I have heard through the grapevine that the UWO mens soccer program will not be fielding a team for the 2015 season.
Think it's 2016, but they're not fielding a team sometime within the next 2 years!
With Wisconsin continually cutting financial aid to the UWW system, plus the state mandated tuition freeze, I'd be surprised if this is the only cut in the coming years.
http://www.uwoshkoshtitans.com/news/2014-15/SportModule
The Men's Soccer and Men's Tennis teams will play their final season in the 2015-16 school year.
Down goes a typically top 5 North Region program. Hard to believe considering the history of the Men's Soccer program.
It will be interesting to hear how this impacts UW-Whitewater and UW-Platteville since they will remain without a conference automatic qualifier. Judging by the article, that seems to be the main reason for choosing Men's Soccer and Men's Tennis as the sports that would be cut.
If UWW and UWP continue to field teams, will it be a two horse race every year for the Pool B bid?????
Quote from: jknezek on April 07, 2015, 09:36:18 AM
With Wisconsin continually cutting financial aid to the UWW system, plus the state mandated tuition freeze, I'd be surprised if this is the only cut in the coming years.
Unfortunate....😩
Spoke with someone in the Wisconsin-Whitewater athletic department and they said that UWW will not be cutting a team due to budget cuts now or in the future.
Hard to believe UWO could not shift money around to keep one of their most successful programs in the athletic departments history on the field.
I blame this on the Koch brothers master puppet and right wing lunatic Gov. Scott Walker
Quote from: D3 Scout on April 08, 2015, 11:05:57 AM
Spoke with someone in the Wisconsin-Whitewater athletic department and they said that UWW will not be cutting a team due to budget cuts now or in the future.
Hard to believe UWO could not shift money around to keep one of their most successful programs in the athletic departments history on the field.
Agreed. It's hard to imagine that the AD couldn't have gotten a little more creative and moved some funds around to keep one of his most successful sports alive. I've heard from a handful of alumni that the AD wasn't exactly a big supporter of soccer to begin with, and that they feel the AD could could have been done more to keep the program going.
The AD's background is heavy in football and
fundraising. How about putting those those fundraising skills to work and saving your men's soccer and tennis programs!!!???
A WIACer here, in Wisconsin, whose take on this is that there are a lot of underlying political factors involved in this situation; this is a trial balloon floated to drum up sympathy... If soccer and tennis are that important to UWO, they will find a way to keep them funded. If not, so be it...
UW-La Crosse was on the brink of cutting the men's baseball program a few years back, but the players got off their behinds and did a lot of fundraising to keep it alive. The program also received a lot of corporate sponsorship... Perhaps the institution of higher education on Wisconsin's east coast can take a page out of the one used on the west coast of the Badger state...
Oshkosh's release closed the door on that possibility.
As someone affiliated with the WIAC and specifically UWO, I can say with confidence that there are definitely things in motion right now to reverse this decision. Alumni as well as athletes (not just the soccer players) at the school have been diligent about finding alternatives, the sport's reputation is quite favorable among the students at the university. The biggest thing they're asking right now is for awareness and support. Below is a link that has more information if anyone is interested.
https://www.facebook.com/saveourtitans?fref=ts
Here's today's newspaper coverage regarding a public forum they had on this subject yesterday:
http://www.thenorthwestern.com/story/news/education/2015/04/08/tensions-flare-forum-uw-oshkosh-athletics-cuts/25495389/
The UWO learned brass is outright dismissing the notion of fundraising? (You can read the lame excuse as to why this is in the UWO release on the athletics sight)... What a way to stifle energy, creative problem thinking, passion, pride, unity and anything else that the sports, and trying to save them, would generate on at an institution of higher education....
Yes, budget issues are occurring at all UW system schools, and yes, much of the discussions/debates are turning political. But if I were a UWO student-athlete who plays soccer, or tennis, I'd seriously consider taking the money I have earmarked for tuition there and transferring elsewhere. Shame on those who have proposed a narrow-minded fix to this situation - the two who made this decision - who apparently did not welcome input and ideas as to a problem that can be solved...
Sorry all - I don't even like soccer! ;) - but I'll get off my soap box before I start to cross the lines of the politics being played out in this state regarding the UW schools and their budgets. Or maybe I have crossed them already. Ha.
OK... one more perhaps political comment.. ;). So, I've lived in three cities with WIAC campuses, or is it campi? ;) over the last decade where new facilities/buildings have been built, using combinations of various people's money - that being the tax payers, or students.
Arguments can be made that in some cases upgrades were needed... and that the improvements would attract students and benefit those already there... And the majority of students benefit, too, compared to say the number who have played on an athletic team...
But to those of you have have graduated, is your university/college better known because it has state-of-the-art facilities, and that is what you remember from your time there? Do you remember sitting in a fancy new desk, taking notes in an English class?
