ADLER

Wow, I thought I had addressed ad nauseam the fact that Bexar County is contributing millions for the new UTSA Athletic Complex. and how the contribution was approved by voters in May of this year. Have I really spent too little time explaining this? UTSA already has a stadium available (and a fairly nice one at that). UTSA is having practice facilities built that will be paid for by the county (sufficient external revenues). UTSA plans to have Bowl Championship Subdivision football by 2014. UTSA intends to have a much larger budget than North Texas based on higher student athletic fees and external revenues. UTSA plans to make a push at CUSA membership if a spot was to become available. So please stop the "We don't want to be like UTSA! We don't want to be like UTSA! We don't want to be like UTSA!" stuff. They have formulated a long term plan while.......

Those type of things are certainly possible. Taco Bell has a $4 million, 15 year deal with Boise State for naming rights on their basketball arena that is paid in yearly installments. It was a benefit of Boise State making a commitment to their football program. Taco Bell Arena Corporations like to be associated with successful programs.

This is exactly why the student athletics fees need to be structured into a long term plan instead of announcing every few years "Hey, who wants to pay additional fees?" That's a recipe' for disaster. Please review the Carr Sports Associates UTSA Athletics Feasibility Study that was commissioned prior to the student athletics fees referendum. It defines the process for raising revenues over an extended period to get the school positioned in the competitive range with 10 other large regional schools of CUSA, the WAC, and the Sun Belt. The results are especially interesting because UTSA has almost the same amount of full-time undergrads as North Texas does on it's Denton campus. UTSA Athletics Feasibility Study - Fiscal Issues The study was based on 2004-2005 budgets and the report was completed in February 2006. The result was that UTSA students overwhelmingly supported the necessary referendum to raise the athletics fee to $20 per credit hour by the middle of the next decade. Their plan is to be competitive with the succesful teams in those mid-major leagues by 2015. A long-term plan works much better than multiple knee-jerk reactions. The SGA should structure the plan so it defines where North Texas will be a decade from now, not just springing another 'desparately needed' increase on the students every several years. You're right, that can't be too popular.

In 1997 new North Texas basketball coach Vic Trilli was determined to get UNT into the then new Conference USA. CUSA didn't give North Texas any consideration because North Texas had no commitment. Upstart program South Florida leapfrogged North Texas and quickly gained CUSA membership because they made the necessary commitment. Prior to 1998 South Florida didn't even have any football. South Florida has since left CUSA for the Big East. National rankings and bowl games have been the result. Central Florida followed a similar path to CUSA. Look what they've accomplished in the last few years. They too aspire to join the BCS Big East. Should North Texas take these two newbies seriously? If a spot in CUSA were to become available in 2013 who do you think they would want, a historically bad North Texas team with no historical commitment, or a new school with much larger budget, plays in the Alamodome, and that can deliver a new market? If you say North Texas then you haven't followed this program long enough.

