MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: reinko on July 31, 2008, 02:31:41 PM
-
The Chronicle of Higher Education just published this.
http://chronicle.com/free/v54/i47/47a00102.htm#spenders
Marquette is the biggest spender in it's division of schools, and had the second biggest increase % wise, of any school for money used on recruiting.
Pretty interesting stuff
-
Marquette is listed as Division I-AAA. Is this for non-football schools?
-
Marquette is listed as Division I-AAA. Is this for non-football schools?
Yes. When the NCAA first split the D-1 Schools into I-A and I-AA in 1978, they added the I-AAA distinction for basketball only schools. The term never really caught on, and almost no one uses it anymore outside of the NCAA itself.
-
I guess ...
"Division I-AA and I-AAA institutions, which are a competitive notch below Division I-A"
is true since as non-football schools, MU doesn't play the higher competitive schools, in football ::)
-
$520,000+
I would love to see a breakdown of this and why there has been such an increase. For instance, do they include the salaries of any assistants because of their recruiting requirments? Do they include any camp expenses? I frankly don't mind the amount because basketball is obviously very important but still, a breakdown would be interesting.
-
$520,000+
I would love to see a breakdown of this and why there has been such an increase. For instance, do they include the salaries of any assistants because of their recruiting requirments? Do they include any camp expenses? I frankly don't mind the amount because basketball is obviously very important but still, a breakdown would be interesting.
a diet pepsi here and a diet pepsi there add up apparently.
-
a 197 Director's Cup ranking is pretty lame, especially for a Big East Conference school.
-
a 197 Director's Cup ranking is pretty lame, especially for a Big East Conference school.
The Directors Cup is lame in general. I can guaranty you that MU getting to the Final Four is more important to fans than finishing in the top 10 of the Directors Cup.
-
I think a bigger question is why MU spent more in 96/97 than 2001/02? That explains some things about the state of MU b-ball. Going to the BE with all sports, not just b-ball, raised the ante and the kitty with TV $$ for today...as did the building of the Al.
ND didn't get a very good ROI for their recruiting budget--especially for football, did they?. But, they have all that NBC TV $$ to spend to try to keep competitive. Maybe they will beat Navy this season.
-
a 197 Director's Cup ranking is pretty lame, especially for a Big East Conference school.
Maybe you should learn more about the Director's Cup before making statements like that. There are 37 possible sports to earn points in, MU fields a grand total of 14 sports teams. So before it even begins, MU is at a huge disadvantage. 197 is actually pretty damn good when you are getting zero points in most sports.
-
I know the scoring you genious. Of the top 10 programs in our Division (all of which have smaller recruiting budgets), we are the second lowest. For a national university in a power conference its still lame. We should be doing better in the programs we have. There is no reason, we should be ranked behind those other schools in our division, even though they have hockey teams. Id be content with Xavier's rankings. They have less resources as MU.
The current AD needs to make this a focus--I'd evaluate him using this ranking.
-
I know the scoring you genious. Of the top 10 programs in our Division (all of which have smaller recruiting budgets), we are the second lowest. For a national university in a power conference its still lame. We should be doing better in the programs we have. There is no reason, we should be ranked behind those other schools in our division, even though they have hockey teams. Id be content with Xavier's rankings. They have less resources as MU.
The current AD needs to make this a focus--I'd evaluate him using this ranking.
Yes, but you're missing BMA's point. It's not so much about the recruiting, but to earn those Directors points you need to field more teams to earn the points. MU has 14 teams, NO ONE in the Big East fields that few of teams in the Big East. In fact, only a few schools in the country field that few of teams.
So the answer is simple, if you want to improve in the Directors Cup say from 197 to oh, 150, you'll need to add at least two teams and get them to be good teams. That will cost millions, so it's a lot easier to add a few hundred thousand dollars to the recruiting budget then add a women's lax team and women's golf team that no one will give a damn about.
-
Yes, but you're missing BMA's point. It's not so much about the recruiting, but to earn those Directors points you need to field more teams to earn the points. MU has 14 teams, NO ONE in the Big East fields that few of teams in the Big East. In fact, only a few schools in the country field that few of teams.
So the answer is simple, if you want to improve in the Directors Cup say from 197 to oh, 150, you'll need to add at least two teams and get them to be good teams. That will cost millions, so it's a lot easier to add a few hundred thousand dollars to the recruiting budget then add a women's lax team and women's golf team that no one will give a damn about.
Completely disagree.
MU should add 6 more teams to get up to 20 sports so we can finally compete in the directors cup. It's easily the most prestigious prize in all of college sports.