Or do you remember more vividly your time there following the sports teams, and the successes or failures those teams had, and the nail-biters you may have attended?
Do people across the country look at your school and say, hey, aren't you guys the ones who have the best oak desks? Or do they say, hey, didn't you guys win a D3 title last year?
Or will they be asking "hey, what happened to your soccer team? Didn't you guys have a soccer team?"
Quote from: bulk19 on April 09, 2015, 02:22:49 PM
OK... one more perhaps political comment.. ;). So, I've lived in three cities with WIAC campuses, or is it campi? ;) over the last decade where new facilities/buildings have been built, using combinations of various people's money - that being the tax payers, or students.
Arguments can be made that in some cases upgrades were needed... and that the improvements would attract students and benefit those already there... And the majority of students benefit, too, compared to say the number who have played on an athletic team...
But to those of you have have graduated, is your university/college better known because it has state-of-the-art facilities, and that is what you remember from your time there? Do you remember sitting in a fancy new desk, taking notes in an English class?
Or do you remember more vividly your time there following the sports teams, and the successes or failures those teams had, and the nail-biters you may have attended?
Do people across the country look at your school and say, hey, aren't you guys the ones who have the best oak desks? Or do they say, hey, didn't you guys win a D3 title last year?
Or will they be asking "hey, what happened to your soccer team? Didn't you guys have a soccer team?"
It's not the oak desk it's the electron microscope. It's not notes in English class, it's having a performing arts center or a state of the art computer lab. Look, the vast majority of D3 students hardly ever attend sporting events. At most D3 schools, sporting events are primarily for the athletes, not for the student body. Does that change at certain schools and in certain circumstances? Absolutely. But I can remember basketball games at W&L (arguably a pretty poor basketball team when I was there) with 50 people in the crowd, almost all parents. Same with soccer and certainly the nationally ranked tennis teams almost never had fans. A student journalist like me? Sure, but fans? No. Even the football team, at the time generally .500, had most of the student body not bothering to show up or leaving after the tailgate.
I love D3 sports. I go to Birmingham Southern soccer, football, and lacrosse games because it's my local D3 school. I drive an hour each way to go to Huntingdon football games when they are playing an exciting game. But we're the exception. Sports just aren't the driver you are trying to make them out to be for the "campus experience" in a lot of places.
Having a modern, large, useful computer lab that accommodates your student body? Much more important to almost everyone than having a men's tennis team. I'm thinking UWO is not going to be the last school to take this path.
My point is:
We are talking about students who benefit, be it by participating on an athletic team, or in a state-of-the-art classroom. They get what they pay for, by whatever tuition they pay... But let's not forget - it is the taxpayer who also funds those who benefit...
Colleges and universities sure do know how to spend the money, and will willingly find ways to do so, in the millions... Walk around the grounds of the three schools I alluded to, and tell me that they don't find ways to spend the money, and continually ask for more...
But ask them to do with less, or make cuts - $60,000? - and they can't, or are unwilling, to find ways to do that, other than cutting a soccer team????
It sounds like there has been a continuous call for support from players, students, alumni, etc. at UW-Oshkosh. On Twitter with the hashtag of #saveUWOsoccer, they have reached a number of people including Ian Darke, Taylor Twellman, and Paul Carr as well other local news outlets. Will it change anything? Who knows...
If any of you are on Twitter, I'm sure they wouldn't mind a few more tweets including #saveUWOsoccer
Quote from: bulk19 on April 09, 2015, 05:03:25 PM
My point is:
But ask them to do with less, or make cuts - $60,000? - and they can't, or are unwilling, to find ways to do that, other than cutting a soccer team????
But to those of you have have graduated, is your university/college better known because it has state-of-the-art facilities, and that is what you remember from your time there? Do you remember sitting in a fancy new desk, taking notes in an English class?
Or do you remember more vividly your time there following the sports teams, and the successes or failures those teams had, and the nail-biters you may have attended?
If you think that this is the only area where the school is going to have to "do more with less" then you're sorely mistaken.
It's quite possible that you don't even see how things are different for the rest of campus. Perhaps it's taking some required intro class, and having all sections taught at once by one adjunct professor instead of in smaller classes by several full-time faculty members. You may look around and see a building getting some cosmetic upgrades, but maybe they need a physical expansion of the building to add additional classroom space and instead this is how they have to make do. Perhaps an understaffed department has to remain understaffed, or salaries are frozen, or benefits cut.
To your second point, I think jknezek hits the nail on the head: Coming into an arena where the audience is likely to have a similar viewpoint as you may be reassuring, but I bet, if you went to the student body/community at large, you'd find a different situation. I think on almost all D-III campuses, school sports contribute next to nothing to a majority of students' campus experience.
Bombers -
In a nutshell, this is a matter of what those on campus (students, faculty, staff, administration) want and what students are willing to pay for, vs. what the taxpayers think they need...
