MGB breaking news -- regents approve new venue

[Matt from A700]

I know everybody around here wants baseball, but I'd also like to see a men's soccer team created. The men only have six official sport teams and three of them are running.

[BTG_Fan1]

54 minutes ago, Matt from A700 said:

I know everybody around here wants baseball, but I'd also like to see a men's soccer team created. The men only have six official sport teams and three of them are running.

That's because of Title 9...

Also, I think baseball is a more likely thing with boosters wanting it, and fans as well. But soccer could be in the works with the new stadium eventually.

Edited February 25, 2017 by BTG_Fan1

[Cerebus]

39 minutes ago, BTG_Fan1 said:

Also, I think baseball is a more likely thing with boosters wanting it, and fans as well. But soccer could be in the works with the new stadium eventually.

We don't have money for baseball right now.  Not only construction and salaries, but the offset Title IX scholarships.   It will take a minor miracle to have it up in going any time soon.

There is no chance we start up men's soccer (and the title IX sport).  

[BTG_Fan1]

1 minute ago, Cerebus said:

We don't have money for baseball right now.  Not only construction and salaries, but the offset Title IX scholarships.   It will take a minor miracle to have it up in going any time soon.

There is no chance we start up men's soccer (and the title IX sport).  

Yea I don't think anything is within the next 3-4 years... I think WB would rather get the sports up and going and have the new SP on the way or already built before starting another sport.

[Cerebus]

3 minutes ago, BTG_Fan1 said:

Yea I don't think anything is within the next 3-4 years... I think WB would rather get the sports up and going and have the new SP on the way or already built before starting another sport.

It is just not very likely we are going to be adding 4 new sports (2 women / 2 men) at any time. 

Again, a new SP is not WBs decision.  It is not an AD facility.  It is a university facility.  

[BTG_Fan1]

1 minute ago, Cerebus said:

It is just not very likely we are going to be adding 4 new sports (2 women / 2 men) at any time. 

Again, a new SP is not WBs decision.  It is not an AD facility.  It is a university facility.  

4 sports?

And again the information we(my class) are getting isn't from the AD office... It's from the individual that runs the other programs that happen at the SP such as kids basketball, cheer camps, etc.

[Cerebus]

Just now, BTG_Fan1 said:

4 sports?

You talked about adding baseball and mens soccer, for Title IX reasons you would need to add two women's sports as well.

[TheTastyGreek]

22 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

We don't have money for baseball right now.  Not only construction and salaries, but the offset Title IX scholarships.   It will take a minor miracle to have it up in going any time soon.

So... I should stop expecting it 'sooner than 2016'?

[BTG_Fan1]

31 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

You talked about adding baseball and mens soccer, for Title IX reasons you would need to add two women's sports as well.

I was talking about that we would be more likely to add baseball over soccer, but soccer could win out because of the new soccer stadium. Not adding both.

 

[GrandGreen]

49 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

You talked about adding baseball and mens soccer, for Title IX reasons you would need to add two women's sports as well.

Title 9 is based on numbers not teams.  Baseball is only 11 ships, I doubt NT would have to add any women's offset.   I would be surprised if NT would even consider soccer.    The problem is that baseball is relatively expensive both in the construction of a facility and in terms of the operational budget.  

58 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

It is just not very likely we are going to be adding 4 new sports (2 women / 2 men) at any time. 

Again, a new SP is not WBs decision.  It is not an AD facility.  It is a university facility.  

Whether the SP is officially a AD asset or a NT asset makes no difference other then the financing of the original construction.    NT did a great thing to get the SP built using state funds.  Never would have happened any other way in those days.   

The SP is going to be run to the overall benefit of the University no matter who officially controls it.  It was very interesting to me, that one of the consultants' recommendations was to transfer Apogee from the AD to general NT's assets.  This was cosmetic in that their objective was to cut down the athletic losses due to the debt service being charged to the AD.   So if the SP being part of the overall NT instead of under the AD is a big problem than why recommend a switch of Apogee. 

[HoustonEagle]

19 hours ago, emmitt01 said:

Geez Wren, could you please stop doing nothing!

Not exactly high level negotiations.  The school was ready for the Fouts property so money was reappropriated for a mid level replacement.  

We will know when WB is getting the job done when we see big donations and some winning teams.  

[NorthTexan95]

8 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

Title 9 is based on numbers not teams.  Baseball is only 11 ships, I doubt NT would have to add any women's offset.   I would be surprised if NT would even consider soccer.    The problem is that baseball is relatively expensive both in the construction of a facility and in terms of the operational budget.   

I don't know how if this was accurate but it was reported before that adding baseball would cause no issues with Title 9.  That's always been my understanding.

[UNTexas]

21 hours ago, Travis said:

I am really curious how this will all look. 

With a track around the field I'd assume the seating will be really far from the field. It's good for track and bad for soccer, for the people watching anyway.

