizations for clinical decompensation.
-
Speaking of arms race...I got a tour of the new Oregon Ducks arena today. Incredible facility
I've only seen pictures, but absolutely ridiculous. I wish I could live there. Heck, I wish I could just vacation there for a weekend.
-
I've only seen pictures, but absolutely ridiculous. I wish I could live there. Heck, I wish I could just vacation there for a weekend.
There is this glass building across the street that is really strange design. I asked what it was and they indicated it is 100% for student athletes academic affairs - studying etc.
Crazy
-
Patients and their families haven't recently changed their preferences on avoiding death but we have massively extended our ability to facilitate their hope through medical technology. We have reached a point where once we get full control (breathing tube, central line, dialysis catheter) it is extraordinarily difficult for a patient to die.
Agreed. And the reason it's so difficult to just let patients die? Patients/families often demand that providers do "everything they can" to prolong life. I work with doctors everyday who tell me that extending the care is futile - that they believe it is in the patient's best interest to let him or her die with dignity - but they feel pressured to follow the wishes of families.
Why do the families demand "everything?" Because they don't (directly) pay the bill. "Keep grandma comatose and on life support for another week? Why not? It doesn't cost us anything."
-
Except these occurred at major research University hospitals/clinics. The McAllen model is becoming the norm. There are very few alternatives in major metro areas in many parts of the country.
Right. The McAllen model is becoming the norm...because of the messed up insurance system I mentioned in my earlier post. And by the way, being a major research university doesn't necessarily make it a high value provider.
-
I'm done with healthcare debates.
Back to school facilities...my daughter started at Mizzou last fall. The rec center is crazy - swimming pools, martial arts studios, cardio, weights -- all the usual stuff. But you can also "float down a lazy river in the Tiger grotto." I didn't make that up.
-
Unlikely, because the powers that be will also scream about teacher to student ratios and all that BS. So more students, more support hires and more professors to keep their magical ratio in tact.
Teacher to student ratio is "BS"? It's a distinguishing factor that makes the experience unique, and a reason many (including myself) chose MU over a cheaper public option. I still have valuable relationships with professors that I maintain to this day because of it. So I hope someone does the screaming in favor of maintaining the ratios.
-
I'm done with healthcare debates.
Back to school facilities...my daughter started at Mizzou last fall. The rec center is crazy - swimming pools, martial arts studios, cardio, weights -- all the usual stuff. But you can also "float down a lazy river in the Tiger grotto." I didn't make that up.
Oregon's student rec center, didn't appear to be anything to write home about. Having said that, I was only on that side of campus yesterday for a few minutes so I may have missed another facility.
-
Food and clothes are needs too, but haven't increased at nearly the rate of education and healthcare. Want to guess why? Because consumers pay directly for them.
supply has something to do with it as well, as does the cost to produce clothes and food....totally different animals.
-
Teacher to student ratio is "BS"? It's a distinguishing factor that makes the experience unique, and a reason many (including myself) chose MU over a cheaper public option. I still have valuable relationships with professors that I maintain to this day because of it. So I hope someone does the screaming in favor of maintaining the ratios.
I agree that teacher/student ratio is important.
However, you have to be careful when interpreting the general numbers you see from schools. Both of my daughters go to large public universities, so if you look at the published ratios, they're considerably worse (higher) than MU's. But they chose specific majors at those schools that have more favorable ratios, and thus far, neither has had more than one large "lecture hall" type class. Instead, most of their classes have a professor (very rarely a TA) and about 10-20 students. They know students in other majors that regularly have 100+ students (kind of like when I majored in Biology at MU).
As always, YMMV.
-
If I win this Powerball tonight, how much would I have to donate to get the facility named the "Warrior Code I'm really a badger fan Hey Sports Palace"?
5, 10 million?
-
If I win this Powerball tonight, how much would I have to donate to get the facility named the "Warrior Code I'm really a badger fan Hey Sports Palace"?
5, 10 million?
I think you should go with "The Warrior Code Sports Palace, I'm really a badger fan?"
-
If I win this Powerball tonight, how much would I have to donate to get the facility named the "Warrior Code I'm really a badger fan Hey Sports Palace"?
5, 10 million?
$2 million will get you naming rights for this place....WarriorCodeScoop ????
-
$2 million will get you naming rights for this place....WarriorCodeScoop ????
Warrior's Code presents, the MUScoop.com Slap of Five Palace.
-
I think you should go with "The Warrior Code Sports Palace, I'm really a badger fan?"
I chose the name because I wanted to right a wrong:
When I was at MU there was a contest to give County Stadium a name. The winning entry was the Aina Hey Sports Palace. The County/Brewers declined to adopt the name in any formal capacity.
-
Warrior's Code presents, the MUScoop.com Slap of Five Palace.
Warrior Code and the Slap of Five is the name of my sextet jazz ensemble.
-
I'm done with healthcare debates.
Back to school facilities...my daughter started at Mizzou last fall. The rec center is crazy - swimming pools, martial arts studios, cardio, weights -- all the usual stuff. But you can also "float down a lazy river in the Tiger grotto." I didn't make that up.
The kids today are spoiled. When I attended MU the only place to go swimming was to join the YMCA. If you wanted to play basketball you had to reserve time at the Old Gym which was hardly available during basketball season since Al had all the time booked.
-
The university as country club will have negative consequences. Debt debt and debt
-
Sorry gang, didn't win. The dream is on hold.
-
It is looking like between the facility and ancillary parking that it will take up a majority of the 3 block stretch of land (about 7 acres in total) south of Straz Tower. I would guess there will be room for more development in the future, however.
http://onmilwaukee.com/dining/articles/butchssteakhouseclose.html
https://www.google.com/maps/place/801+W+Michigan+St,+Milwaukee,+WI+53233/@43.0369272,-87.922427,366m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x8805199d1ebcca59:0x2781c0b68e1254a5