Satterfield contract adjusted & Billy Jones gets extension

[NewApp]

but she is not willing to throw any more money at athletics when the rest of campus is starving for funds for academic and faculty needs.

If this is accurate, my worst fears about the new chancellor hire have been realized.

Not my fears. We need a balance.

[NewApp]

From the buzz from the Chapel Hill PTB, part of the reason she was hired was to put us "back in our place." That of being primarily a teacher's college first. That would lesson the threat of competing with the rest of the University System's funding and for the lack of a better word, "prestige." i.e. too big for our britches. After all, we're supposed to a little hick hillbilly teachers' college stuck back in the poverty stricken mountains.

Not sure how anyone could actually "put us back in our place" -- I don't think we've ever left "our place" (at least in the eyes of the Board of Governors). App has a great reputation given the resources made available, but in terms of funding or support that we deserve, none of our former chancellors have had any significant success with getting us up to a higher level -- whether it's funding formulas, Ph.D. programs, or whatever. Not knocking any former leadership, but the new Chancellor probably stands as much chance as the others to make progress in this area.

I didn't say anything to the contrary. Just saying that's where some of the Baby blue PTB feel and want us.

Definitely wholeheartedly agree about past and former chancellors

[NewApp]

but she is not willing to throw any more money at athletics when the rest of campus is starving for funds for academic and faculty needs.

If this is accurate, my worst fears about the new chancellor hire have been realized.

Why? If the Charlie Cobb plan was valid, the Chancellor won't need to throw more university money at athletics because the move to FBS will result in more incremental revenue than incremental cost. Athletics will have more money and it won't have to come from students or institutional funds.

Agree again. That is what I said in different words in another post. RP

[NewApp]

It sure feels like we're pinching pennies these days:

-- We didn't allow several of our teams on campus the weekend before school started because we declined to pay their housing costs, something we routinely did in the past.

-- We redirected funds raised by the baseball team and earmarked for the baseball team and channeled those funds to the overall athletic budget.

-- Except for a day trip to Charlotte, the band hasn't played on the road this season.

-- Employees who expected to be compensated with FBS-level salaries are seeking employment elsewhere, presumably because those FBS-level salaries aren't materializing. See Jay Sutton, Jake Stroot. Others are actively looking.

-- Our Board of Trustees extended the contracts of two young coaches whose service here so far has been unremarkable as a hedge against paying them higher salaries later. It has the potential to control expenses in the short term but comes at considerable risk if those coaches fail to produce.

The point is, I'm enjoying the improved football schedule and increased presence on regional and national television as much as the next person, but it appears we're having trouble making Charlie Cobb's fanciful FBS financial projections come true.

Not ashamed to admit that I strongly agree with everything you said except the band thing. Didn't the band go to Statesboro Thursday night?

on edit, just saw another later poster saying similarly about the BOD.

[NewApp]

In 2009 App State made a slightly more than they spent in athletics, but since UNC system athletics can't make a profit, it wasn't classified as such. The irony is that losing to Montana kept the program from losing money. Going to the National Championship is a money-loser. The NCAA gets all the ticket money and says the teams have to be there several days beforehand to do media events, plus the band travel is costly.

Making money at the FCS level is next to impossible. Montana might on a good year and they're the only one. Last year no FCS programs made more than they spent.

The chance of losing money at FBS is there, but the ceiling is a lot higher to make money, especially now with the CFB Playoff payouts.

Just asking, but don't you think that the publicity we got from winning 3 consecutive national championships benefited to a certain extent other areas of the athletic and educational areas in licensing fees , increase in prospective student application numbers, and marketing in general. Some would argue not as much as the Michigan win, but still. But beating two or more flagship universities created a lot of attention even to the casual fan. I know the Charlotte Observer, TV media, and the WSJ certainly spent a lot of space and time on our accomplishments. I still have the copies to prove it.

[T-Dog]

Absolutely. Can't measure that in dollars and cents. Incoming GPA, quality of students, etc.

[AppAttack]

In 2009 App State made a slightly more than they spent in athletics, but since UNC system athletics can't make a profit, it wasn't classified as such. The irony is that losing to Montana kept the program from losing money. Going to the National Championship is a money-loser. The NCAA gets all the ticket money and says the teams have to be there several days beforehand to do media events, plus the band travel is costly.

Making money at the FCS level is next to impossible. Montana might on a good year and they're the only one. Last year no FCS programs made more than they spent.

The chance of losing money at FBS is there, but the ceiling is a lot higher to make money, especially now with the CFB Playoff payouts.

And what does the NCAA do with all that money besides pay for its employees and offices?? Non-profit my sweet patooty. I hate them. They gotta go.