-
Marquette needs to make this a priority. I hope it's like a 9 foot trophy that students could take to parties like hockey players do that win the Stanley Cup
-
I know the scoring you genious. Of the top 10 programs in our Division (all of which have smaller recruiting budgets), we are the second lowest. For a national university in a power conference its still lame. We should be doing better in the programs we have. There is no reason, we should be ranked behind those other schools in our division, even though they have hockey teams. Id be content with Xavier's rankings. They have less resources as MU.
The current AD needs to make this a focus--I'd evaluate him using this ranking.
Shocking that you misspelled genius since you clearly don't get it. Every other Big East school has more opportunity to earn points than MU does. Some even get to discard low scores because they have more than 20 sports. Even if MU is highly ranked in the 14 sports they have, they still are at a huge disadvantage because they have six empty spots for which they receive zero points. Unless they add more sports, they can't get much higher.
-
What's the reason other Big East schools can have additional sports and Marquette can't?
-
What's the reason other Big East schools can have additional sports and Marquette can't?
Title IX & Football Need equal amount of male and female athletes to be in compliance. Take Louisville, they have 12 Women sport teams vs. 9 Men. Added Rowing, LAX, Field Hockey to get to parity. Even Villanova and Georgetown, even though they are not in the BE for football, have more teams because they sponsor football. MU dropped wrestling a few years back instead of converting a women's club sport. Travel and recruiting for the BE is costly.
-
Shocking that you misspelled genius since you clearly don't get it. Every other Big East school has more opportunity to earn points than MU does. Some even get to discard low scores because they have more than 20 sports. Even if MU is highly ranked in the 14 sports they have, they still are at a huge disadvantage because they have six empty spots for which they receive zero points. Unless they add more sports, they can't get much higher.
Xavier is well ahead of Marquette. They are in the A 10, in case your forgot. Our ranking is poor. As a Blue & Gold contributor, Im ashamed!!!
-
What's the reason other Big East schools can have additional sports and Marquette can't?
Money. Plain and simple. When I was there, we did a study to add women's golf, women's softball. All we actually ended up doing was getting rid of Rifle and Wrestling going from 16 to 14 teams.
It costs a lot of money and MU has decided to run a top notch men's hoops program and very good programs in women's soccer, women's hoops, potentially men's soccer. All the rest of the teams are competitive, but won't be nationally ranked 80% of the time.
Keep in mind for years MU didn't have the facilities to even think about this stuff. The soccer teams had to get in vans every day and drive miles away to practice. Track and Field the same. The Valley Fields has been a huge plus to get those teams back to competitive levels and even nationally recognized (women's soccer).
But to add any additional programs means more scholarships which Athletics has to pay for plus the budgets that go with them. And all of them would be huge money losers. 13 of the 14 sports MU fields are money losers.
-
Maybe you should contribute more then.
-
Money. Plain and simple. When I was there, we did a study to add women's golf, women's softball. All we actually ended up doing was getting rid of Rifle and Wrestling going from 16 to 14 teams.
It costs a lot of money and MU has decided to run a top notch men's hoops program and very good programs in women's soccer, women's hoops, potentially men's soccer. All the rest of the teams are competitive, but won't be nationally ranked 80% of the time.
Keep in mind for years MU didn't have the facilities to even think about this stuff. The soccer teams had to get in vans every day and drive miles away to practice. Track and Field the same. The Valley Fields has been a huge plus to get those teams back to competitive levels and even nationally recognized (women's soccer).
But to add any additional programs means more scholarships which Athletics has to pay for plus the budgets that go with them. And all of them would be huge money losers. 13 of the 14 sports MU fields are money losers.
Take the money we would have paid TC, and put it to good use. We are saving close to a million dollars this year-and net and next-and next. That additional money, could be put to good use in the athletic dept. The soccer team---should evolve.
-
Maybe you should contribute more then.
Its not a money issue. We are outspending our peers (as evidenced by the ranking). Its an effectiveness issue. Lets not defend mediocrity nor make excuses for a poor 197th place finish.
-
Xavier is well ahead of Marquette. They are in the A 10, in case your forgot. Our ranking is poor. As a Blue & Gold contributor, Im ashamed!!!
Then you should write bigger checks then. Or we should go back to CUSA. We finished in the top 150 usually when we were in CUSA.
Xavier earned 25 points in the Fall to finish 118th. All 25 points came from women's volleyball
Marquette earned 0 points in the Fall.
Xavier earned 99 points in the Winter to finish 99th. 73 points by men's hoops and 25 points by women's hoops.
Marquette finished with 50 points in the Winter to finish 160th. All 50 points earned by men's hoops.
Xavier earned 25 points in the Spring, all 25 points earned by Men's Tennis.
Marquette finished with 5 points in the Spring. All 5 points earned by Men's golf.
Xavier finished 124th with 148 total points in 2008.
MU finished 197th for the year with 55 total points in 2008.