Edited February 25, 2017 by UNTexas

[GreenN'walinsVet]

1 hour ago, UNTexas said:

With a track around the field I'd assume the seating will be really far from the field. It's good for track and bad for soccer, for the people watching anyway.

We were jaded with the seating situation at Fouts.  If the Bleachers are directly on the track straight away then its not to bad for soccer at all.  Think most High School Football Stadiums (Well small school stadiums now).  The problem becomes when they build the jumping pits between the stands and the track and then the playing field (ala Fouts).

[Cerebus]

9 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

Title 9 is based on numbers not teams.  Baseball is only 11 ships, I doubt NT would have to add any women's offset.   I would be surprised if NT would even consider soccer.  

They would for sure need to add ~11 ships for women if they added 11 for men.  That is why RV discussed the possibility of adding a women's bowling team, or a women's equestrian team.  It was the first step needed to add the scholarships for a mens baseball team.

 

9 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

Whether the SP is officially a AD asset or a NT asset makes no difference other then the financing of the original construction

It makes a huge difference. The AD doesn't control the SP.  That means the university uses it to schedule all sorts of events in there when the AD might want to use it.  No one outside the AD can go into the AD offices and take space, no one outside AD can go into the weight rooms and meeting rooms or practice fields and schedule time over the AD's demands.   Those spaces belong to the AD.  When it comes to to the SP, the AD is just one of many tenants.  

 

[GrandGreen]

1 hour ago, Cerebus said:

They would for sure need to add ~11 ships for women if they added 11 for men.  That is why RV discussed the possibility of adding a women's bowling team, or a women's equestrian team.  It was the first step needed to add the scholarships for a mens baseball team.

RV also stated that NT would not have to add a women sport to add baseball.   The truth is that most colleges are not in strict compliance with title IX provisions which short version is that an institution should offer athletic scholarships to the sexes in proportion with their undergrad enrollment.   The penalty for non-compliance after a series of steps is that federal funds may be withheld from the school.   This has never happened.  The real threat is that the institution may be sued by aggrieved parties for non-compliance with standards.   

It makes a huge difference. The AD doesn't control the SP.  That means the university uses it to schedule all sorts of events in there when the AD might want to use it.  No one outside the AD can go into the AD offices and take space, no one outside AD can go into the weight rooms and meeting rooms or practice fields and schedule time over the AD's demands.   Those spaces belong to the AD.  When it comes to to the SP, the AD is just one of many tenants.  

If that is true, explain the consultants' recommendation for Apogee.    Do you really think that if the SP was directly under the control of the AD, they would have the authority to deny the universities' use of the facility for say a graduation?  Of course not, the AD works for the President and the school; it is not truly a separate entity anymore than the Business School.   In a practical sense, I doubt there are few if any AD's that have compete control over any major arena or stadium.  Yes, they may technically schedule the events through the AD; but I doubt any school is going to severely restrict the utility of a major asset by limiting it to only athletics.    

 

[KRAM1]

13 hours ago, TheTastyGreek said:

So... I should stop expecting it 'sooner than 2016'?

Nope...because personnel and priorities do change.

[Cerebus]

27 minutes ago, GrandGreen said:

The real threat is that the institution may be sued by aggrieved parties for non-compliance with standards.  

The AD is a VP position that reports to the President.  The real threat is that if you look at the Title IX reports we are one of the top schools in the nation when it comes to sports gender parity.  Do you really think RV wanted to delay baseball just to keep that ranking?  No, previous presidents didn't want to be the one who allowed that ranking to slip under their watch.  Maybe Smatrek is OK with us falling further out of compliance and risking lawsuits and the incredibly bad press that would create, but I doubt it.  

 

27 minutes ago, GrandGreen said:

If that is true, explain the consultants' recommendation for Apogee.  

The consultants recommended the Apogee specific bond debt be moved to the general construction bond pool.  If at all possible, to do that while keeping Apogee under AD control.  

 

27 minutes ago, GrandGreen said:

Do you really think that if the SP was directly under the control of the AD, they would have the authority to deny the universities' use of the facility for say a graduation?

No of course not, the President is his boss and wants that to happen there.  However the VP in charge of athletics (the AD) would be able to tell other VP's and their employees when and where they could use a new SP.   What happens now is that sometimes the AD is told they can not have use of the current SP because they have already assigned the space to someone else.  It's just not graduations, it also classes, outside of NT events, etc.  

Now the AD could decide when to allow those to happen, but it would be the AD's decision.  

[GrandGreen]

1 hour ago, Cerebus said:

The AD is a VP position that reports to the President.  The real threat is that if you look at the Title IX reports we are one of the top schools in the nation when it comes to sports gender parity.  Do you really think RV wanted to delay baseball just to keep that ranking?  No, previous presidents didn't want to be the one who allowed that ranking to slip under their watch.  Maybe Smatrek is OK with us falling further out of compliance and risking lawsuits and the incredibly bad press that would create, but I doubt it.  