Here's a video that UTSA used prior to the refernedum that raised their student athletic fees from $10 per credit hour to $20. You be the judge as to if they have a concrete plan as to where they want to go, and a method to get there. UTSA Athletics Fee Referendum Video (click here) "A budget of $18.5 million is the bare minimum required to field successful programs at the mid-major level" Here's a copy of Q&A: UTSA athletics fee student referendum which was posted in UTSA Today, the student paper. Q&A: UTSA Athletics Fee Student Referendum (click here) On Sept. 11 and 12, current UTSA students can vote on a student referendum to increase athletic fees. Increased fees would be used to take Roadrunner Athletics to the next level of NCAA competition. (The student referendum has since passed and been approved) Possible improvements include new athletic facilities, the addition of football and a move to a new conference. The referendum would authorize increasing athletics fees over the next several years from a current maximum of $120 per semester to a maximum of $240 per semester. Each student now pays $10 per hour for the first 12 credit hours each semester. Athletics fees are charged only on 12 hours per semester; therefore, the fee currently is capped at $120 per semester. If the student referendum passes, athletics fees would increase over five years to no more than $20 per hour. Q. What conference is UTSA moving to? A. The Division 1A conferences that may be attainable by UTSA during the next 10 years are the Sun Belt Conference, Western Athletic Conference (WAC) and Conference USA. Conference USA is the most prestigious and attractive with nearby opponents Houston, Rice, SMU, UTEP, Tulsa and Tulane in its western division. Q. How much would students pay for football tickets? A. The Athletics Department expects that students would be admitted to football games free with their student IDs. Even though it is likely UTSA would plans to play its home football games in the Alamodome, Athletics would plan to admit students to games at no charge as a result of paying athletics fees. (And according to the UTSA paper, Bexar County and the City of San Antonio are suggesting free use of the Alamodome as incentive for the university to start a football program.) Q. Who would UTSA play in football? A. If UTSA moved into a new conference, it would play that conference's member schools such as Houston, Rice, SMU and UTEP in Conference USA. Q. Why do students have to pay athletic fees if they don't go to the games? A. The athletics fee is similar to the library, medical services, University Center, Recreation Center and other fees. All students pay to cover the costs of these services whether they use them or not. In return for paying athletics fees, the UTSA Athletics Department makes three promises to students -- to provide fun, affordable entertainment; build pride and tradition in UTSA and increase equity in a UTSA degree. Students receive benefits from these promises while in school and after graduation even if they don't attend athletics events. And after the student referendum there was this: Bexar County provides $50 million for UTSA sports complex Which passed on May 10 of this year: Venue Prop 2 Amateur Athletic Facilities (WITH 622 OF 622 PRECINCTS COUNTED) FOR (a favor) . . . . . . . . . 41,002 AGAINST (en contra) . . . . . . . 16,170 The facilities are scheduled to be completed by 2012. It doesn't take the Hubble Telescope to detect the big Whooosh! coming.

What has North Texas done in the past 30 years to build on that success? Surely there has been a long term plan, and not just a bunch of band-aids to cover immediate needs.

I think the students that are opposed to a stadium fee have a legitimate point. Many of them aren't sports fans and many will not attend football games no matter how nice the stadium. It's not going to stop them from contributing because even the most critical of them knows that the reason that the fee is being raised is because the it has been far too low for too long and North Texas has been unable to build facilities or comply with NCAA regulations (Title IX in 2002) without tacking on a small increase. That is exactly why the Student Government Association should look closely at how they structure this fee. Here is my suggestion for what may be the best format for raising the fee. $1 per credit hour incerase in 2008-2009 $1 per credit hour incerase in 2009-2010 $1 per credit hour incerase in 2010-2011 $1 per credit hour incerase in 2011-2012 then a year without any increase $2 per credit hour incerase in 2013-2014 $2 per credit hour incerase in 2014-2015 $2 per credit hour incerase in 2015-2016 $2 per credit hour incerase in 2016-2017 Now I can hear all of you saying "Hey, wait Adler, you're wanting to impose the higher parts of the fee on people that aren't even at North Texas yet. Those 2016-2017 incoming Freshmen are just starting fourth grade his year. You're not being fair to them." That is where you are wrong. A small increase is needed right now, there's no debating it and it is going to happen because a new stadium is needed. The current stadium is a dilapidated structure built in 1952 that has a history of structural problems. The property where the current stadium resides is required for academic purposes and the future Interstate-35 expansion is going to be too close to the current structure. Many of the other colleges in the Sun Belt, schools that North Texas is desperately trying to outperform, already have student athletic fees in the $200 - $300 range per semester. A couple of other large Texas colleges that desire a national presence have also raised their athletic fees to be $240 - $300 per semester by 2012. North Texas needs to be in a position to be able to meet these challenges or it will potentially keep being passed over in any future conference realignments. But to impose a larger fee, one equal to what other 'emerging national schools' pay, one that would substantially improve athletics, one that could result in more attractive conferences, on current students would be wrong. It would be like raising someone's car payments after they have already started to pay for their vehicle. New students in 2013 and subsequent years would be selecting their college fully aware of all fees . If the fees make North Texas a more costly option than another college (very highly unlikely, but I had to say it) then that will be a factor in their decision. What would be unfair is to wait until 2013 or 2014 and then spring another 'necessary, fee on unsuspecting students. We all know that an adjustment will be necessary. Like buying a car, "The price on the sticker is what you pay" is the most honest way to help prospective students forecast their college costs. And all North texas would be doing is raising 2016 athletic fees to what many other students are already paying.