I doubt more then 50 people in America could tell you that Xavier finished below 100 but above 125 nor do I think more then 10 people in America give a crap.
It's nice and all, but when dollars are scarce, finishing near the top of the Director's Cup is a pipe dream. And finishing around 124...is that really something to shoot for?
The Pac Ten schools dominate every year and I mean EVERY year of the standings. Their athletic departments often field 25 to 35 teams, they are all fantastic in those sports (world class, Olympian level) due to the money, facilities, weather, etc. Michigan is also very good along with some SEC schools.
MU would have done better this year if women's hoops had gotten into the tournament, but this is where the Big East can make it difficult on the women. When we played in CUSA, MU did better in the Director's cup.
-
Its not a money issue. We are outspending our peers (as evidenced by the ranking). Its an effectiveness issue. Lets not defend mediocrity nor make excuses for a poor 197th place finish.
Huh?
How can you say it's not a money issue. Of course it's a money issue. Secondly, the "money saved" by MU isn't all from the athletic department. Much of the money to pay for Crean was from outside sources, and rest assured they aren't interested in putting that money elsewhere to start up a women's softball team or to bolster the women's volleyball team. That is the reality of the situation.
-
Thanks for proving my point Chicos. We should have finished above Xavier.
-
Xavier is well ahead of Marquette. They are in the A 10, in case your forgot. Our ranking is poor. As a Blue & Gold contributor, Im ashamed!!!
A-10 actually helps you, easier conference makes it easier to earn points. And Xavier fields 16 teams to MU's 14. If you want it to change, find someone to pony up the cash for scholarships.
Or perhaps start a petition to have MU move to an easier conference, you hated C-USA so much, maybe you could push a move back to the Horizon League, that would make the all important Director's Cup points easier to get.
-
Thanks for proving my point Chicos. We should have finished above Xavier.
How did I prove your point? Xavier has more teams then MU, thus they have a better opportunity to finish ahead of MU in those standings. They field teams in an easier conference which means they also will have an easier opportunity to pick up points.
I fail to see how your point was proven at all. I was at MU in athletics when we did those studies and I can assure you, unless you're going to cut a monster check, we're not adding any sports any time soon. And unless we go to a lesser conference, it will be tough to earn those points in the other sports.
Simple as that.
-
there was talk a few years ago of adding Women's crew to the varsity level. As a club team they rank in the top 10-15 schools in the nation, whether it's varsity or club. I don't know why exactly they weren't given varsity status as they are a very good team and train like they'll be competing in the Olympics and get results but I'd guess it has to do w/ money.
-
I would estimate less than 1% of the people know what the Directors Cup is and that is being very gracious. MU is noted for BBall and now BEast BBall. I dont think recruits or parents of students ask how did MU do in the Directors Cup when thinking of attending MU. I'm not knocking the cup just saying it is an unknown and not a way to measure MUs success due to the costs of college sports.
-
I get the economics and the impact of adding new sports because of Title IX.
I guess my question is... why are other schools, especially BE schools, able to add more sports?
Is it simply an issue of focusing on a few things and trying to do those well vs. spreading resources across more areas and negatively impacting the ability to compete in BBall?
-
I get the economics and the impact of adding new sports because of Title IX.
I guess my question is... why are other schools, especially BE schools, able to add more sports?
Is it simply an issue of focusing on a few things and trying to do those well vs. spreading resources across more areas and negatively impacting the ability to compete in BBall?
Don't know. In many cases those schools had more sports to begin with. They may also have different arrangements with the school in terms of scholarship funding, etc. At MU, for example, every scholarship that is given out in athletics must be paid by athletics back to the university to "make the university whole" as it were.
Not all schools operate this way. So for MU it's a tremendous expense to add sports, even if it's something like golf where the equipment needs are small and MU doesn't need to have an on-campus golf course. When you start looking at adding something like women's softball, then it goes up considerable due to the number of players on the team, the equipment, fields to play on, etc.
The other poster is correct that women's crew was considered from what I was told through the grapevine. Could happen I suppose but it would surprise me a bit. All we've done in the last ten years is shrink our teams, including Rifle which was a coed sport and we were nationally in the top 15.
-
Wow ... This thread proves that their will always be someone that will find something to moan about no matter how trivial the issue. Honestly, before this thread I didn't even know of the Directors Cup. Furthermore, I could care less where MU finishes.
I agree with Chicos ... With limited resources, MU needs to focus their efforts and more importantly their money, on the sports that they feel will have most benefit to the university. I doubt many here would be very happy if the men's bball recruiting budget was slashed because MU wanted to make a bigger commitment to the track & field program or have additional sports.
BTW - Henry, I love the new avatar.
-
you certainly can't slash anything related to the men's bball program. We could conceivably draw over 18,000 nine times this year at the BC.