To address some of your examples, hypothetically - what if the adjunct instructor who has several large sections is better than the full-time tenured prof who is merely playing out the string, waiting to retire? I had some good young new teachers, and some awful, some of my worst, tenured professors, who, in small group classes, just didn't give a damn any more... To me, the size of my class didn't matter; if I needed individual help, I went to see my professor...
As far as staffing? They may lose benefits? Have their salaries frozen? Or even lose jobs? Well, welcome to the real world...
As far as students not attending sporting events nowadays? Yes, alas, that is true. They are hidden behind technology, and missing out on the real world that is happening all around them, what's happening beyond the little 8-inch screens they are looking at... Collegiate sports, however, contribute to the quality of life for those who live in those cities - the taxpayers, who enjoy those events...
As far as staffing? They may lose benefits? Have their salaries frozen? Or even lose jobs? Well, welcome to the real world...
Collegiate sports, however, contribute to the quality of life for those who live in those cities - the taxpayers, who enjoy those events...
[/quote]
So, in other words, at a D-III institution, if you can't pay to keep departments adequately staffed and for quality instructors, well, that's tough, but soccer is somehow this integral part of the community so how dare we eliminate it? Give me a break.
I live in a college town, and the high-profile Division I sports here are ignored by a large part of the population, let alone the lower-profile D-III teams. And even for those who follow them, I doubt there'd be much outrage if they disappeared tomorrow. Just because you, and (I'm guessing) people you know, support athletics with a passion does not mean the community at large does.
This just seems a matter of priorities. While I love D3 sports it falls pretty low on my chart of necessities of a good college. The goal of the university is to educate, so classroom resources get priorities. The second goal is to keep the lights on, so maintaining facilities used by large numbers of students should be a pretty high priority. Whether that is grounds keeping or air conditioning the dorms to help enrollment is irrelevant, it's more important than a tennis team to me. Things like athletics are grouped with the club and social activities, good for a smaller subset of the community and prioritized and funded as such. While I think there is plenty of room in most schools budgets to manage an athletic department, at a D3 level the athletic department is ancillary to the school. So if it comes down to a choice, keep the professors and the computer labs and the new student commons, cut the sports.
That being said, I think Bulk does make a good point that there probably is some fat that could have been trimmed to keep these sports, but that choice wasn't made. Instead, the soccer and tennis teams were deemed the "fat" and other things deemed more important. How many admin assistants does the college president and staff need? Could trimming one or two of them have saved the teams? Maybe, and that is what I would focus on if I were trying to fight this change.
On the whole, however, while it is upsetting to a small subset of people to lose these teams, I just can't imagine too many people at UWO other than the players and soccer and tennis alumni are going to get really upset about it. Witness the winnowing of college wrestling programs at all levels over the last 40 years. No one really makes a fuss about it anymore.
Quote from: jknezek on April 14, 2015, 01:06:28 PM
The goal of the university is to educate, so classroom resources get priorities. The second goal is to keep the lights on, so maintaining facilities used by large numbers of students should be a pretty high priority
That being said, I think Bulk does make a good point that there probably is some fat that could have been trimmed to keep these sports, but that choice wasn't made. Instead, the soccer and tennis teams were deemed the "fat" and other things deemed more important. How many admin assistants does the college president and staff need? Could trimming one or two of them have saved the teams? Maybe, and that is what I would focus on if I were trying to fight this change.
The bolded part 100%. We can love sports, and wax nostalgic about all the benefits to campus community, a sense of pride, being part of a team, whatever. The fact is that at the D-III level, the role sports play in tertiary, at best, in most places.
I'm just guessing, but it might be that the administration decided that
every department had to have something cut, probably in the interest on ensuring nobody comes out with "Our department is always the one getting the cuts, and this department never does." If you're dealing with budget cuts, you don't want to make it seem like you're favoring one department over the others.
Even if the actual amount of money is negligible for an athletic department's bottom line, the idea you want to promote is that no one is immune, and that everyone has to make do with less.
It did seem, from the articles I read on it, that the team's not being in an AQ conference anymore really moved the decision along. And that's not surprising. If you've got to make dozens or even hundreds of cuts quickly, you can't labor over each one as much as you like. So when you see the sports being out of an AQ conference, there you go
Quote from: Bombers798891 on April 14, 2015, 05:07:41 PM
Quote from: jknezek on April 14, 2015, 01:06:28 PM
The goal of the university is to educate, so classroom resources get priorities. The second goal is to keep the lights on, so maintaining facilities used by large numbers of students should be a pretty high priority
That being said, I think Bulk does make a good point that there probably is some fat that could have been trimmed to keep these sports, but that choice wasn't made. Instead, the soccer and tennis teams were deemed the "fat" and other things deemed more important. How many admin assistants does the college president and staff need? Could trimming one or two of them have saved the teams? Maybe, and that is what I would focus on if I were trying to fight this change.
