A couple of Notes from the UNT Naming Right Press Conference

redallover · August 12, 2011

I'd suspect you would want to put the money for baseball into football or men's basketball. Conferences don't care too much if you have a baseball team but they do care how much revenue you generate in football and men's hoops.

Nearly all baseball programs lose money and that's before considering the space that's allocated to the program in terms of stadium, offices, etc.

Edited August 12, 2011 by redallover

adman · August 12, 2011

Yup, and here's my direction. I hope we use a small fraction of the money to acquire an artillery and munition storage facility so that Boomer won't have to be hauled back and forth to Fouts and piled into a cramped golf cart shed any more?

Rick

I thought Boomer and the Model A had a home inside the new stadium. No?

FirefightnRick · August 12, 2011

I thought Boomer and the Model A had a home inside the new stadium. No?

Not that I can tell so far? Im hoping though???? And I don't believe we will even see the Model A this year? Certainly won't see the Spirit Bell. Neither has run in at least a couple of years I believe?

Rick

UNT Mean Green · August 12, 2011

I think HKS did TCU's baseball stadium

No way. In no way, shape, or form would you model any college baseball stadium after Lupton when starting with a clean slate. You would certainly start with the idea of mimicking HKS' previous baseball facilities, which include many spring training venues. Most recently the new home of the Diamondbacks and Rockies (been there it's unbelivable).

Here's some of HKS' work for Baseball:

Salt River Fields at Talking Stick

Ballpark of the Year

Talking Stick receives Gold LEED Certification

OR CAMELBACK RANCH

Spring Training home of White Sox and Dodgers

sorrry this thread went waaaaaay off topic!

NT80 · August 12, 2011

The way I understand it baseball would "cost us" 9.something scholarships. (Not sure why it is fractional)

Also, adding baseball will not cause any Title IV issues. Meaning we can add baseball and not have to add any women's sport.

Finally - It is also my understanding that the next two things on the table for the athletic department are:
1A - Baseball
1B - Indoor football practice facility.

And that you'll probably see those two things happen at roughly the same time. (With the time being in the very, very near future.)

RV once said he would love for us to have a couple indoor facilities, so multiple sports, band, etc could use them. Great idea.

shutter · August 12, 2011

If not baseball, I would like to Mens soccer come back. We used to field good teams in the early 80s.

stebo · August 13, 2011

We have the student fee, which is planned to cover the $80M stadium obligation. (Right now) it can't be used for any other purposes.

We have Apogee Money that can be used at the AD's discretion.

Also, I suspect that as of today we only have $1M from Apogee. I doubt that wrote the full check today. Probably just paid for year 1.

You know - this is a little confusing. The student fee was passed as a dedicated athletics fee for the entire department. It will fund all aspects of the program - salaries, equipment, and facilities. Part of the benefit of that fee was the ability to fund 50% of the new stadium (the amount allowed by law for facilities by student fee). The BOR could (theoretically) increase the fee up to 10% per year without student or State approval until it maxes out at $20 bucks a credit hour.

The tricky part is that Perry tied this fee to the stadium by making it go into effect when the stadium construction started and expire when the stadium is paid off. So it is really in the department's best interest to finance the bonds as long as possible - or until they can get a true dedicated fee amendment. As it stands, when the bonds retire - the "dedicated" athletic fee also retires (leaving us with no fee at all!)

That is the bill that was signed by our Governor - after a last minute negotiation. That is not what the students voted for but that is what Perry signed after Austin got a hold of the request. I hate politicians, the students voted for it and it should have been left alone.

As far as baseball goes, the scholarships are the easy part. Baseball uses half scholarships so the Title IX consequences are neglible. It would add 7 or 8 ships and I think that we are already spending more on women than men so there would probably not need to be an additional female sport added... but you have to weigh the cost of the facilities, the coaching staff, and the commitment. If we are not going to do it right - and spend the money needed to put a first class Div I team on the field (with full coaching, trainers, and proper equipment) than I don't think that RV will spend the money. That being said, it could be a fantastic justification for raising the athletic fee after a year or two - to fund it properly.

Edited August 13, 2011 by stebo

SilverEagle · August 13, 2011

Not that I can tell so far? Im hoping though???? And I don't believe we will even see the Model A this year? Certainly won't see the Spirit Bell. Neither has run in at least a couple of years I believe?

Rick

Ok, this is ridiculous. Just as ridiculous as KRAM1 (and others) having to organize a fund raising event to help out with the expenses for the cheer staff.

Boomer, the Model T, and the Bell are all long time North Texas tradition icons.

I will say however that I think the Bell should be mounted on a trailer again. It could be brought into the stadium being pulled behind the Model T.

I think that the care of these spirit icons should be turned over to the Alumni Association. After all, one of them already is under the care and protection of one of our best Alumni. Looking after these icons, and making sure they are well maintained, would be an excellent project for the Alumni association.

A lot more useful than "mixers".

GrandGreen · August 13, 2011

You know - this is a little confusing. The student fee was passed as a dedicated athletics fee for the entire department. It will fund all aspects of the program - salaries, equipment, and facilities. Part of the benefit of that fee was the ability to fund 50% of the new stadium (the amount allowed by law for facilities by student fee). The BOR could (theoretically) increase the fee up to 10% per year without student or State approval until it maxes out at $20 bucks a credit hour.

