First UNI, Now MSU?

[MoValley John]

I will make this easy for you. Forget cattle sales, what people are questioning is the direct institutional support that helps fund athletics. In other words, at Missouri State, in order for the athletic department to break even, the university gives the athletic department money. According to USA Today, in 2008-09 that number was $5,112,403.00. In other words, if Missouri State didn't receive that money, the athletic department would have lost roughly $5,112,403.00. Here is the link wioth the figure: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ncaa-finances.htm?loc=interstitialskip

And since times are tough, people are looking for ways to cut costs, at Missouri State, people are targeting the $5,112,403.00 received in direct institutional support. People within the university and politicians are beginning to say that the $5,112,403.00 could be put to better use elsewhere. What is not calcuable is a the non-monetary impact athletcis has on the school, city and region. If they could calculate it, I'm sure it would be much greater than $5,112,403.00. But alas, the value of Missouri State athletics is being questioned and that is a huge, huge problem. While the University of Missouri has plenty of clout and can withstand and even scoff at such attacks on their athletic department, Missouri State cannot.

And none of this has anything to do with your immensly successful cattle herd. It is all about the $5,112,403.00 that some pencil necked professor wants spent on additional tenure, marker boards and erasers instead of basketballs and jockstraps.

[beatingrillz]

I understand the theory and i have read the article. I also sat in on the reading of the audit last week and at no point was the athletics the main point of issue only after a former mizzou beat writer took the stance you read in that article was there ever a question. Yes there is a deficit for JQH but that is not in the athletic budget, yes there was discrepency in some coaches sallary even in Coach Martins but those questions have been answered. It is never good to have the school looked at in this light, huge mistakes were made under the previous administration and one can only hope that things will turn around soon.

[Aargh]

You asked I simply stated what it was. When the school needs money they can borrow it from several different place most recently they borrowed money against the school cattle herd.

Now there's an ongoing source of revenue for you!

A $5 million transposition error in the published documents? That's insane!

My degree was in accounting and I did accounting work for 10 years. I'm very familiar with audit reports. Auditors will do anything they can to avoid producing the type of report that was quoted in this thread. If a business got a report like that, their source of funds would dry up quicker than a slug trying to crawl across the salt flats. Big money donors are accustomed to reading financial reports and may be skeptical of continuing to provide funds for an institution with such poor ability to track what they're doing with the money.

Any attempt to gloss over this is wishful thinking by MSU fans.

[MoValley John]

Any attempt to gloss over this is wishful thinking by MSU fans.

Oh come on now! Sure they can! Missouri State has value added adventures (wthf???) and a cattle herd. I know the saying about lipstick on a pig, but you can also gloss the hell out of a cow.

[gtmoBlue]

Unfortunately for Bradley, WSU, and CU there is nowhere to go conference-wise.

One alternative is to drop ISU-B, Evansville, UNI, and MSU - and recruit regional schools from other conferences who would gain a financial boost from MVC membership: WKU, SLU, Tulsa, and DePaul, or perhaps Dayton or Butler.

Just a thought.

[TNMSUFAN]

Not sure about the private schools but we are the only public school in the Valley that doesn't use "student fees" to support our athletic programs. Here are the dollar amounts of student fees generated.

Student fees for Valley Teams

MO State - $0
IL State - $7.2 million
IN State - $5.2 million
N. Iowa - $1.2 million
S. Illinois - $8.9 million
Wichita St - $2.9 million

Even with those fees the other 5 still had to get some direct institutional support

Direct institutional support

IL State - $2.2 million
IN State - $2.0 million
N. Iowa - $5.3 million
S. Illinois - $3.5 million
Wichita St - $1.8 million

Even with all that WSU was the only school that made money

[DoubleJayAlum]

Thanks for the info TM. Do you have UNIs figures?

[valleychamp]

UNI receives 1.2M in student fees. I believe it is the lowest in the conf.

[MoValley John]

UNI receives 1.2M in student fees. I believe it is the lowest in the conf.

Missouri State has zero in student fees, outside of the private institutions, the lowest in the league.

My gripe isn't how much is paid in student fees and direct institutional support, it is why do schools like UNI and MSU allow your athletic departments to be beat up by politicians and angry professors? The fact remains that even if UNI and or MSU received 12 mil in public funding for athletics, it would be just one drop in the bucket of the overall university budget. Chump change for what athletic the departments really deliver.

In my opinion, this war is being fought all wrong. Rather than tap dancing around the issue by telling the regents and trustees how the school will do a better job and cut costs and become more efficient, a strong case needs to be made for the value of athletics at your institution. A better case needs to be made that the $7-10 million is a freaking bargain. Regardless if they are profitable or not, nobody questions the value of athletics at the University of Iowa and the University of Missouri. Yet when it comes to UNI and MSU, these pinheads talk about your $7- 10 million deficits as if they are crippling the school and that somehow the money could be better used somewhere else.

Once again, the money spent on athletics at UNI and MSU is a bargain, essential for esprit de corps and vital to the local economy. Furthermore, I'm sure your local businesses feel a boost from activity before and after big games and events. The university benefits by getting its name out into the public and athletics boosts student recruitment. Sure, UNI, MSU and all schools need to constantly review how they spend their athletic money, but right now, what both schools get in return is a bargain. Unfortunately, that part if the story is not being sold very hard and until it is, these issues will continue to reoccur, stories will continue to pop up in the loca paper and one day the other side will win by gaining major reductions in athletic funding or having the athletic department cut off completely from public funds.

My opinion is that the pro athletic funding crowd needs to become proactive and take to the offensive on the issue. Right now, that isn't happening. This is a serious, serious issue.

[TNMSUFAN]

Thanks for the info TM. Do you have UNIs figures?

My bad...added UNI