The bolded part 100%. We can love sports, and wax nostalgic about all the benefits to campus community, a sense of pride, being part of a team, whatever. The fact is that at the D-III level, the role sports play in tertiary, at best, in most places.
I'm just guessing, but it might be that the administration decided that every department had to have something cut, probably in the interest on ensuring nobody comes out with "Our department is always the one getting the cuts, and this department never does." If you're dealing with budget cuts, you don't want to make it seem like you're favoring one department over the others.
Even if the actual amount of money is negligible for an athletic department's bottom line, the idea you want to promote is that no one is immune, and that everyone has to make do with less.
It did seem, from the articles I read on it, that the team's not being in an AQ conference anymore really moved the decision along. And that's not surprising. If you've got to make dozens or even hundreds of cuts quickly, you can't labor over each one as much as you like. So when you see the sports being out of an AQ conference, there you go
Good points about making across the board cuts so as to avoid internal battles between departments, and about decisions often being taken 'the easy way' when many cuts are necessary.
But I'll also support Bulk (probably to his shock after the late, unlamented politics board! ;D) about administrative 'fat'. Before retirement, I was a union organizer, then union president for the lecturers at Eastern Michigan U., so I studied such issues quite a bit. I know nothing about UWO specifically, but college administrations have grown (both in numbers and costs) much faster than faculty costs (or, for that matter, ANY category of costs other than D1 athletics). As I say, I don't know about UWO specifically, but 'administrative bloat' is a nation-wide epidemic. If they are at all typical, they could have cut several times the cost of the athletic programs being cut with no noticeable effect on administration.
Good points being made by all - alas, as one who is in the state where these cuts are being made, some of us feel that these points are not being made, or if they are, they are being ignored... ;)
Bombers - I'm not sure where you live, but the three D3 communities I have lived in, including the one I now live in, support sports at every level, k-12, collegiate, and professional and every variety... It's something to take pride in... Sorry your residents don't, or take it for granted...
As I noted earlier, I don't even like soccer. Ha. I just don't like the way the sports teams seemed to be blindsided in this process, without any input, or chance to keep the program alive. This being made as a final decision while the state budget hasn't even finalized....
That being said - I also quote jknezek: Whether that is grounds keeping or air conditioning the dorms to help enrollment is irrelevant, it's more important than a tennis team to me.
We live in Wisconsin = they don't need air conditioners in the dorms. I lived in one without, I don't see why students today can't...But there are dorms in the UW System that do have them, I think... I'm not sure what percentage, probably a minority, and I guess perhaps the cost for them would be included in room and board, but... If taxpayers are paying? Then that would be a fat that could be trimmed if it meant saving a sports team... (I'll blame the phenomenon of installing dorms in dorms on the New Orleans Saints, who, if memory serves me correctly, outfitted the dorms at UW-La Crosse with air conditioners during the 10 or so years they moved training camp to Wisconsin... Details and memory are faulty on that era...)
I guess my other quarrel with the UWO situation is the politics as a whole in this state that is ongoing regarding the UW System budget, politics which I have tried to avoid, but have perhaps tiptoed in and around... And the key word which has been mentioned by others - fat. Yes, they can trim fat... and trim administrative bloat... And yet by the same token, they sure can spend... My take is they have a spending problem, which creates a problem when deciding what should be cut...
And to throw one more wrench in the mix... Why has college tuition gone up dramatically from the time I graduated 30 years ago??? Google it and you'll find many different #s/%s, and how many more hours kids today have to work today to pay for a college tuition, compared to my day... Someone needs to unravel that thread, and therein may lay some answers...
Also? I haven't seen it, but the UW-System was sitting on a surplus a year or so ago? Google that story, and depending on the #s that are used, figure out what happened to that money???
Update on the matter: there is a petition available to sign and can be found at www.saveuwosoccer.com, a website that the alumni and current players have recently worked on together to launch. They have their annual alumni match set for this Saturday, pretty curious to see how much of a buzz this might create around campus and the community.
Quote from: Bombers798891 on April 13, 2015, 03:34:52 PMI think on almost all D-III campuses, school sports contribute next to nothing to a majority of students' campus experience.
That's not true. There are quite a few D3 campuses where intercollegiate sports play a
substantial role in the life of the school, if for no other reason than because the population of student-athletes makes up a large percentage of the undergraduate student body.
It's obviously not the case at UWO, which has 12,000+ undergraduates. But it
is the case at numerous D3 institutions whose undergrad student bodies are in the 500-2,500 range that's much more typical of D3 as a whole.
Quote from: Bombers798891 on April 14, 2015, 12:51:56 PM
So, in other words, at a D-III institution, if you can't pay to keep departments adequately staffed and for quality instructors, well, that's tough, but soccer is somehow this integral part of the community so how dare we eliminate it? Give me a break.
