DentonLurker

Giving $'s to a player is not charity. As such, the money given to these collectives is not and should not be considered a tax benefit to the "donor."

In recruiting, everything matters. Each thing is of different importance for each recruit. It's not just facilities. It's not just coaching. It's not just academics. It's not just location. It's a mix of all of the above plus some other things I'm sure that is weighted differently by each athlete.

I give Texas State a lot of credit for what they’ve done with that facility. That stadium used to barely be a high school-quality stadium. They’ve pulled off a lot of consistency and held onto their history in how they’ve expanded it, despite it being done in phases.

I mean the AAC is better than CUSA, but I’m not paying $34M to join the AAC.

I dont think NIL in and of itself is an issue for me. If an athlete wants to make a few bucks selling autographs or being in commercials for Bill Utter Ford, I don’t care about that. What I have an issue with is these collectives where athletes are guaranteed something just for being athletes. Also, in your scenario, I think we are going to find out pretty fast that a lot of “donors” are not going to continue giving forever with no real benefits (no tax deduction, no ticket benefits, etc.). Not everyone is going to buy success on the field consistently and that’s when the coffers will stop being filled, in my opinion.

I give my $’s to the MGSF. I think players deserve to be paid what they can get, but I don’t feel led to contribute to them getting paid.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but throwing out an idle threat without naming names is certainly not going to.

Who did Charlotte land?

He hasn’t called anyone specific out yet. When he does, his words will carry more weight. Also, everyone wants their current job until they don’t.

The NCAA does exactly what its members want them to do. The presidents, ADs, and their staffs are the ones who set the rules and tell the national staff where and how to spend their time.

This isn’t really surprising. HEB doesn’t appear to have Denton very high on the priority list.

School funds: Includes both direct and indirect support from the university, including state funds, tuition, tuition waivers etc., as well as federal Work Study amounts for student workers employed by athletics department. It also includes state, municipal, federal and other appropriations for athletics, as well as the value of university-provided support such as administrative services, facilities and grounds maintenance, security, risk management, utilities, depreciation and debt service that is not charged to the athletics department. Contributions: Includes amounts received directly from individuals, corporations, associations, foundations, clubs or other organizations for the operations of the athletics program. Amounts paid in excess of a ticket’s value. Contributions include cash, marketable securities and in-kind contributions such as dealer-provided cars for staff use. Also includes revenue from preferential seating. I’m not sure why you wouldn’t believe that. Giving to Athletics has been terrible for a long time.

Okay. I apologize for the slight generalization of using the word budget instead of actuals. I think for the purposes of this conversation it’s probably not really that impactful of a distinction.. I can’t imagine that it’s materially different from what was budgeted. And I just double checked the numbers and they add up. I typed them out from the database linked above.

Here's the breakdown: Revenue - $44.477M Ticket Sales - $1.337M Contributions - $2.358M Rights/Licensing - $4.815M Student Fees - $13.251M School Funds - $20.075M Other - $2.638M Expenses - $44.222M Coaching/Staff - $16.651M Scholarships - $6.526M Facilities/Overhead - $10.337M Other - $10.706

I'm curious to know what you consider a budget if revenue and expenses aren't a budget?

Did anyone in Houston make it out to this last night? I'm curious about attendance and how the event was.

I get what you’re saying. I think the difference is that I would like to see us get away from people expecting something for a donation that costs the department money. You decrease the benefit to the department as soon as they have to buy something to give people. And honestly, I’m just not convinced most people are going to be super jazzed about the cheap $5 or less gift they would get in exchange for a $25 donation. If they want to give away a free ticket to a game, fine. If they want to even throw in a free parking pass, fine. Those things don’t cost the department money, which is what I’m really against.

My point is that the underlying tone for pretty much every conversation about SMU moving to a different conference is look at our NIL ($'s), look at our facilities ($'s), we won't have any issue paying an exit fee ($'s), etc. There's not really much talk about how good the teams are, how SMU sells out every game, how SMU puts a million eyes on TV's, how SMU helps other schools sell tickets, etc.

It’s kind of entertaining that the main argument in all of this for SMU seems to be “we’re rich.”

Coach resignations, outside of retirement or leaving for another job, are typically “resignations in lieu of termination.”

I’m sure that $5 heavy cotton t-shirt will get them to come back. LOL

I would also love to hear the ideas of what someone should get for a $25 donation, besides emails. I don’t get it.

I get it, but they will do better than SDSU

Baseball is a money pit. Do you need Jared to tell you that? With how low our ticket sales numbers and our donor participation is in general, why add Baseball? The truth is, we just can’t afford it right now.

Is total budget really a ranking tool? It doesn’t really give you any insight into the health of a program.