[NewApp]

but she is not willing to throw any more money at athletics when the rest of campus is starving for funds for academic and faculty needs.

If this is accurate, my worst fears about the new chancellor hire have been realized.

Why? If the Charlie Cobb plan was valid, the Chancellor won't need to throw more university money at athletics because the move to FBS will result in more incremental revenue than incremental cost. Athletics will have more money and it won't have to come from students or institutional funds.

Athletic funds haven't and won't come from students or educational funds. I just don't like the idea of her going cheap on us. Like it or not those stadium enhancements are more important than just about anything else that money could could be spent on.

It was my understanding that the athletic budget and educational budget were completely distinct. And student fees are about the only thing I can think of that could overlap "student or institutional funds" with athletics.

"Athletic funds haven't and won't come from students or educational funds"
Your naivety is showing young feller.

[moehler]

too early to get a feel for the agenda of our new Chancellor. My biggest fear is what happened at JMU, 5 years ago they had a great Chancellor who like Peacock, really supported varsity sports, new Chancellor comes in, pretty much has reversed all the good work the previous Chancellor did, now their athletic dept is screwed, all that work done to get the program in position to attempt to make the move up to the national level is gone.

[APPARJ]

but she is not willing to throw any more money at athletics when the rest of campus is starving for funds for academic and faculty needs.

If this is accurate, my worst fears about the new chancellor hire have been realized.

Not my fears. We need a balance.

Based on what?

[NewApp]

but she is not willing to throw any more money at athletics when the rest of campus is starving for funds for academic and faculty needs.

If this is accurate, my worst fears about the new chancellor hire have been realized.

Not my fears. We need a balance.

Based on what?

If nothing else, look at the state of our athletic facilities compared to our academic ones. We have nice academic facilities for sure, but they pale in comparison to our more or less state of the art athletic facilities. Look at our endowment compared to our peers or our want to be peers.

Academics should be our primary shining star but it is on the way to becoming secondary as our athletic accomplishments and prestige grow. Millions recognize our athletic brand but are there equal numbers who truly know just what a fine academic institution we are?

I stand by my post.

[AppDawg]

but she is not willing to throw any more money at athletics when the rest of campus is starving for funds for academic and faculty needs.

If this is accurate, my worst fears about the new chancellor hire have been realized.

Not my fears. We need a balance.

Based on what?

If nothing else, look at the state of our athletic facilities compared to our academic ones. We have nice academic facilities for sure, but they pale in comparison to our more or less state of the art athletic facilities. Look at our endowment compared to our peers or our want to be peers.

Academics should be our primary shining star but it is on the way to becoming secondary as our athletic accomplishments and prestige grow. Millions recognize our athletic brand but are there equal numbers who truly know just what a fine academic institution we are?

I stand by my post.

What about all of the dorms that have been gutted and renovated and the new ones built? The new Library? The new cafeteria, the expansion of the student union? The new Communications building on corner of depot and rivers st. New College of Education Building? Renovation of the History Building? Within last 10-15 yrs, a new physics building was opened as was a new wing to Rankin.... Need I go on...

I was with you on academics - profs/student resouces needed funding for the decreases and added constraints the State on NC has placed on the University, but I do not buy the academic buildings pale in comparison..

[APPARJ]

Not my fears. We need a balance.

Based on what?

If nothing else, look at the state of our athletic facilities compared to our academic ones. We have nice academic facilities for sure, but they pale in comparison to our more or less state of the art athletic facilities. Look at our endowment compared to our peers or our want to be peers.

Academics should be our primary shining star but it is on the way to becoming secondary as our athletic accomplishments and prestige grow. Millions recognize our athletic brand but are there equal numbers who truly know just what a fine academic institution we are?

I stand by my post.

What about all of the dorms that have been gutted and renovated and the new ones built? The new Library? The new cafeteria, the expansion of the student union? The new Communications building on corner of depot and rivers st. New College of Education Building? Renovation of the History Building? Within last 10-15 yrs, a new physics building was opened as was a new wing to Rankin.... Need I go on...

I was with you on academics - profs/student resouces needed funding for the decreases and added constraints the State on NC has placed on the University, but I do not buy the academic buildings pale in comparison..

AppDawg,

Stop bringing up such things. It ruins the narrative.

[APPARJ]

but she is not willing to throw any more money at athletics when the rest of campus is starving for funds for academic and faculty needs.

If this is accurate, my worst fears about the new chancellor hire have been realized.

Not my fears. We need a balance.

Based on what?

If nothing else, look at the state of our athletic facilities compared to our academic ones. We have nice academic facilities for sure, but they pale in comparison to our more or less state of the art athletic facilities. Look at our endowment compared to our peers or our want to be peers.