I live in a college town, and the high-profile Division I sports here are ignored by a large part of the population, let alone the lower-profile D-III teams. And even for those who follow them, I doubt there'd be much outrage if they disappeared tomorrow. Just because you, and (I'm guessing) people you know, support athletics with a passion does not mean the community at large does.
D3 sports don't exist for the community. They don't exist for the alumni, or the parents, or even, when you come right down to it, for the students at large.
They exist for the student-athlete. That's a truth that's right at the heart of the D3 credo, and every NCAA D3 administrator will echo it.
D3 isn't like D1 (or even D2, for that matter), so any comparisons between the divisions in terms of who is paying attention to what, or whose needs are being met by intercollegiate sports, are irrelevant.
Quote from: jknezek on April 14, 2015, 01:06:28 PM
This just seems a matter of priorities. While I love D3 sports it falls pretty low on my chart of necessities of a good college. The goal of the university is to educate, so classroom resources get priorities. The second goal is to keep the lights on, so maintaining facilities used by large numbers of students should be a pretty high priority. Whether that is grounds keeping or air conditioning the dorms to help enrollment is irrelevant, it's more important than a tennis team to me. Things like athletics are grouped with the club and social activities, good for a smaller subset of the community and prioritized and funded as such. While I think there is plenty of room in most schools budgets to manage an athletic department, at a D3 level the athletic department is ancillary to the school. So if it comes down to a choice, keep the professors and the computer labs and the new student commons, cut the sports.
But the point that the UWO soccer coach made in the article, which I haven't seen addressed yet by anyone in this discussion, is that the program is
a source of revenue for the school. The Titans had 26 players on their 2015-16 roster. That's 26 tuition-paying UWO students who wouldn't have gone to that school otherwise. According to the article, the 2015-16 UWO soccer team had a $31,000 operational budget (which can't possibly include salary), and the UWO chancellor further claimed that cutting the sport would result in an annual savings of $60,000 for the school. But if the tuition income from those 26 players exceeds that of this claimed savings, then how is cutting the program going to save the school money? You
lose more money than you gain, because you'll lose most or all of those 26 student-athletes. I'm sure that all, or nearly all, of them were recruited to attend UWO specifically for soccer, and it's likely that they'll transfer elsewhere in order to keep playing soccer now that the program's neck has fallen under the axe.
The UWO chancellor's response to this point by the soccer coach struck me as obtuse:
QuoteLeavitt said the amount of income athletics programs generate was not part of the criteria officials considered when deciding which ones to cut, disputing Molenaar's assertion the decision was not related to the budget reduction.
"It's related to the expense side of the budget cut," Leavitt said. "We have to reduce the (general purpose revenue) footprint of athletics. We're going to put two (athletics) positions in the basket. We're (also) going to put 80 to 100 all together across this university. Do you think that an English professor doesn't generate revenue? You don't think a class of 35 in a math class also does? That's all revenue."
Do 18-year-olds
really choose a school based upon a specific English professor? If so, it's news to me.
Quote from: Bombers798891 on April 14, 2015, 05:07:41 PMI'm just guessing, but it might be that the administration decided that every department had to have something cut, probably in the interest on ensuring nobody comes out with "Our department is always the one getting the cuts, and this department never does." If you're dealing with budget cuts, you don't want to make it seem like you're favoring one department over the others.
Even if the actual amount of money is negligible for an athletic department's bottom line, the idea you want to promote is that no one is immune, and that everyone has to make do with less.
Given the byzantine and contentious nature of campus politics at just about every college or university of which I'm aware, I have no doubt that your "share the pain" thesis is correct, if for no other reason than it circumvents any number of interdepartmental brouhahas.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on April 14, 2015, 06:41:12 PM
But I'll also support Bulk (probably to his shock after the late, unlamented politics board! ;D) about administrative 'fat'. Before retirement, I was a union organizer, then union president for the lecturers at Eastern Michigan U., so I studied such issues quite a bit. I know nothing about UWO specifically, but college administrations have grown (both in numbers and costs) much faster than faculty costs (or, for that matter, ANY category of costs other than D1 athletics). As I say, I don't know about UWO specifically, but 'administrative bloat' is a nation-wide epidemic. If they are at all typical, they could have cut several times the cost of the athletic programs being cut with no noticeable effect on administration.
Sounds like they could've used you at that meeting in Oshkosh, Chuck ... although I doubt that you would've made the chancellor's Christmas card list. ;)
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 12, 2015, 06:49:42 PM
Quote from: jknezek on April 14, 2015, 01:06:28 PM
This just seems a matter of priorities. While I love D3 sports it falls pretty low on my chart of necessities of a good college. The goal of the university is to educate, so classroom resources get priorities. The second goal is to keep the lights on, so maintaining facilities used by large numbers of students should be a pretty high priority. Whether that is grounds keeping or air conditioning the dorms to help enrollment is irrelevant, it's more important than a tennis team to me. Things like athletics are grouped with the club and social activities, good for a smaller subset of the community and prioritized and funded as such. While I think there is plenty of room in most schools budgets to manage an athletic department, at a D3 level the athletic department is ancillary to the school. So if it comes down to a choice, keep the professors and the computer labs and the new student commons, cut the sports.