 

The consultants recommended the Apogee specific bond debt be moved to the general construction bond pool.  If at all possible, to do that while keeping Apogee under AD control.  

 

No of course not, the President is his boss and wants that to happen there.  However the VP in charge of athletics (the AD) would be able to tell other VP's and their employees when and where they could use a new SP.   What happens now is that sometimes the AD is told they can not have use of the current SP because they have already assigned the space to someone else.  It's just not graduations, it also classes, outside of NT events, etc.  

Now the AD could decide when to allow those to happen, but it would be the AD's decision.  

A windmill debate, I guess we will continue to disagree.  

I don't know if NT is a leader in gender equality or not.  If NT is, I am not sure what that gets you; other than a lot of extra expense.  Here are the stats:

Sports: women 10, men 6:  (track officially counts as 3 separate teams, outdoor track, indoor track and cross country although the ship limit is imposed as one entity)

Maximum ships if all are at limit:  women 99, men 115.  (Note due to partial ships in some sports including swimming and track & field, the number of athletes on ship can be much higher than these limits)

Undergraduate enrollment %:  women 52%, men 48%

Title IX theoretical scholarship target: women 111, men 103 

The point being that few colleges are in compete compliance and I suspect you are correct in that NT is probably a lot closer than most.   Most title IX suits are not over numbers. They are about the unfair treatment of women athletes which includes a comparison of the resources available to women in relation to men.    

Moving Apogee to the general construction bond pool is transferring it from the AD department to NT general control.  Your second comment supports my theory.   Operationally, it is immaterial were the facility is on an accounting basis.   The AD could be making all the decisions now regarding the SP, if it is what the NT administration wanted.   

Frankly, I think the whole SP reporting status is a red herring that RV liked to use.   It is not rocket science, the basketball schedule has to be coordinated with other major uses of the SP and adequate on-court practice has to be provided.  Just like the vast majority of college arenas in the country manage.  I can remember two or three occasions were games had to moved because of conflicts.   My guess those were errors by the AD occurring when they contracted games without reference to the master SP schedule. 

 

Edited February 25, 2017 by GrandGreen

[FirefightnRick]

15 hours ago, Cerebus said:

We don't have money for baseball right now.  

 

Have you not been paying attention?  WE GOT MONEY TO BURN, BABY!!!!

 

 

Rick

[GreenMachine]

2 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

A windmill debate, I guess we will continue to disagree.  

I don't know if NT is a leader in gender equality or not.  If NT is, I am not sure what that gets you; other than a lot of extra expense.  Here are the stats:

Sports: women 10, men 6:  (track officially counts as 3 separate teams, outdoor track, indoor track and cross country although the ship limit is imposed as one entity)

Maximum ships if all are at limit:  women 99, men 115.  (Note due to partial ships in some sports including swimming and track & field, the number of athletes on ship can be much higher than these limits)

Undergraduate enrollment %:  women 52%, men 48%

Title IX theoretical scholarship target: women 111, men 103 

The point being that few colleges are in compete compliance and I suspect you are correct in that NT is probably a lot closer than most.   Most title IX suits are not over numbers. They are about the unfair treatment of women athletes which includes a comparison of the resources available to women in relation to men.    

Moving Apogee to the general construction bond pool is transferring it from the AD department to NT general control.  Your second comment supports my theory.   Operationally, it is immaterial were the facility is on an accounting basis.   The AD could be making all the decisions now regarding the SP, if it is what the NT administration wanted.   

Frankly, I think the whole SP reporting status is a red herring that RV liked to use.   It is not rocket science, the basketball schedule has to be coordinated with other major uses of the SP and adequate on-court practice has to be provided.  Just like the vast majority of college arenas in the country manage.  I can remember two or three occasions were games had to moved because of conflicts.   My guess those were errors by the AD occurring when they contracted games without reference to the master SP schedule. 

 

Do your numbers include women that self identify as men and vice versa? If so, can't we just move people around like chess to get the correct ratios. One day I am a man on the men's track team but the next week they need me over on the woman's team to get our ratios in line.

2 hours ago, FirefightnRick said:

 

Have you not been paying attention?  WE GOT MONEY TO BURN, BABY!!!!

 

 

Rick

Spending money wisely and burning money are totally different things.

[FirefightnRick]

17 minutes ago, GreenMachine said:

Spending money wisely and burning money are totally different things.

Correct 

 

Rick

[MeanGreenTexan]

On 2/25/2017 at 2:17 PM, FirefightnRick said:

 

Have you not been paying attention?  WE GOT MONEY TO BURN, BABY!!!!

 

 

Rick

I assume you're talking about the AD staff & Pres Smatresk flying around looking at IPFs?

How much Athletic Dept money do you think was spent on that trip?