Holmgren article about athletic spending vs K-12 cuts

Wed Jan 27, 2016 2:44 pm

My point was more to there's a reason colleges have athletics or else hardly any college would be in the athletics business.. it drives revenue.. maybe not directly as most ADs are money losers, but it has far more economic impact than the athletic dept.. the university sees increases in donations, cities profit from game days, many reasons why athletics are schools are a big deal. A lot people are too short sighted or ignorant to realize this.

Wed Jan 27, 2016 2:49 pm

I'm already seeing this article being shared all over Facebook with nasty comments. This is not going to go over well. The bottom line is the football team better start winning, and it better start winning next season, or all hell is going to break loose.

Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:08 pm

MrTitleist wrote:My point was more to there's a reason colleges have athletics or else hardly any college would be in the athletics business.. it drives revenue.. maybe not directly as most ADs are money losers, but it has far more economic impact than the athletic dept.. the university sees increases in donations, cities profit from game days, many reasons why athletics are schools are a big deal. A lot people are too short sighted or ignorant to realize this.

Oh, I absolutely agree. What I'm getting at, though, is exactly your last line. Question is who is at fault, short sighted ignorant people or our AD for not sending a clear informed message with supporting data?

Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:25 pm

ragtimejoe1 wrote:
MrTitleist wrote:My point was more to there's a reason colleges have athletics or else hardly any college would be in the athletics business.. it drives revenue.. maybe not directly as most ADs are money losers, but it has far more economic impact than the athletic dept.. the university sees increases in donations, cities profit from game days, many reasons why athletics are schools are a big deal. A lot people are too short sighted or ignorant to realize this.
Oh, I absolutely agree. What I'm getting at, though, is exactly your last line. Question is who is at fault, short sighted ignorant people or our AD for not sending a clear informed message with supporting data?

I will counter with.. even if the AD informed the ignorant masses.. would they listen or care, or would they continue to fight the "academics only" fight?

Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:31 pm

MrTitleist wrote:
ragtimejoe1 wrote:
MrTitleist wrote:My point was more to there's a reason colleges have athletics or else hardly any college would be in the athletics business.. it drives revenue.. maybe not directly as most ADs are money losers, but it has far more economic impact than the athletic dept.. the university sees increases in donations, cities profit from game days, many reasons why athletics are schools are a big deal. A lot people are too short sighted or ignorant to realize this.
Oh, I absolutely agree. What I'm getting at, though, is exactly your last line. Question is who is at fault, short sighted ignorant people or our AD for not sending a clear informed message with supporting data?
I will counter with.. even if the AD informed the ignorant masses.. would they listen or care, or would they continue to fight the "academics only" fight?

Tough to tell, but I think it would arm politicians with the information they need to continue to support athletics. I remember when the Sandusky thing came down, they broke out how much money it would cost school, town, county, and state if they got the "death penalty". Now more than ever, IMO, Burman needs to become a salesmen. Help the politicians help athletics.

Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:13 pm

MrTitleist wrote:Can anyone name a college -without- an athletics program?

University of Minnesota-Rochester

Thu Jan 28, 2016 2:11 am

LanderPoke wrote:Pretty disappointing article from our beat writer. The overall tone was ''how could we fund athletics at the expense of our poor children?". He didn't even try to put a positive spin on things or dig deeper with bits and pieces of info like Tracy provided.

The most disappointing part was he didn't lay out what excellence in athletics will do for an institution, not to mention what it does for the city of Laramie. Everyone wants a vibrant college town? Well UW athletics is the single biggest economic contribution to Laramie's retail and hospitality industry. Students living here are cheap, people that come for games are not and will leave their money.

https://twitter.com/ryanholmgren/status ... 2033101824

Thu Jan 28, 2016 3:56 am

MrTitleist wrote:Can anyone name a college -without- an athletics program?

Massachusetts Institute of Technology or MIT

Thu Jan 28, 2016 5:52 am

The Virginian wrote:
MrTitleist wrote:Can anyone name a college -without- an athletics program?
Massachusetts Institute of Technology or MIT

University of Northeastern Illinois. They dropped their entire athletics department in the mid-90s.

Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:10 am

The Virginian wrote:
MrTitleist wrote:Can anyone name a college -without- an athletics program?
Massachusetts Institute of Technology or MIT

http://www.mitathletics.com/landing/index

Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:13 am

The sad part of the K-12 cuts are that athletics will bear the brunt in many places. I know here in Lander they are already looking at cutting programs with the lowest participation. In addition to the local cuts I know that there is talk of cutting transportation reimbursements which would mean that schools will not travel to the furthest contest sites. In a state like Wyoming that will greatly restrict the competition that our kids face.

Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:18 am

elfletcho wrote:Holmgren has been quite the disappointment. He snaps a long streak of great CST UW beat reporters.

Couldn't disagree more. I think Holmgren has been great. Way better than the 2 or 3 schmucks we had before Vorel. So even if Holmgren wasn't good he wouldn't be breaking any streaks other than the 1 great Vorel. But I have been pretty pleased with Holmgren overall.

Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:23 am

I like Holmgren. It appears he was forced to write this bullshyte so I give him a pass on this one.

Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:23 am

So...all the (programs / schools, etc.) that were forced to "spend it while you have it" the last 6 years, and wasted money on poop they didn't need but "had to spend it," are now going to cry about having cuts? Cry me a river.

To me, this is a perfect time to trim the fat. There are so many organizations / departments / groups that overspend and spend irresponsibly in Wyoming it makes me sick.

Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:49 am

I think it's dog poop that everyone cries when you cut "money for the children" even after years of living fat off the hog.

Our k-12 spending has been some of the highest in the country. Rock Springs has built 4 new schools over the past few years. The state had so much money they needed to funnel it somewhere and education is always something legislatures love. The counties should have cut the mill on out property tax during this period since the state was funneling so much money to them.

Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:49 am

https://twitter.com/WYOPride/status/692427329629388800 https://twitter.com/ryanholmgren/status ... 2033101824

Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:53 am

Our spending per student in K-12 ranks somewhere around 7th nationally. We spend almost $10K more per student than states like Utah and Idaho. We spend almost $5K more per student than Montana. We are somewhere around $3-4K/per student from the top spending state (New York). I'm no financial expert, but I would guess nearly $16K/student goes a little farther in WYO than $19K does in New York...strictly a guess.

Even with a few cuts, spending on K-12 will still be in the top 10 states in the nation on per student basis.

UW and athletics on the other hand...? Well, you know.

Thu Jan 28, 2016 10:11 am

ragtimejoe1 wrote:Our spending per student in K-12 ranks somewhere around 7th nationally. We spend almost $10K more per student than states like Utah and Idaho. We spend almost $5K more per student than Montana. We are somewhere around $3-4K/per student from the top spending state (New York). I'm no financial expert, but I would guess nearly $16K/student goes a little farther in WYO than $19K does in New York...strictly a guess.

Even with a few cuts, spending on K-12 will still be in the top 10 states in the nation on per student basis.

UW and athletics on the other hand...? Well, you know.

Those are good numbers. VERY high spending on students in Wyoming. Teaching salaries in Wyoming also rank very highly nationally as well.

Thu Jan 28, 2016 12:46 pm

Wyoming schools don't know how good they have it. They should see how it is here in South Dakota. There are parking meters that make more in a day than a teacher in this state.

Thu Jan 28, 2016 12:59 pm

SDPokeFan wrote:Wyoming schools don't know how good they have it. They should see how it is here in South Dakota. There are parking meters that make more in a day than a teacher in this state.

LOL Tru Dat! Our district is full of former SD educators!