Why can't North Texas be like this? (Yes, Click Here) It can. That school was not even in Division 1 until 1997. They played in relative obscurity and drew vey few fans. North Texas has more potential than just about any school in the country to build a winning program. But we all know what 'potential' means. It's not just about a stadium, North Texas needs to seize the opportunity to make a name for itself.

Big wheels keep on turning Carry us home to see old kin Singing songs about the Southland Cause we'll be playin' there again And I think its a sin, yes

Congratulations Joey.

Yes, I know that I am sometimes portayed as the eternal optimist, but that may be the reason why I have never given up hope for North Texas to be able to accomplish something more than it has; to become something better than it is. But I like to think of myself as more of a realist. The method to success is so clearly mapped out by the other large state schools which have already made the move and those that are soon planning to. Why can't the same thing happen for North Texas?

I too don't think Texas State has any problems with North Texas althouth I do believe they use UNT as a model of ineptitude. It's not changing at Texas State by sheer luck, an aggressive agenda from the very top is making change happen. I wish the same could be said for North Texas. Here is a link to the Texas State University: Poised For Greatness The Rising Star of Texas Bobcat Club fundraising video.

You know, people often ask how things got so bad at North Texas. They want to know what method these formerly unknown newcomers used to pass North Texas so quickly. But then people stick their heads in the sand when concrete evidence is being shown as to exactly what method these schools are using to pass North Texas. Whooosh! Whooosh! Whooosh! Well there goes Eastern Carolina, South Florida, and Central Florida all disappearing out in front. Florida Atlantic and Florida International have just recently passed, and Texas State and UTSA are closing quickly from behind with full intents to blow the doors off 'wallowing' North Texas.

No, what I am saying is that there are students that are not interested in what benefits North Texas. They would oppose anything that benefits the university, and many would inflict harm on it if given the opportunity. They do exist and they will be vocal when a referendum is proposed. That is why North Texas needs strong vocal leadership from it's University President, Student Government Association leaders, and the leaders of campus organizations; dorms, Greek organizations etc.

You can mock their commitment to improve themselves. But many people did the same to Florida State, Eastern Carolina, Central Florida, and South Florida who did the same thing. Where has North Texas gotten by not making a commitment? Are North Texas graduates that much wealthier because they didn't pay a competitive athletics fee?

There are times when it's easy to define who cares about the well-being of the university, and who does not.

Unfortunately the hole in the ship needs to be fixed first. For decades North Texas has seen very few bail water and the overwhelming majority bail out. Asking what few remain to bail faster hasn't made any progress. Hopefully. This year a wake-up coffee was served when the Dallas Morning News ran the story that North Texas had a total of ZERO points in this years Director's Cup standings which compares how well all 300 Division 1 schools compete on a national level. And if that didn't get her attention, then certainly the cold herring with which Texas State just slapped her should have done the trick. But even if built by 2010 a new stadium is not the panacea, it's just masking a symptom of a much larger problem. Has the "Fabulous' Super Pit been able to keep North Texas Basketball from only having 5 seasons of winning records against Division 1 teams in the last 25 years? There has to be a real commitment along with the facility improvements. Otherwise you're just flushing the money away. Oh, and then North Texas can blame the 'bad' alumni, the 'bad' fans, and the 'bad' community support.