But the point that the UWO soccer coach made in the article, which I haven't seen addressed yet by anyone in this discussion, is that the program is a source of revenue for the school. The Titans had 26 players on their 2015-16 roster. That's 26 tuition-paying UWO students who wouldn't have gone to that school otherwise. According to the article, the 2015-16 UWO soccer team had a $31,000 operational budget (which can't possibly include salary), and the UWO chancellor further claimed that cutting the sport would result in an annual savings of $60,000 for the school. But if the tuition income from those 26 players exceeds that of this claimed savings, then how is cutting the program going to save the school money? You lose more money than you gain, because you'll lose most or all of those 26 student-athletes. I'm sure that all, or nearly all, of them were recruited to attend UWO specifically for soccer, and it's likely that they'll transfer elsewhere in order to keep playing soccer now that the program's neck has fallen under the axe.
This is a horrible argument. The soccer team makes money because 26 student athletes pay to be on campus? UWO could pull 26 students without spending one soccer dime with no problem. So you can still kill the expense and even though the program by one measure was revenue positive, not having the program is even MORE revenue positive. Which is the point the President made by talking about expenses instead of revenue. The revenue will remain from 26 students, the expenses overall to the athletic department will go down. UWO accepts 67% of applicants (U.S. News). The student body won't drop by 26 people if you cut soccer. It will be the same size, and there will be more net profit per student (miniscule though that is) since the small expenses of soccer are removed.
Quote from: jknezek on May 13, 2015, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 12, 2015, 06:49:42 PM
Quote from: jknezek on April 14, 2015, 01:06:28 PM
This just seems a matter of priorities. While I love D3 sports it falls pretty low on my chart of necessities of a good college. The goal of the university is to educate, so classroom resources get priorities. The second goal is to keep the lights on, so maintaining facilities used by large numbers of students should be a pretty high priority. Whether that is grounds keeping or air conditioning the dorms to help enrollment is irrelevant, it's more important than a tennis team to me. Things like athletics are grouped with the club and social activities, good for a smaller subset of the community and prioritized and funded as such. While I think there is plenty of room in most schools budgets to manage an athletic department, at a D3 level the athletic department is ancillary to the school. So if it comes down to a choice, keep the professors and the computer labs and the new student commons, cut the sports.
But the point that the UWO soccer coach made in the article, which I haven't seen addressed yet by anyone in this discussion, is that the program is a source of revenue for the school. The Titans had 26 players on their 2015-16 roster. That's 26 tuition-paying UWO students who wouldn't have gone to that school otherwise. According to the article, the 2015-16 UWO soccer team had a $31,000 operational budget (which can't possibly include salary), and the UWO chancellor further claimed that cutting the sport would result in an annual savings of $60,000 for the school. But if the tuition income from those 26 players exceeds that of this claimed savings, then how is cutting the program going to save the school money? You lose more money than you gain, because you'll lose most or all of those 26 student-athletes. I'm sure that all, or nearly all, of them were recruited to attend UWO specifically for soccer, and it's likely that they'll transfer elsewhere in order to keep playing soccer now that the program's neck has fallen under the axe.
This is a horrible argument. The soccer team makes money because 26 student athletes pay to be on campus? UWO could pull 26 students without spending one soccer dime with no problem. So you can still kill the expense and even though the program by one measure was revenue positive, not having the program is even MORE revenue positive. Which is the point the President made by talking about expenses instead of revenue. The revenue will remain from 26 students, the expenses overall to the athletic department will go down. UWO accepts 67% of applicants (U.S. News). The student body won't drop by 26 people if you cut soccer. It will be the same size, and there will be more net profit per student (miniscule though that is) since the small expenses of soccer are removed.
Admittedly, it's not an argument that works as well for a high-population, low-admissions-threshold school like UWO (as opposed to most private D3 schools, whose profile is the opposite in both directions, in which case it can be a very valid argument). The danger here, though, is that such an effect might be cumulative. Twenty-six soccer players might be a drop in the bucket; but if you cut enough activities and programs that are exclusive-student magnets (e.g., they draw in students who wouldn't otherwise apply to the school), then you might begin to suffer the death of a thousand cuts.