The tricky part is that Perry tied this fee to the stadium by making it go into effect when the stadium construction started and expire when the stadium is paid off. So it is really in the department's best interest to finance the bonds as long as possible - or until they can get a true dedicated fee amendment. As it stands, when the bonds retire - the "dedicated" athletic fee also retires (leaving us with no fee at all!)

That is the bill that was signed by our Governor - after a last minute negotiation. That is not what the students voted for but that is what Perry signed after Austin got a hold of the request. I hate politicians, the students voted for it and it should have been left alone.

As far as baseball goes, the scholarships are the easy part. Baseball uses half scholarships so the Title IX consequences are neglible. It would add 7 or 8 ships and I think that we are already spending more on women than men so there would probably not need to be an additional female sport added... but you have to weigh the cost of the facilities, the coaching staff, and the commitment. If we are not going to do it right - and spend the money needed to put a first class Div I team on the field (with full coaching, trainers, and proper equipment) than I don't think that RV will spend the money. That being said, it could be a fantastic justification for raising the athletic fee after a year or two - to fund it properly.

My read of the fee requirement is that it is in effect as long as part of the fees are used for construction not just the stadium. Therefore, NT should always have a construction payment to insure continuation of the fees but it does not have to be related to the stadium or even football. There is always something to build and it might take a little planning but it is my understanding the fees can go on into perpetuity as long as part of the proceeds are used for athletic construction projects. It is still perplexing that NT will have to be under those constraints when TSSM and UTSA were allowed to raise their athletic fees to the max without those restraints.

Green P1 · August 13, 2011

Not that I can tell so far? Im hoping though???? And I don't believe we will even see the Model A this year? Certainly won't see the Spirit Bell. Neither has run in at least a couple of years I believe?

Rick

I don't see how there could possibly be room for either without the track. I will say that there's no excuse for both of them not being incorporated into the tailgaiting environment.

MeanMag · August 13, 2011

My read of the fee requirement is that it is in effect as long as part of the fees are used for construction not just the stadium. Therefore, NT should always have a construction payment to insure continuation of the fees but it does not have to be related to the stadium or even football. There is always something to build and it might take a little planning but it is my understanding the fees can go on into perpetuity as long as part of the proceeds are used for athletic construction projects. It is still perplexing that NT will have to be under those constraints when TSSM and UTSA were allowed to raise their athletic fees to the max without those restraints.

I read it the same way you did.

My first thought after the debt on the stadium is paid down a little more was the 2 projects mentioned on here.

1A. Baseball

1B. Indoor Practice facility

With this summer it seems like those needs might be interchangeable. Why not combine the 2 needs into one facility and spend a little to save a little? Guaranteed to host a super regional.

filmerj · August 13, 2011

You know - this is a little confusing. The student fee was passed as a dedicated athletics fee for the entire department. It will fund all aspects of the program - salaries, equipment, and facilities. Part of the benefit of that fee was the ability to fund 50% of the new stadium (the amount allowed by law for facilities by student fee). The BOR could (theoretically) increase the fee up to 10% per year without student or State approval until it maxes out at $20 bucks a credit hour.

The tricky part is that Perry tied this fee to the stadium by making it go into effect when the stadium construction started and expire when the stadium is paid off. So it is really in the department's best interest to finance the bonds as long as possible - or until they can get a true dedicated fee amendment. As it stands, when the bonds retire - the "dedicated" athletic fee also retires (leaving us with no fee at all!)

That is the bill that was signed by our Governor - after a last minute negotiation. That is not what the students voted for but that is what Perry signed after Austin got a hold of the request. I hate politicians, the students voted for it and it should have been left alone.

As far as baseball goes, the scholarships are the easy part. Baseball uses half scholarships so the Title IX consequences are neglible. It would add 7 or 8 ships and I think that we are already spending more on women than men so there would probably not need to be an additional female sport added... but you have to weigh the cost of the facilities, the coaching staff, and the commitment. If we are not going to do it right - and spend the money needed to put a first class Div I team on the field (with full coaching, trainers, and proper equipment) than I don't think that RV will spend the money. That being said, it could be a fantastic justification for raising the athletic fee after a year or two - to fund it properly.

I also thought this was the way the bill read, but Flyer, in another post, insists that this isn't the case.

Last post on the page.My link

Edited August 13, 2011 by filmerj

Mean Green 93-98 · August 13, 2011

I also thought this was the way the bill read, but Flyer, in another post, insists that this isn't the case.

Last post on the page.My link

You were right that that is the way the bill read. But at the time, several people indicated that it would not actually play out that way.

gruu · August 13, 2011

You were right that that is the way the bill read. But at the time, several people indicated that it would not actually play out that way.

Y'all should not confuse what the law says and how it's enforced in our great country.

stebo · August 13, 2011

You were right that that is the way the bill read. But at the time, several people indicated that it would not actually play out that way.

All of it is on the 20th page of our Apogee Stadium forum -

Text of Ammendment Thread:

Quote from our Student Leader that helped get the fee

Posted 22 April 2009 - 05:14 PM

(j) The fee may not be charged after the fifth academic year
in which the fee is first charged unless, before the end of that
academic year, the university has issued bonds payable from the
fee, in which event the fee may not be charged after the academic
year in which all such bonds, including refunding bonds for those
bonds, have been fully paid.

Hmm, I do not like this at all!"

and

Actually, it says more than that. Once the bonds are paid off, no more athletic fee.

But that can be dragged out for a long time, and the law can be changed.