I think the message certainly becomes clearer when excerpts from the two articles are placed together. The gauntlet has been thrown down. Does somebody need to drive up from San Marcos and start slapping Gretchen Bataille, Rick Villarreal, and Jeff Kline with a cold fish before they will accept the challenge?

That is exactly what I have been trying to illustrate for people. But they keep telling me that "We're going to keep the athletics fee incredibly low, but we intend to scrape enough together to start paying for a stadium". Meanwhile Athletic Directors at other schools are talking about their intentions to "kick your ass and then leave you behind". Sure that's paraphrasing, but's it's exactly what he meant by not wanting to be like the those perpetually "wallowing in the cellar." OK, North Texas is THE example of "wallowing in the cellar". The example of what NOT to do. Who is prepared to meet this challenge? Does the Student Government at North Texas enjoy "wallowing"? With what is that word usually associated?

On the Road to Success College Athletics By Tyler Mayforth San Marcos Daily Record Sports San Marcos — If you walk through the Darren B. Casey Athletic Administration Complex, you will get the feeling something big is about to happen. There’s a certain excitement flowing through the air. Boxes are piled high with packets containing information about “The Drive” and 2,600 more are scheduled to be mailed next week. Smiles grace the employees’ faces like laughing gas is pumped through the air-conditioning ducts. The talk is palpable to a university seeped in tradition, ready for another winning year. The fervor is high because there is a feeling of anticipation. It’s centered around one two-syllable word, not before uttered within the athletic department until Dr. Larry Teis took over in 2004 — progress. Before Teis gained control, even though the End Zone Complex was built, it was one step forward, two steps back. Athletically, the programs were advancing, but academically, Texas State was collected numerous violations. While the football team emerged on to the national radar with its 2005 season, the men’s basketball team crumpled while Greg LaFluer was in charge. Former head coach Dennis Nutt drove the program into the ground. The Bobcats’ wins dropped, as did their grades. So Teis came in and immediately went to work. He allowed Nutt one more season, then went on the prowl for a new coach. He hired Doug Davalos and said the two saw eye-to-eye at the start. Both knew what needed to be done. “We let the men's basketball team slide too far,” Teis said. “When I hired Coach Davalos, we had a mutual understanding of had to be changed. We’ve quadrupled our win total, but most importantly, we cleaned up the academics.” As he cleaned up the academic mess, Teis looked toward the future like a progressive visionary. He knew the department need more money to do what they wanted, so he teamed with Denise M. Trauth, university president, to push the issue. Slowly, the operating budget for the athletic department rose. In 2004, Teis’ first year as Director of Athletics, the budget was $8.3 million. The next year, they had $8.7 million, the following, $9.9 million and in 2007, $10.4 million. The budget for 2008 is $11.2 million. “We’ve been able to add $5 million to the budget since I arrived, so we are making things happen,” Teis said. “We are looking at a projected budget of $13 million in 2009. We know what we need to do to make the next move and we’re putting the pieces in order.” The pieces are beginning to fall in place for the next move — a trip into the Football Bowl Subdivision. Texas State added brand new scoreboards to the baseball, football and softball fields, as well as a jumbotron inside Strahan Coliseum. If the school is to move into the FBS, other improvements need to be made and Teis is working toward rectifying those issues. Demolition of the baseball and softball complexes begins in August and by February, the fields should be presentable to the public and playable. Should Texas State move up in five years, it needs a collective idea of where it wants to go. Not necessarily the conference in which it ends up, but from what team to model its move. For every Marshall, there is a Louisiana-Monroe and North Texas, wallowing in the cellar. “You need to pick out things you see with every team you want to follow,” Teis said. “But, I really don’t know if we want to model ourselves after somebody from the past, since times have changed. We just want to get ourselves in a position to look like a University of Houston, a UTEP. I say look like because they are state schools and that's what our budgets will look like. We want to be able to compete in that arena.” Under his watch, not only have budgets increased, but so have charitable donations. Most recently, Jerry and Linda Field gave Texas State $100,000 to go toward “The Drive.” Only three months removed from the single-largest donation in the history of the athletic department, Darren B. Casey’s $1 million gift. Teis knows the importance of collecting these donations as Texas State needs as much help as it can get with the upcoming move. He’s not a stranger to success, as he was named 2005-06 General Sports TURF Systems AD of the Year Division I-AA West Region winner. “We are going to do our part,” Teis said. “We need others to help us do the same. Us doing our part is winning and getting people in the stands and letting others see it. We need people to come at the start and help us move to that level. There are schools right now that don’t win, but still sell out their stadium. We just need a passion and a belief in it to keep moving forward.” Teis believes in progress, do you? Click HERE for story - San Marcos Record-Sentinel