Even a state school with 12,000+ undergrads and a low admissions threshold isn't immune to the vagaries of a dip in student population, especially in a baby-bust generational cohort. North Park's next-door neighbor, Northeastern Illinois University, has an undergrad population of 8,900 and a 64% acceptance rate for admissions -- and yet the school's administration is so panicked about a slide in undergrad enrollment (on a campus located within a city of 2.7 million people, mind you) that it's willing to poison its relationship with the local community by expropriating neighboring businesses via eminent domain in order to build dorms to attract foreign students, under the premise that thousands of Chinese 18-year-olds are just dying to come halfway around the world to get a bachelor's degree from Northeastern Illinois University. Add to that sort of thinking the possibility of a major budgetary cutback in terms of state monies (Illinois, which is in far worse economic shape than Wisconsin, is going to follow fast upon the heels of America's Dairyland in terms of state education funding cutbacks), and you can see why a behemoth like UWO that shouldn't be worried about losing 26 students might actually worry about just that.
I daresay Northeastern Illinois doesn't want a few thousand Chinese students because their enrollment is slipping, they want them because they pay full freight, unlike those pesky in-state students. Lots of schools are pursuing this same strategy, especially state schools as budgets are cut. I find it all ridiculous since that simply undermines the point of state schools, educating the in-state kids to make a more profitable and successful workforce, but if the state doesn't want to pay for the goal of their own universities, the university admins will try and do anything to maintain their own prominence and jobs.
You could be right ... although the slashing of financial aid from the state and the raising of tuition for in-state students that'll no doubt be a twin result of the budgetary crisis will no doubt bring the costs for in-state and out-state students closer at a place like NEIU.
I agree with your point about the overseas strategy undermining the institutional mission of a school like NEIU.
Here's a pretty good summary in today's La Crosse Tribune of what the UWL men's baseball team did when it was on the chopping board six years ago... Go Eagles!
http://lacrossetribune.com/sports/six-years-after-it-was-to-be-cut-uw-l/article_8b0ce831-66d5-5d74-ad44-7a2d54e6a55b.html
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on April 14, 2015, 06:41:12 PM
But I'll also support Bulk (probably to his shock after the late, unlamented politics board! ;D) about administrative 'fat'. Before retirement, I was a union organizer, then union president for the lecturers at Eastern Michigan U., so I studied such issues quite a bit. I know nothing about UWO specifically, but college administrations have grown (both in numbers and costs) much faster than faculty costs (or, for that matter, ANY category of costs other than D1 athletics). As I say, I don't know about UWO specifically, but 'administrative bloat' is a nation-wide epidemic. If they are at all typical, they could have cut several times the cost of the athletic programs being cut with no noticeable effect on administration.
Sounds like they could've used you at that meeting in Oshkosh, Chuck ... although I doubt that you would've made the chancellor's Christmas card list. ;)
[/quote]
Finally returned to this thread and saw your post. I would have gladly testified, and have never received a Christmas card from ANY college administrator, so that wouldn't faze me! :D (Even the ones who sent out cards willy-nilly somehow skipped the 'agitator'! ;D That may be my proudest accomplishment as an educator - except for a few kids (one was 57!) who were flunking out that I helped coax on to the dean's list.)
Thought this thread deserved a little bump.
NCAC, check out my post in the north region thread
A recent former player from UWO, Daniel Kobin, has put out a video for his final undergraduate project before graduating in a week or so. His four years spanned from 2011-2014. Thought you guys might be interested as it's really well put together.
https://www.facebook.com/dannykobin/videos/10153785434576419/?pnref=story
Quote from: Wisco21 on December 10, 2015, 10:08:29 AM
A recent former player from UWO, Daniel Kobin, has put out a video for his final undergraduate project before graduating in a week or so. His four years spanned from 2011-2014. Thought you guys might be interested as it's really well put together.
https://www.facebook.com/dannykobin/videos/10153785434576419/?pnref=story
That's great stuff.
Any news on the Oskosh scenario? From what I have heard, there have been no changes to reinstall the program.
My ? is, what is going to happen to the Oskosh players.... Green bay, Superior, Milwaukee, Whitewater, Loras?
Quote from: dontshootthegoose on December 23, 2015, 01:59:38 PM
Any news on the Oskosh scenario? From what I have heard, there have been no changes to reinstall the program.
My ? is, what is going to happen to the Oskosh players.... Green bay, Superior, Milwaukee, Whitewater, Loras?
::) Yes
Quote from: dontshootthegoose on December 23, 2015, 01:59:38 PM
Any news on the Oskosh scenario? From what I have heard, there have been no changes to reinstall the program.
My ? is, what is going to happen to the Oskosh players.... Green bay, Superior, Milwaukee, Whitewater, Loras?
Great question Goose. I wonder if someone in the know can shed some light.
Wisco21?
Quote from: casualfan on December 23, 2015, 07:57:49 PM
Quote from: dontshootthegoose on December 23, 2015, 01:59:38 PM
Any news on the Oskosh scenario? From what I have heard, there have been no changes to reinstall the program.
My ? is, what is going to happen to the Oskosh players.... Green bay, Superior, Milwaukee, Whitewater, Loras?