Academics should be our primary shining star but it is on the way to becoming secondary as our athletic accomplishments and prestige grow. Millions recognize our athletic brand but are there equal numbers who truly know just what a fine academic institution we are?

I stand by my post.

Our academic reputation has increased along side our athletic success. This is proven by the numbers showing the quality of student since the '05 - '07 championship (Michigan) run. Check the stats. It's actually quite encouraging.

Therefore, I think your entire statement is wrong and that you're being contrary.

[appbio91]

but she is not willing to throw any more money at athletics when the rest of campus is starving for funds for academic and faculty needs.

If this is accurate, my worst fears about the new chancellor hire have been realized.

Not my fears. We need a balance.

Based on what?

If nothing else, look at the state of our athletic facilities compared to our academic ones. We have nice academic facilities for sure, but they pale in comparison to our more or less state of the art athletic facilities. Look at our endowment compared to our peers or our want to be peers.

Academics should be our primary shining star but it is on the way to becoming secondary as our athletic accomplishments and prestige grow. Millions recognize our athletic brand but are there equal numbers who truly know just what a fine academic institution we are?

I stand by my post.

I think people recognize App is a top tier school in the UNC system. I can tell you from experience we are getting some outstanding students these days. I was shocked to learn what the SAT scores are for the top 10% of in coming freshman (basically kids invited to be in the Honors College). We have a very high success rate getting kids into medical school, as high as any school in the state. So I totally disagree with your post. I believe academics are the first priority at App. They are now and they were under Peacock. We have built a national reputation. We are recognized every year in national publications for excellence and value. The most telling stat I saw recently was that we rank right behind Carolina and State for ROI of undergraduate degrees. That means that our grads are spending less on their degrees and getting jobs that pay enough to cover the cost of the degree. If academics were not up to snuff my kid would not be at App even though it would have broken my heart to send her to Chapel Hell.

[NewApp]

ApparJ,
Not being contrary. You're being too suspicious or else externalizing. Just a simple difference of opinion. What you say about improvement is true, it's just i think it's somewhat exaggerated at times by many.

[Saint3333]

It sure feels like we're pinching pennies these days:

-- We didn't allow several of our teams on campus the weekend before school started because we declined to pay their housing costs, something we routinely did in the past.

-- We redirected funds raised by the baseball team and earmarked for the baseball team and channeled those funds to the overall athletic budget.

-- Except for a day trip to Charlotte, the band hasn't played on the road this season.

-- Employees who expected to be compensated with FBS-level salaries are seeking employment elsewhere, presumably because those FBS-level salaries aren't materializing. See Jay Sutton, Jake Stroot. Others are actively looking.

-- Our Board of Trustees extended the contracts of two young coaches whose service here so far has been unremarkable as a hedge against paying them higher salaries later. It has the potential to control expenses in the short term but comes at considerable risk if those coaches fail to produce.

The point is, I'm enjoying the improved football schedule and increased presence on regional and national television as much as the next person, but it appears we're having trouble making Charlie Cobb's fanciful FBS financial projections come true.

This post is full of incorrect assumptions based on the recent news.

[NewApp]

but she is not willing to throw any more money at athletics when the rest of campus is starving for funds for academic and faculty needs.

If this is accurate, my worst fears about the new chancellor hire have been realized.

Not my fears. We need a balance.

Based on what?

Common sense and caring for both aspects equally. If I had to choose between being a nationally recognized football school and a nationally known academic institution, I would whole heartedly choose the academic entity. Some on here and elsewhere wouldn't.

[NewApp]

Deleted

[sonsofyosef]

Based on what?

If nothing else, look at the state of our athletic facilities compared to our academic ones. We have nice academic facilities for sure, but they pale in comparison to our more or less state of the art athletic facilities. Look at our endowment compared to our peers or our want to be peers.

Academics should be our primary shining star but it is on the way to becoming secondary as our athletic accomplishments and prestige grow. Millions recognize our athletic brand but are there equal numbers who truly know just what a fine academic institution we are?

I stand by my post.

What about all of the dorms that have been gutted and renovated and the new ones built? The new Library? The new cafeteria, the expansion of the student union? The new Communications building on corner of depot and rivers st. New College of Education Building? Renovation of the History Building? Within last 10-15 yrs, a new physics building was opened as was a new wing to Rankin.... Need I go on...

I was with you on academics - profs/student resouces needed funding for the decreases and added constraints the State on NC has placed on the University, but I do not buy the academic buildings pale in comparison..

Plenty of academic buildings that should have been replaced by now remain: Greer Hall, Sanford Hall, Edwin Duncan Hall...and the music building should have had an addition at least ten years ago.