Has that been the case with our basketball team that plays in a very nice 10,000 seat arena? Or have our two most successful teams in the last quarter of a century both lost to UTA which recruits players to a stage at Texas Hall? North Texas does need facilities, that's a given. But the inability to adequately fund the teams that play in those facilities will insure that people will continue to not want to watch them. Please do whatever you can to get the athletics fee raised $2 per hour for the next 7 years. It's a relatively painless increase for current students, and future students will be aware of the fees before enrolling. Increased athletic success will enhance their college experience and the value of their education. The costs of the UNT education will still be a bargain, but the school will have a winning image. 2008-2009...$6 per credit hour 2009-2010...$8 per credit hour 2010-2011...$10 per credit hour 2011-2012...$12 per credit hour 2012-2013...$14 per credit hour 2013-2014...$16 per credit hour 2014-2015...$18 per credit hour 2015-2016...$20 per credit hour That way North Texas will have eventually caught up to contribution levels that UTSA and Texas State students had been giving since 2012. In 2015-2016 North Texas students will still be contributing less per semester than other Sun Bely students already pay.

I hate to say this but uninformed customers are always going to choose the least expensive option. Did you explain that $4 an hour means that North Texas may get a stadium built, but that the home team that plays in it will still be getting it's ass kicked almost every weekend, and North Texas will have to continue to sell 'bodybag games' just to make budget. What a bargain! But at a moderate increase, which over a very extended time will eventually equal per-student contributions at the other emerging universities in Texas will guarantee that North Texas has the financial ability to be successful. The time has come for North Texas to start dominating all those public schools that are half it's size and all the tiny privates. It is time to start kicking ass. That is what's expected every year at other schools but absolute athletic insignificance has been tolerated at North Texas for far too long. Only then will fans and alumni support the program. (What has attendance been like for the past 25 years in the Fabulous Super Pit?)

I hate to say this, but later may not be an option. North Texas is already poised to be left standing in the next round of conference musical chairs. Now the stage is being set for the letdown in the next round after that. And on the fee amount, why are schools of comparable enrollment size, that already have stadiums, raising their fees to $20 per student hour if a $15 fee is enough? They want to win at this level, not just participate.

In the mid 1980's UTA raised student fees just enough to get a football stadium built but there was not a sufficient increase for the athletic programs. How did that work out?

Is Jeff capable of doing what the Student Presidents at Texas State and Texas-San Antonio have acheived? Those schools already have stadiums (although Texas State will have to expand theirs), and their student contributions are going to be capped at $300.00 and $240.00 per student per semester respectively. That's more than three times what the current contribution is at North Texas. Considering that those schools also have enrollments in the 30,000 range, their budgets are going to be much larger than North Texas. Those schools are planning for success. Stretch the increase increments out as far as necessary, but set them to eventually match the per student contribution of our competition. If the other schools are planning $20 per credit hour by 2013, try to have the same advantage for North Texas by 2016.