Great question Goose. I wonder if someone in the know can shed some light.
Wisco21?
I know where one of the players (their best player) is going ;D
KICKIN - If your source is as good as my source, the player will be a solid addition to a Duhawk lineup that will be challenged to fill the holes left by seven senior starters.
I've heard that one other player could also be coming to Loras, but I do not have confirmation on that.
As for other schools, I have only heard rumblings, nothing substantial.
Quote from: KICKIN95 on December 24, 2015, 10:21:32 AM
Quote from: casualfan on December 23, 2015, 07:57:49 PM
Quote from: dontshootthegoose on December 23, 2015, 01:59:38 PM
Any news on the Oskosh scenario? From what I have heard, there have been no changes to reinstall the program.
My ? is, what is going to happen to the Oskosh players.... Green bay, Superior, Milwaukee, Whitewater, Loras?
Great question Goose. I wonder if someone in the know can shed some light.
Wisco21?
I know where one of the players (their best player) is going ;D
I'm gonna guess Javier Simon would be the player you likely know about? Obviously due to the connection from his brother.
If so, great coup for Loras.
But also If so, I'm sure there are others on the UWO team who would be quick to contest who is the best player on UWO.
Quote from: casualfan on December 29, 2015, 11:09:09 AM
Quote from: KICKIN95 on December 24, 2015, 10:21:32 AM
Quote from: casualfan on December 23, 2015, 07:57:49 PM
Quote from: dontshootthegoose on December 23, 2015, 01:59:38 PM
Any news on the Oskosh scenario? From what I have heard, there have been no changes to reinstall the program.
My ? is, what is going to happen to the Oskosh players.... Green bay, Superior, Milwaukee, Whitewater, Loras?
Great question Goose. I wonder if someone in the know can shed some light.
Wisco21?
I know where one of the players (their best player) is going ;D
I'm gonna guess Javier Simon would be the player you likely know about? Obviously due to the connection from his brother.
If so, great coup for Loras.
But also If so, I'm sure there are others on the UWO team who would be quick to contest who is the best player on UWO.
Subjective of course.
Jacob Hernandez is without question UWO's best player, I do believe he will be attending Milwaukee this coming fall. Not sure if he will be playing or not but I don't think UWM boss Kris Kelderman would be opposed as Hernandez would fit very comfortably in a D1 environment.
Javi Simon will be a DuHawk. He is good but not great, not yet anyways. Once he matures a bit more he will become a great player. The talent, the athleticism, the skill is all there- he just needs the discipline and mental toughness, he has potential to be an All-American. He has also had some off-the-field issues, however I have no doubt that Loras nation will help him find himself as a player and as a young man.
Freshmen Tyler Howard is also in discussion with a couple D3 coaches around the region.
Other than that, I believe other players will be transferring out to pursue academics but will not be continuing their footballing careers.
Thanks for the update Wisco. Reliable information that I trust completely. +k
The three of them are all talented players. I agree with your assessment of Simon. Howard is extremely athletic and needs some fine tuning but could improve at a fast pace throughout his college career. Simon will fit in well with Loras I think.
I don't think that Hernandez is on UWM's level but he's likely not that far off. Could be a flier worth giving a go for Kelderman.
I'm surprised these are the only 3. Thought the other freshmen would likely transfer to play again as well as the sophomores. I understand about the juniors but still thought there would be 1-2 that would play out their senior season somewhere else.
Very curious!
Tyler Howard to Dubuque.
Will be a big change going from a school of 12,000 undergrad to less than 2,000. As a forward/winger he can find striker-esque guidance from returning statistical leaders, Gonzalo Hernandez and Leo Lenth- something Oshkosh really didn't offer.
With Simon at Loras and Howard at UD it appears my allegiances need some rearranging.... Iowa21 doesn't roll as well off the tongue as Wisco does though ;)
Head Coach Wytse Molenaar set to take over the reigns at Albion College
http://www.gobrits.com/sports/msoc/2016-17/releases/20160201bi9qne
This one I didn't see coming! UWO Freshmen Nick Harenda signs for Northern Michigan University, a DII program in the UP. It will be the first year of the program's existence after the decision to add four more varsity sports was made in 2015.
More information here: http://www.nmuwildcats.com/sports/msoc/index
Interesting...There is a Michigan, Michigan State, Western Michigan Central Michigan and Eastern Michigan in D1. I suspect eventually Northern Michigan will be D1 and join the MAC with Western and Eastern Michigan.
Don't forget about Michigan Tech- although I do believe aside from their men's hockey program being DI, the rest of their varsity sports are DII.
UWO sophomore Jakub Rys will be transferring to Wartburg College to see out his final two years of eligibility. Talented right back with some pace to him, hope to see him help in returning the Knights back into the national picture. By the looks of their 2016 schedule, they will definitely have the opportunity.
http://www.go-knights.net/schedule.aspx?path=msoc